In a few weeks, an ancient handwritten text (also known as a letter) will land on your doorstep asking you whether you think the LGBTQI community deserve the same human right as those who identify as straight to be able to marry the person they love.
It shouldn’t even need to be asked.
But unfortunately since the Federal Government has refused to allow politicians a free vote, a postal vote is the best chance Australia has at getting same-sex marriage legalised — as every other English-speaking western country already has.
To acknowledge the ridiculousness of the situation and make a statement, many were suggesting they would fill their voting envelope with glitter.
The visuals of such a ‘glitterbombing’ are delightful. Imagine thousands of tiny flecks of glitter in all the colours of the rainbow gushing out of envelopes! Glitter mountains taking over parliament house! Staying there in the carpet or ridges of the wooden floors forever more because glitter is the cockroach of the craft world and never goes away!
But however glorious it might be, please DON’T.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics, who will be counting the results, told Buzzfeed that putting any extra material in the survey envelope risks rendering the vote ineligible.
So unless you want your ballot paper to get destroyed, ditch the glitter.
Instead, the best thing you can do is to ensure you have updated your address on the electoral role, fill in the form according to its instructions and show your support for same-sex marriage by making your voice heard.
Considering the postal vote is not compulsory and not binding, every single vote counts.
Then, save your glitter it to throw in celebration in a few weeks time if all goes to plan.
For more information about the postal vote, see our explainer here.
LISTEN: Mamamia Out Loud has a message for Malcolm Turnbull.
Top Comments
The statement "But unfortunately since the Federal Government has refused to allow politicians a free vote" convently ignores that the government made an election commitment to hold a plebiscite. Why no mention of Labor and the Greens voting down a choice by the people? Isn't that more of a refusal?
Governments make election commitments to do a lot of things and often don't stick to them. Why is keeping an election promise suddenly so important to them now?
1) both abbott and turnbull have broken way more election promises than theyve kept
1) labor and greens were voted in with equality at the heart of their commitments so were elected to refuse a plebliscite for a free vote on the floor
So this promise gets kept, but none of the others? That's a cop out.
It's important to the people. If the government broke its promise to give everyone their say then whilst SSM would be legal, it would always be tainted because of the robbery of everyone having a say and it's imposition by a government who didn't keep its word.
If the plebiscite comes back Yes, then the debates settled in the main, Australia welcomes SSM, the people endorsed it and that's the end of the debate.