Tuesday, September 01, 2015

Hate speech from the pro-homosexual lobby in Australia

The governing Liberal Party of Australia, Australia's major conservative party, has decided to let the nation as a whole decide whether or not to allow homosexual marriage -- via a referendum or plebiscite.  The Left don't want the people to decide.  They want homosexual marriage NOW.  And their behaviour is typically abusive.  Andrew Bolt comments:

The real hate speech so far isn’t coming from defenders of traditional marriage.

No, it’s the same-sex lobby that’s pushing its case with abuse, sneers and intimidation — a hatred that risks provoking an equally ugly reaction.

 Sky News presenter Peter van Onselen claimed the Liberals would drive gays to kill themselves by delaying gay marriage, and that they thought such suicides “acceptable”.

An Equal Love campaigner who shared a stage with Labor leader Bill Shorten in Melbourne on Saturday shouted, “Tony Abbott, stick your plebiscite where the sun don’t shine”.

Celebrity QC Julian Burnside tweeted that all defenders of traditional marriage were “bigots”, among whom he apparently counts former Labor prime minister Julia Gillard.

And a Sydney Morning Herald sledged of two panellists on the ABC’s Q&A, who dared criticise the gay-marriage push, calling them “tedious”, “tiresome”, a “tinfoil hat brigade”, “a gigantic yawn” and more.

Why are gay-marriage campaigners stoking up hatred like this?

Why risk provoking an equally ugly backlash?  If you continue to slander your opponents as bigots, haters, knuckle-draggers and morons, and shout them down and ban their ads, you really are inviting the hot-headed to respond in kind.



Anonymous said...

Homosexuals do not want equality, they want special privileges for their perverted sexual behavior. There is something wrong with their brains.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:17 - It seems that any "victim" group will easily overstep if allowed to by the complicit media. It isn't just the vocal gay activists but every group that has been told they are the victims of bias.

If the media would do it's job and call out such misbehavior then it would stop but the typical media person seems to have an agenda these days and lives in a "if you don't call out my agenda then I won't call out yours" world.

Bird of Paradise said...

Everytime theres a anti-gay protest the news media scum-suckers make it the front page story in their daily news rags and the talking head yammer about it all week long but since this involves gays listen to the crickets folks

stinky said...

Gay marriage is just the latest MacGuffin.

Alpha Skua said...

Obama go away

Anonymous said...

I tend to support the idea of a plebiscite - although I do not personally support SSM I see it as an unfortunate inevitability - but I do not support delaying it until after the next election.
Let's just get the damn thing out of the way already.

Anonymous said...

If you don't like SSM don't have one - nobody is forcing you to, but it seems many people want to force other people not to have a SSM.

Anonymous said...

Are the SSM advocates afraid that in a democracy the majority don't want SSM? Isn't that what a democracy is all about? Seems to me that many things have been done in the name of democracy without asking the people. The bullshit about politicians making society changing decisions without consulting the populace should see the ousted at the next election. They don't have a conscience vote, they have to vote the conscience of the community and they can't do that unless they have a plebiscite within the local community.

Anonymous said...

11:12 The US and most western countries have a government by elected representatives who make decisions on behalf of the population that them, albeit each country's electoral system isn't very reflective of the populace in practice. Plebiscites or referenda are only used for "big" issues but even then manipulated by the political parties especially the government in power which allows them. Only Switzerland has plebicites on a regular basis as a "true" democracy.

Olaf Koenders said...

The previous Labor grabbermint didn't want anything to do with SSM for all the many years they were in office, so in typical fashion they wax hypocritical against the Liberal grabbermint, attempting to appear as if "in touch" with the people. Rubbish and lies.

Anything they do at the trough is for themselves.

In any case, I'm with Anon 1:17. Why is marriage such a necessity for them, unless they're looking for special privileges?

Anonymous said...

Just how is it a special privilege to have the same privilege of a legal marriage under the same terms?

Olaf Koenders said...

Marriage is a special privilege compared to non-marriage. Marriage is now a legal thing, which requires a licence. Stupidly, it's a privilege for tax purposes.

Anon 1:53 - Your comment didn't answer the real question: Why do they now regard marriage as such an important issue - is it the tax privileges?

Anonymous said...

Why does anyone regard marriage as an important issue? You can't speculate negatively about the motives of just one section of society and not about the rest.