Wednesday, September 14, 2016
Debating homosexual marriage is "hate speech" (?)
The usual intolerance of dissent that characterizes the Left below. They just KNOW all the right answers and everyone else should shut up. Stalin thought the same.
The writer is commenting on a proposal to have a popular vote on whether homosexual marriage should be allowed in Australia. The Left are showing how antidemocratic they are by opposing the idea. The people are not fit to make decisions affecting their own lives, apparently
Here's a question that, on the face of it, seems refreshingly simple to answer: should public money be used to promote hate speech?
And at first glance the answer would appear to be "no, obviously". But when you think about it a little bit more deeply, the answer becomes: "Seriously? Still no, for all sorts of legal and moral reasons. Why are you even asking this? Do you need a hug and some quiet time?"
However, it's the question which the Coalition party room is going to be inexplicably struggling with this week as it decides whether or not the $160 million plebiscite on whether or not to legalise same sex marriage should be even more expensive by using even more public money to fund publicity campaigns for the Yes and the No cases.
The problem that the No case, and by extension the federal government, have with funding such a campaign is that it would encourage activity which is arguably illegal.
In 2013 the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Intersex Status) Bill 2013 was passed, meaning that it is illegal to discriminate "on the basis of sex, marital or relationship status, pregnancy or potential pregnancy, breastfeeding, family responsibilities, sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex status."
This little problem, incidentally, is why there was a push to suspend our anti-discrimination laws for the duration of the plebiscite - an option which was immediately ruled out by Attorney-General George Brandis in February, who pointed out that "There are very obvious practical problems with that, among them... that most anti-discrimination laws in this country are laws of the states, not the Commonwealth."
The fact that a No campaign would appear to be arguing for something which is prima facie illegal is just one more problem for those seeking to prevent same sex marriage being recognised in Australia, along with the enduring problem that there's no sane reason to deny Australian citizens equal rights because of their sexuality, and the fact that those most strongly advocating the No case are not exactly the most charming, persuasive and charismatic people the country has to offer.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The comments of Bird 1:48 and 1:24 undermine a sensible argument and just gives support to the view that "conservative" folk are dumb!
If it's a question of equality in things like power of attorney, equal access to public resources as a couple or even the right to decide what your partners last wishes were then there is no issue. The issue is endorsing a change to the fabric of society that will tear a rent in it that will never be closed. Already we have a prominent NSW Muslim advancing the question of polygamy because he feel entitled to a second wife (in Western society that is crazy given the courts won't agree to Sharia) in an effort to ride on the back of the Gay Marriage debate. We have the supporters of gay marriage already slandering ordinary Australians over the issue because the government was re-elected on the promise of a plebiscite. The socialists in the Australian parliament are doing everything they can to prevent that happening to the point that it will go to the next parliament to raise a free vote for gay marriage. What do they fear that they are so willing to deny the Australian people the right to decide in a non binding vote that the right of democratic people to exercise right to vote? Why is all the hate speech on this issue coming from the left? Could it be because they want to create small cells of people that they can control so that in the big picture they control the majority? I think that may be the big picture. Gay marriage is just the thin edge of the wedge in the divide and conquer political realm. The left have the unions, the left have the welfare lobby and the left have the gay lopbby.
Have you seen this article from the pro-SSM crowd:
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/why-i-dont-have-faith-in-australians-ahead-of-the-samesex-marriage-plebiscite/news-story/851c3a7941a8c9ce23357435c4e58636
The most self-righteous, anti-democractic twaddle I have ever heard. The mainstream media isn't letting up in the pro-SSM campaign.
Apparently people who disagree with you shouldn't have the right to vote on major social change that was also part of the platform the government campaigned on only a few short weeks ago.
Scary stuff if these people have their way - everyone they disagree with will be silenced and stripped of their rights.
1:33 AM - your comments are proof of your bird-brain - as are those of your avian friends who seem to dominate the comments section (unless you're all clones of the same illiterate life-form).
Post a Comment