"Free speech hijacked by gay marriage supporters*
Rowan Dean
Courier Mail 22 August, 2017
TRIGGER warning: reading this might make you decide to vote “No” in the same-sex marriage postal vote. But only if you care about the right of the individual not to be bullied by the elite about indigenous culture, freedom of religion, free speech and, above all, about a normal future for our children devoid of sexualised political correctness and sinister “gender fluidity” ideology.
First, a declaration. I have long supported the idea that gay couples should be allowed to be joined for life with all the equal rights, recognition and dignity that any heterosexual couple or de facto couple enjoy under the law.
As with most people, when the idea of same-sex marriage first loomed several years ago, I shrugged and thought, “Sure, why not?” I also accepted, as any sane person does, the counter-argument that, historically, marriage has always been uniquely, by definition, the union of two people of the opposite sex, ideally ’til death us do part, for the purpose of procreation.
So — again, like most sensible people — I put these two conflicting arguments together and asked the obvious question: surely there can be some new form of legal civil union with an appropriately respectful phrasing and dignified ceremony that denotes a homosexual coupling for life with the intention of raising a family where children are intended to be the biological offspring of one of the pair? Maybe some ad guru could come up with a funky new word for it, because, with all due respect, that is not what the word “marriage” means.
But then a strange thing happened, starting with the Great Moralising Opportunist of all time, Kevin Rudd. Politician after politician, CEO after CEO, celebrity after celebrity, all miraculously underwent these amazing Road to Damascus-style conversions on gay marriage. It was like some frenzied Deep South Pentecostal meeting. Hallelujah! We’ve seen the light!!
Tripping over themselves to grab as much publicity as they could while the idea was still a novelty, they all clambered onto the rainbow-coloured bandwagon with unseemly haste. How, I wondered, could religious or cultural conviction and historical precedent be so easily and casually abandoned?
Next came the bullying. Rather than being politely asked your opinion on the topic, it quickly became de rigueur to “believe” in “marriage equality” (a made-up phrase literally devoid of meaning). To hold any other opinion, or even doubts, meant you were a bigoted, homophobic, morally inferior person deserving of harsh condemnation. Soon, those who raised any qualms were socially ostracised. Or fired from boards. Or both. Thus, the majority learnt to keep their mouths shut.
Then came the neo-Marxist gender assault on our children. In a nutshell, young kiddies are apparently being taught to experiment in mind (and body?) with
homosexual desires by teachers who tell them not to mention what goes on to their parents. Future royal commissions, I suspect, will be hauling today’s headmasters, teachers, politicians and academics in to answer for this abomination.
In the UK, a top private primary school for girls (ages 3 to 8) is being threatened with closure because it is NOT teaching the girls about homosexuality and transgender theory. This is a direct result of the UK legalising same-sex marriage in 2010.
I have no doubt such intimidation will begin here, too, the moment same-sex marriage is legalised. In Ontario, Canada, the latest depiction of gender taught in schools is — I kid you not — LGGBDTTTIQQAAPP. The last P, by the way, stands for polyamorous. What next, “polygamy equality”?
Then came the Uluru Bark Petition, with a group of Aboriginal elders, representing 70 different indigenous groups, going to Canberra to petition against gay marriage. Their argument: that the greatest achievement of indigenous Australians was their remarkable survival over 60,000 years in one of the harshest environments on earth, cut off from other civilisations. This feat was achieved through strict cultural rules on heterosexuality and “marriage”, as well as the key role of “ancestors”. Fertility and procreation were paramount. Needless to say, the Left was quick to denounce these elders. Not all indigenous culture, it appears, is worth recognising.
Then came the explosion outside a Christian organisation, allegedly the work of a gay activist. Enough said.
Then came the outright hatred; a celebrity singing that those who question gay marriage are homophobic, racist and bigoted.
Now ad agencies, airlines, banks, and arrogant, bullying, politically correct bosses insist you say “Yes” to gay marriage. Employees, take note: your personal or religious beliefs and the precious freedom to speak your own mind has been stolen from you. Until you fill in your postal vote, that is.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-free-speech-hijacked-by-gaymarriage-supporters/news-story/cd702eea8ca24f012645007647959486
Rowan Dean
Courier Mail 22 August, 2017
TRIGGER warning: reading this might make you decide to vote “No” in the same-sex marriage postal vote. But only if you care about the right of the individual not to be bullied by the elite about indigenous culture, freedom of religion, free speech and, above all, about a normal future for our children devoid of sexualised political correctness and sinister “gender fluidity” ideology.
First, a declaration. I have long supported the idea that gay couples should be allowed to be joined for life with all the equal rights, recognition and dignity that any heterosexual couple or de facto couple enjoy under the law.
As with most people, when the idea of same-sex marriage first loomed several years ago, I shrugged and thought, “Sure, why not?” I also accepted, as any sane person does, the counter-argument that, historically, marriage has always been uniquely, by definition, the union of two people of the opposite sex, ideally ’til death us do part, for the purpose of procreation.
So — again, like most sensible people — I put these two conflicting arguments together and asked the obvious question: surely there can be some new form of legal civil union with an appropriately respectful phrasing and dignified ceremony that denotes a homosexual coupling for life with the intention of raising a family where children are intended to be the biological offspring of one of the pair? Maybe some ad guru could come up with a funky new word for it, because, with all due respect, that is not what the word “marriage” means.
But then a strange thing happened, starting with the Great Moralising Opportunist of all time, Kevin Rudd. Politician after politician, CEO after CEO, celebrity after celebrity, all miraculously underwent these amazing Road to Damascus-style conversions on gay marriage. It was like some frenzied Deep South Pentecostal meeting. Hallelujah! We’ve seen the light!!
Tripping over themselves to grab as much publicity as they could while the idea was still a novelty, they all clambered onto the rainbow-coloured bandwagon with unseemly haste. How, I wondered, could religious or cultural conviction and historical precedent be so easily and casually abandoned?
Next came the bullying. Rather than being politely asked your opinion on the topic, it quickly became de rigueur to “believe” in “marriage equality” (a made-up phrase literally devoid of meaning). To hold any other opinion, or even doubts, meant you were a bigoted, homophobic, morally inferior person deserving of harsh condemnation. Soon, those who raised any qualms were socially ostracised. Or fired from boards. Or both. Thus, the majority learnt to keep their mouths shut.
Then came the neo-Marxist gender assault on our children. In a nutshell, young kiddies are apparently being taught to experiment in mind (and body?) with
homosexual desires by teachers who tell them not to mention what goes on to their parents. Future royal commissions, I suspect, will be hauling today’s headmasters, teachers, politicians and academics in to answer for this abomination.
In the UK, a top private primary school for girls (ages 3 to 8) is being threatened with closure because it is NOT teaching the girls about homosexuality and transgender theory. This is a direct result of the UK legalising same-sex marriage in 2010.
I have no doubt such intimidation will begin here, too, the moment same-sex marriage is legalised. In Ontario, Canada, the latest depiction of gender taught in schools is — I kid you not — LGGBDTTTIQQAAPP. The last P, by the way, stands for polyamorous. What next, “polygamy equality”?
Then came the Uluru Bark Petition, with a group of Aboriginal elders, representing 70 different indigenous groups, going to Canberra to petition against gay marriage. Their argument: that the greatest achievement of indigenous Australians was their remarkable survival over 60,000 years in one of the harshest environments on earth, cut off from other civilisations. This feat was achieved through strict cultural rules on heterosexuality and “marriage”, as well as the key role of “ancestors”. Fertility and procreation were paramount. Needless to say, the Left was quick to denounce these elders. Not all indigenous culture, it appears, is worth recognising.
Then came the explosion outside a Christian organisation, allegedly the work of a gay activist. Enough said.
Then came the outright hatred; a celebrity singing that those who question gay marriage are homophobic, racist and bigoted.
Now ad agencies, airlines, banks, and arrogant, bullying, politically correct bosses insist you say “Yes” to gay marriage. Employees, take note: your personal or religious beliefs and the precious freedom to speak your own mind has been stolen from you. Until you fill in your postal vote, that is.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-free-speech-hijacked-by-gaymarriage-supporters/news-story/cd702eea8ca24f012645007647959486