Select Page

What thinking Australians Are Thinking (part 2)

Jennifer Oriel’s words were both prophetic and precise (“Marriage debate reveals Left’s divorce from reason”, 19/9). Why do the Left and the Greens excel in such refined revulsion against Christians and other social conservatives, who support the law of the land regarding wedlock?
Because it is obviously so easy to badmouth bishops, pour scorn on the teachers of religious instruction in schools, or dance semi-naked on a papier mache bust of Fred Nile at the annual Mardi Gras. In short, there is safety in soft targeting.
Indeed, this is a more preferred and cowardly option than daring to criticise or picket the embassies of those nations where homosexuality is still deemed a capital offence.
Whereas the church was once told not to force its traditional convictions on to the rest of society, now it has been insidiously informed that it is wrong to even hold those views.
The present scourge of hate speech actually began when the same-sex marriage debate was covertly morphed into one of marriage equality; this instantly presumed that the historic notion of the union of complementary genders coming together and possessing that unique reproductive quality, was unequal, and thus instantly rendered homophobic and invalid.
If we do live in a robust democracy, then we must allow the silent majority the opportunity to respectfully articulate why the most stabilising social institution should not be declared inferior and amended without resorting to scornful insults.

Peter Waterhouse, Craigieburn, Vic

The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex lobby, like so many minorities of the past, are behaving like revolutionaries who see intimidation and violence as part of a strategy for victory.
LGBTI efforts in successfully shutting down a Christian gathering on the subject of the same-sex marriage plebiscite (“Marriage event off: threats to hotel staff”, 17/9) is an example of what they are prepared to do to shut down informed debate.
The threat of violence seems to be acceptable if it comes from the LGBTI lobby which accuses, without clear evidence, the other side of bigotry and hatred. If this behaviour were to be replicated by those against the LGBTI ideals, there would be all hell to pay in the parliament, in the media and elsewhere.
Yet Bill Shorten, Tanya Plibersek and Penny Wong stand up and condemn those against same-sex marriage, accusing them of potentially inciting hatred, suicide and violence. It seems to be a one-sided debate led by our left-leaning politicians.
This debate is not about fairness, objectivity or what is best for Australia, it’s about changing our way of life — all in the interest of the progressive leftist agenda.

John George, Terrigal, NSW