Tag: homosexuality

Emotional blackmail is rife amongst the Greens.

The Australian Greens have started a campaign to bring queer refugee’s into Australia. They have basically admitted that homosexuals are not safe in Muslim controlled countries. According to their website they have stated:

LGBTIQ asylum seekers under threat

Right now, thanks to Malcolm Turnbull and Peter Dutton, gay asylum seekers held on Manus Island are facing a dangerous and terrifying choice. To return to their country of origin where they could face the death penalty, or stay in PNG and risk up to 14 years’ imprisonment for being gay.

There is no pride in detention – Australia is a place that openly accepts the LGBTI community. We have a proud history of being a safe haven for refugees fleeing extreme persecution. But this horrific offshore detention regime has tarnished our record.

The Greens call on the Turnbull Government and the Labor opposition to close the camps on Manus Island and Nauru, and bring every man, woman and child to Australia.

Your voice is one of hope and strength to those most vulnerable – there is no pride in detention.

As usual the Greens have used individual circumstances to try and score political points. Most Australians would welcome genuine refugee’s but what constitutes a genuine refugee? In some countries it is illegal to chew gum – Singapore. One would argue that by disallowing citizens to chew gum is a breach in human rights and if you do chew gum, you face extreme persecution such as 2 year imprisonment (I would imagine Prisons in Singapore aren’t as humane as ours)[1]

Homosexuality is illegal in most Muslim controlled countries and often they do face dire circumstances such as the death penalty. Does this really constitute a genuine refugee? Australia only just passed legislation to allow same sex couples to Marry. America and the United Kingdom passed this law years ago – does that mean gay couples could have jumped on a boat to New York to seek refuge because the Australian law discriminates? Further to this, it wasn’t that long ago that it was illegal in Australia for people to be Homosexual – did we see a mass exodus of gays seeking refuge elsewhere? Of course not.

The Greens, as usual, are playing with peoples emotions on this matter. They are blackmailing Australians making you believe that we should have open borders if people are not happy with their country’s laws. Being gay shouldn’t give you an automatic right to be given refugee status and kudos to Immigration Minister, Peter Dutton and Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull for standing their ground on this.

Why I will be voting No in #MarriageEquality vote! #auspol #samesexmarriage

A couple of weeks ago I wrote that I don’t really give a toss if same sex marriage win’s or loses. I still stand by that. I do however believe that this is a contentious issue and rightly so and therefore people should have a vote on it.  One thing I didn’t mention is my voting intention. On the topic of same sex marriage I will be voting No. I will be voting no, not because ‘I’m homophobic’ or a ‘bigot’ or ‘hitler’ or because I don’t want equality, Im voting no because of the reasons why people voted for Brexit and Donald Trump. Supporters for same sex marriage will no doubt condemn me for this, and I can take it but when you see people being abused for not ‘conforming’ to the status quo or being bullied and harassed for their views, out of protest (maybe it is the Taurus in me) I tend to dig my heels in.

It was reported by The Australian (1/9/2017) that Liberal Party Vice President Karina Oketel who is from Sri Lanka has experienced worst bigotry over her views on same sex marriage than any racist labels she has endured. Ms Oketel told The Australian she has been racially vilified for her skin colour in the past but that was mild compared to when she defends the current marriage act.
This kind of bigotry coming from the Yes campaigners is disturbing. I have seen first hand on social media that the Yes campaigner’s do not even want to understand why people are voting no. They just want to shut down debate.
Now the arguments made by those who are against same sex marriage can be debated. Safe Schools, Polygamy marriages, Incestrous marriages all these things can happen without same sex marriage. In fact Safe Schools is happening now but without proper debate these issues will continue to burn up until the last person sends off their voting papers.

The continual bigotry and the hatred on those from the Yes side will mean people will just vote no. Do not tell me how to vote. Do not say voting No is wrong. Do not undermine my democratic right to have self thought. We are not living in George Orwell’s 1984. We are living in a liberal democratic society of 2017. This is why I am voting no.

 

 

DEMOCRACY SHOULD PREVAIL IN SAME SEX MARRIAGE!!

Ever since the ultra catholic nation of Ireland voted in favour of same sex marriage, the media and politicians in Australia have been pushing their rhetoric of same sex marriage. Every day the media have been publishing articles on this issue and the Australian Labor Party are using this to gain some political mileage. Given this, one would think this is the most important issue the Government faces, it appears that the ever increasing government debt, increased pressures on standard of living and the growing threat of terrorism is just a minor blip in this society we live in.

The issue of same sex marriage is contentious, and so it should. Marriage has always been a religious institution between a man and a woman nevertheless the state, (Government) passed the Marriage Act in 1961 and this is where the problem started. In 2004 it was then amended to define marriage as:

Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

Certain unions are not marriages. A union solemnised in a foreign country between: (a) a man and another man; or (b) a woman and another woman; must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia

 

The problem for the religious right and their argument is that they allowed the state to legislate. When you allow politicians to legislate something on moral issues you can bet your life that future politicians will tweak it to suit the popular vote of the day.

On both sides of politics you have politicians politicising this issue, and this is not fair on those who oppose same sex marriage and it gives false hope for those who support change. As we do live in a democratic nation, the people, for the people, should deal with this issue.

We often hear people say politicians should represent the people who vote for them, and this is true, therefore you should expect politicians in safe conservative seats or politicians in seats, which have an influential number of migrants who have strong religious ties, vote conservatively. Likewise members of parliament in trendy inner city areas whose views lean to the left of the political spectrum would likely to vote in favour of same sex marriage. Given this array of inequality representation of Parliament, it should be put to a national plebiscite vote.

A controversial issue such as same sex marriage should be decided by the people because it is just that, controversial. If the majority of Australian people vote in favour of same sex marriage it will allow those who oppose it some time to accept it without much doubt. At the moment, with a Parliamentary vote we are already seeing some Senators and media personalities saying ‘what about the silent majority?’ A plebiscite vote will alleviate this issue.