EXASPERATED voters are increasingly questioning changes to Australia’s Marriage Act as Malcolm Turnbull’s prized social re-engineering policy dangerously divides the nation.
With homosexual rights activists – both inside and outside parliament – progressively trampling mainstream values, a growing number of once-sympathetic Australians are finding their voice.
- Since 2017 – at least – homosexual rights activists have trampled mainstream values.
- Voters feel they were lied to after a vote offering 'respect' was used to divide the nation.
- Liberal MPs are blind to the anger engulfing the quiet masses.
And with LGBTQ gender fluidity issues now dominating almost every aspect of national life, from university “chest” feeding to military cross-dressing, voters are questioning the unintended consequences of the 2017 changes.
One-time homosexual marriage supporter Alan Mitchell said that, in hindsight, his plebiscite “yes” vote was a mistake.
DARK CORNER
“There is little doubt that those laws, seen in the eyes of reasonable people at the time, were the respectful way to go – not realising what waited around a very dark corner,” Mr Mitchell wrote in an online comment to Politicom.
“What a mistake I made!
“I am positive there would be a big percentage of Australians who would love to have the vote over again – me included.
“The Liberals now speak for a very noisy bunch of people who would be far better off keeping a little less boisterous and earn respect.”
Mr Mitchell’s comments are among many others calling for a rethink after extremist Liberal Party MPs again threatened to overturn religious freedom legislation.
Queensland’s Warren Entsch, Victoria’s Tim Wilson and WA’s Dean Smith last week warned Attorney-General Michaelia Cash that religious freedoms should never impinge on the distinct rights of LGBTQ minorities.
PROMISED
The Attorney-General is attempting to deliver the Morrison government’s promised religious freedom laws by Christmas – an effort already twice killed off by Left-wing Liberals.
Another voter, John Bryant, said he believes the community had been tricked in 2017.
“In 2017 we were told it was only about love – now they want to stop free speech, free choice on religion and acknowledge numerous genders,” Mr Bryant said.
“Why weren’t we told all this before the postal vote? No doubt they believed they could not win the day.”
Another angered voter said the nation had been side-tracked for far too long by homosexual issues and their flow-on demands.
“The average bloke just wants a job to feed his wife and kids, and to give them a decent life,” Nick Bury posted online.
“Homosexual marriages and renewable power really don’t help them to pay their bills or to put bread on their tables,” Mr Bury said.
Ms Cash’s effort is the third attempt by centre-right Liberals to rectify Malcolm Turnbull’s broken promise to enact religious freedom laws coinciding with same-sex marriage legislation.
SCUTTLE
Despite the promise, conservative MPs were betrayed when Mr Turnbull and his Left-wing Liberal allies voted down religious freedom amendments to the same-sex bill in 2017.
Despite having overwhelming support from a majority of Liberal Party senators, the amendments were shot down when six Liberals – including now Foreign Minister Marise Payne – sided with Labor and The Greens to scuttle the protections.
Attacks on Australia’s faithful have been well documented ever since.PC
The problem was between equality and equity. Equality was the cry, equity should have been the solution.
This could easily be achieved by retaining the previous marriage act, and the word ‘marriage’ for heterosexual marriages, and creating a new word for a union and a new act for those who desire a non-heterosexual union.
The word ‘marriage’, referring to the union of a heterosexual couple has now been removed from the English language. This is problematic for many reasons: legal, social intercourse, and spiritual.
I agree, time to revisit the imbroglio.
“This could easily be achieved by […] creating a new word for a union […] those who desire a non-heterosexual union.”
How about we call it “A Celebration of Sodomy” or perhaps “A Partnership in Perversion”?
(In the end it doesn’t really matter of course: whatever label they wear will turn to ash, because all sinners will spend their eternity burning in the Lake of Fire).
P.S. What will we call it for those who wish to enter into matrimony with a horse or a goat or a chicken, or perhaps with a corpse?
Agreed. And for the lost who die in their pride and their sins without Christ it will be sadly so and much too horrible to contemplate. This nation has but only one choice. Repent and return to the One True Living God. If we want the blessings that we have been so, so privileged to experience to continue on to our children and childrens children, we have to confess and turn from practices and lifestyles that The Lord calls Sin and Abominations. There is no other Way for healing in this great and wonderful land of ours except through Christ.
I pray for truly God fearing leaders to again walk the corridors of parliament and pass laws based on Gods Word. I pray for this nation to show real love towards The One True God and each other, by obeying His commandments. The God who, in the most indescribable demonstration of love ever – took our place at Calvary and suffered terribly and agonisingly on that rugged cross – that includes every single one of us – for every wicked thought, every evil word and every wretched deed of our hands and our flesh. Jesus is the ONLY hope for all humanity. I am not ashamed to speak, lift up and declare His Holy and Great Name. For whoever is ashamed of and hates Christ the Son of God, then on judgement day, God the Father in Heaven, who sacrificed His only precious begotten Son – The Lamb of God, He then will be ashamed of and reject them – forever. Let there be one more sinner who hears this Gospel truth, confesses, repents and calls on the ONLY name given under Heaven by which a man or a woman can be saved. In Jesus name. Amen.
Told you so . $123 million rigged vote that once it got what it wanted it would never stop . How much is enough ? Just a little bit more .
Tony Abbott was right when he said the gay lobby claimed they only wanted to join marriage but it has become apparent that they really wanted to change marriage. This will be to the great detriment to the good traditional values held by the vast majority of Australians. Look at the rubbish being inflicted on young minds in our schools.
Another seismic example of what happens when the feel good factor takes over and facts go unreported and buried …
Long before we were allowed our illusory say, the High Court in December 2013 had already overturned the understanding of the Marriage Act 1961 as an exclusive, voluntary, heterosexual union for life. This was the decision which gave federal parliament immediate power to legislate same sex marriage and change the bedrock of society without reference to the people. The flawed plebiscite was simply a political sop, but hey! who amongst our voices in Canberra wanted to know?
In 2016, then Senior Fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies, Barry Maley, argued that the High Court’s decision was incorrect. “In effect the Constitution has been altered in a regrettable and undemocratic way, and this should be remedied by holding a national referendum”, he recommended (CIS Occasional Paper 147). “A plebiscite to test public opinion, promised by the coalition parties, does not allow the people of Australia to have a determining say on the matter”.
Correctly he pointed out only a referendum could achieve that in a way that was “democratically, legally and politically impeccable”.
Maley also uncovered the astounding fact that only the Yes (same sex) case was represented at the High Court’s adjudication. The No case was totally unrepresented.
At the time, my grass roots efforts via a one-page Open Letter to all Senators and Members, plus targeted letters to party leaders, plus lobbying local representatives to advance Maley’s evidence that a referendum was required, all went nowhere in the then covert but now well and truly out New Normal style of politics.
Our incorporated Constitution is apparently designed to intersect with and accommodate the Climate/Covid globalist agendas now focused on taking our woefully underinformed nation down.
What Aussies think about same sex marriage or being masked lab rats and stuck like pin cushions in the Great Reset will never be the stuff of future referenda if we persist in the belief God is dead and the totalitarianism is the way to go.
Anyone with half a brain knew the yes vote was not just about gay marriage and anything the lying, backstabbing, hypocrite Turnbull supported also knew it would not be of benefit for the Public in general.
Suggest you review the article at the following web address.
https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/d54f1c04-d155-44b0-8abf-56e968cc5b0e/downloads/1c3s718r8_607652.pdf?ver=1624864151359
The parliamentary homosexual lobby seems blissfully unaware that their campaign to overturn the social order leads to a single destination – the re-criminalisation of homosexuality. Is that their intention?
It should be remembered that Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Cabinet offered a Plebiscite conducted via polling booths, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Cabinet overturned that sensible decision and conducted a simple yes or no postal ballot instead.
Apparently twenty per cent of people eligible to vote did not participate and of the eighty per cent who did the yes return was marginally higher than the no.
We never had a real vote. We had the sham of a “postal plebiscite” organised by those who knew full well sensible Aussie voters would reject the proposal if an actual vote was held.
Let’s make a deal, if the Arizona US Election 2020 Audit finds wide spread fraud due to postal votes, we should consider our Gay Marriage postal vote was also fraudulent and therefore made void, and recall all associated gay marriage legislation.
What are the odds on the upcoming referendum on the ‘Voice’ suffering the same fate. And like the same sex marriage rubbish, that will only be the foot in the door.