What freedoms do we lose if same-sex marriage wins?
Left-wing lobby group GetUp has reportedly already declared that the Yes campaign has won, yet 40 per cent of Australians have still not voted in the plebiscite.
Perhaps voters are waiting for the ‘official’ Yes and No arguments, as we would expect. Where are the official Yes-No television debates? While the ABC and big corporations have backed the Yes campaign, the No side has had little opportunity to put their case. We are voting in a vacuum.
When you don’t know what you are voting for, vote No.
This is about far more than same-sex marriage and parents are beginning to understand how this issue will affect their parental rights.
Sex education should be a family matter, but radical gay sex and gender education classes will become widespread, and compulsory if this vote is carried. That Canadian father featured on No ads, claims that when same-sex marriage was legalised in Canada, children in public schools were taught to ‘celebrate’ LGBTIQ sexuality, and parents had no right to object.
“More and more kids will be taught their gender is fluid and not based on biology” one of the sentences in the Coalition for Marriage pamphlet says. This is happening in Victoria now. Surely children have the right not to be confused by gender politics.
Even people who are not religious are worried that we have no guarantee of religious freedoms. The freedom to believe or practise whatever we choose goes beyond simple church-going. Where is the guarantee that individuals, churches, schools, and businesses will not be pressured into supporting same-sex promotions?
Changed regulations overseas have eroded traditional notions of privacy, by removing female-only toilets, and allowing males who ‘identify’ as something else into female hospital wards.
And will a promise of religious freedom mean anything? As federal Vice-President of the Liberal Party, Karina Okotel pointed out, “Currently in England, where same-sex marriage was only legalised three years ago, a same-sex couple are taking the Church of England to court to require them to officiate their wedding, challenging the religious exemptions that were enshrined in British law.”
Most people would accept legalising some sort of ceremony when a same-sex couple commits to each other. But stealing the word marriage for something that is not the traditional mother-father family is one step too far. The gay community needs to create a new word for their ceremony.
The ABC’s Emma Alberici told the story of her daughter’s 15-year-old friend who was kicked out of home after coming out to his family. When one viewer reprimanded Ms Alberici on Twitter for exploiting a child to score a political point. She responded: “Your white male privilege is deplorable”. Is “white male privilege” the next step in their revolution?
What else do we get after the plebiscite is over? “Labor would also establish an LGBTIQ watchdog funded by taxpayers to monitor and take action against Australians,” Karina Okotel points out, citing the example of the petition to deregister Dr Pansy Lai, who appeared in the first Coalition for Marriage television advertisement.
Ms Okotel asks what other freedoms will we lose if SSM becomes law?
We don’t know. Get your No vote into its envelope and posted straight away.