Yesterday Malcolm Turnbull introduced legislation for the proposed same- sex marriage plebiscite.
This legislative instigation marked a year since the Liberal government announced its policy of conferring the question of gay marriage to a public vote (plebiscite).
Both 1 year ago and currently, the plebiscite appears to be the best possible outcome in considering both the proponents and opponents of gay marriage. The idea that both sides of the debate could equally participate in arguing their positions both for and against the issue, is the most democratic, equitable and reasonable outcome. Particularly as the proposed changes would affect the very bedrocks of our society, it would be wise to allow all citizens a say in this matter.
But to say this policy has met with vociferous opposition, would be a mighty understatement. Federal Labor, the Greens and their army of regressives have repeatedly condemned the proposed plebiscite, instead favouring a free vote in parliament. Primarily, these groups and individuals oppose the marriage plebiscite on two grounds.
One is that these critics claim an open debate on gay marriage would be ‘harmful’ and ‘divisive’. As is the case in other areas, the left’s stance in regards to this issue and the message it is sending to Australians is clear; agree with our ideas about marriage and the required changes, or you are nothing more than a homophobic bigot. Any position that is deemed to disagree with this leftist- construction of marriage, is to be prevented, trampled upon and stopped from engaging in any public debate.
It’s hardly hateful to state that the historical consensus of marriage being between a man and a woman is clear, but for the left whose memory of history developed in the past ten years, none of this matters.
What an authoritarian, hypocritical position to take, from the side of politics that commonly self- identifies as being ‘inclusive’ and ‘tolerant’.
There have also been suggestions that giving voice to the dissenters of gay marriage through a plebiscite, could contribute to further youth suicides.
Opposition leader Bill Shorten recently articulated these type of concerns.
“Every piece of expert advice tells us young Australians who are gay are more likely to contemplate suicide and more likely to take their own lives,” he said.
“The idea of young people, perhaps yet to come out, seeing the legitimacy of their identity debated on the national stage. That is not an ideal inflicted on any citizen when we have a better path.
“Let me be as blunt as possible: a ‘no’ campaign would be an emotional torment for gay teenagers, and if one child commits suicide over the plebiscite, then that is one too many.”
Coming from Bill Shorten, it is difficult to take this assertion seriously, considering that he supported the idea of a marriage plebiscite in 2013.
Regardless of Shorten and much of the Labor Party’s hypocrisy over this issue, similar statements to these are grossly irresponsible. What an extraordinary claim to insinuate that a mere debate over marriage, could lead to further homosexual suicides.
Moreover, these type of comments regarding the plebiscite, make Shorten and other like- minded figures, appear somewhat as apologists for gay suicides. Its almost as if the left is preying on the problems of vulnerable teenagers struggling with their homosexuality and tempting them to consider a suicidal path, just so they can say at the end of it all; see you right wing bigots, I told you so, look what you’ve done, and they can revel in their accomplishment of being right.
To excuse the motivations behind suicide for a political cause in this manner is nothing but an impulsive, shameless contention, which accurately reflects the current state of left wing politics. Long gone are the days when the left emphasized the real concerns for ordinary people, as instead a lust for petty, symbolic victories have taken hold.
I don’t agree with Malcolm Turnbull on everything. But raps to him for sticking to the Liberal policy of holding a plebiscite, against pressure from the public and perhaps even against his own personal beliefs.