The Institutional Threat of Same Sex Marriage By Mrs Vera West

     Although our politicians and the media are firmly behind the same sex marriage push, the margins between the Yes position and No are getting narrower:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/thousands-rally-in-support-of-australia-gay-marriage-as-polls-narrow/
Yes, one has to go to overseas sites to get any critical news, that is just how bad it is. One poll has 58.4 percent supporting gay marriage, but the numbers are falling, and can be made to fall more, if people stop sitting on their hands and get out there.

     Former Prime Minister John Howard, who will be remembered for his massive support of Asian immigration to Australia, has said that the legalisation of gay marriage will have substantial impacts on a range of issues, such as free speech and religion: The Weekend Australian, September 9-10, 2017. That is putting it mildly.  In an insightful, and indeed frightening article at https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/09/whats-changed-in-britain-since-same-sex-marriage/, David Sergeant says that there have been substantial changes to basic institutions:

“It became clear, during this year’s general election, just how militant the LGBT lobby have become, following marriage redefinition. The primary target was Tim Farron, leader of England’s third largest political party, the Liberal Democrats. High-profile journalists had heard that Farron was a practising Christian. In every single interview thereafter, they demanded to know. Did he personally believe homosexual sex to be a sin? He practically begged the commentariat, to allow him to keep his personal faith and legislative convictions separate. For decades, he pointed out, he had vocally and legislatively supported the LGBT Lobby. Likewise, he had long backed same-sex marriage, voting for it enthusiastically. This simply was no longer enough.

Shortly after the election campaign, Farron resigned. He stated that it was now impossible, for a believing Christian to hold a prominent position in British politics.

In a heartbreaking development and in spite of Britain’s ‘foster crisis’, aspiring foster parents who identify as religious, face interrogation. Those who are deemed unlikely to ‘celebrate’ homosexuality, have had their dreams of parenthood scuppered. This month, Britain’s High Court, ruled that a Pentecostal couple were ineligible parents. While the court recognised their successful and loving record of adoption, they decreed that above all else: ‘The equality provisions concerning sexual orientation should take precedence’. How has Great Britain become so twisted? Practicing Jews, Muslims, Christians and Sikhs, who want to stay true to their religious teachings, can no longer adopt children.

Freedom of speech: In the lead-up to the Parliamentary vote, we witnessed almost incomprehensible bullying. David Burrows MP, a mild-mannered supporter of the ‘Coalition for Marriage’, had excrement thrown at his house. His children received death threats and their school address was published online. Similarly, ‘Conservative’ broadcaster Iain Dale promised to, ‘publicly out’ gay MP’s, who did not vote for redefinition.

Many hardworking Brits have lost their jobs. Consider Adrian Smith, sacked by a Manchester Housing Trust, for suggesting that the state: ‘shouldn’t impose its rules on places of faith and conscience’. Or Richard Page, fired for gross misconduct after articulating, that children might enjoy better outcomes, were they to be adopted by heterosexual couples.

Simultaneously, contrary to ‘steadfast’ government assurances, small businesses have been consistently targeted. Courts in Northern Ireland ruled that the Asher’s Family bakery had acted unlawfully. What crime committed by this tiny business? Politely declining to decorate a cake with a political message in support of same-sex marriage. The courts maintained that business owners must be compelled to promote the LGBT cause, irrespective of personal convictions.

Even the National Trust, a British institution with over 4.2 million members, has decided to join the bullying LGBT crusade. A message went out. Each of the Trust’s 62,000 volunteers, would be required to wear a compulsory same-sex rainbow badge. Those who said they’d rather not were told they would be ‘moved out of sight’ until they were prepared to publicly demonstrate inclusive tolerance.

In retrospect, the silent majority in Britain remained silent for too long. Reflecting on redefinition, Ben Harris-Quinney, Chairman of the Bow Group think tank pondered that: ‘Same-sex marriage was promoted in the UK, as an issue of supposed tolerance and equality. What we have seen, is the most unequal and intolerant outcomes of any political issue in recent history’.”

     Looking at the United States, where the Supreme Court, boosted by lobbying from powerful elite groups, found a constitutional right to homosexuality, there are fears that a paedophilia agenda will come, down the track, given many developments, including the liberal media testing the waters, and Californian lawmakers upholding the “rights’ of children as young as  10-year-old children to marry adults:
http://yournewswire.com/california-pedophiles-marry-kids/
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Effort-to-bar-juvenile-marriages-in-California-11268497.php
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/02/salon-deletes-articles-defending-pedophilia-from-site/

     Then there are interesting legal challenges emerging, such as whether or not a person can “marry” his laptop:

“If marriage based on self-asserted sex-based identity narratives is a ‘fundamental right,’ ‘individual right,’ ‘existing right,’ based on a ‘personal choice’ for homosexuals, then clearly it is also a ‘fundamental right,’ ‘individual right,’ ‘existing right,’ based on a ‘personal choice’ for polygamists, zoophiles and machinists,” Mr. Sevier and several self-identified polygamists said in their lawsuit against Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Colorado baker they are challenging.
Masterpiece Cakeshop baker Jack Phillips is slated for a day in the Supreme Court this year after justices said they would hear his appeal of a Colorado civil rights office that penalized him for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding.

Now it’s Mr. Sevier and his cohorts — three polygamists — who said if Colorado can force Mr. Phillips to bake a same-sex wedding cake, then it also can make him bake a man-machine cake.

Mr. Sevier, whose law license has been put on “disability inactive status” in Tennessee, has a history of filing unusual challenges. Earlier this year, he sued four Democratic lawmakers for displaying rainbow flags in the hallways of their government office buildings.
Throughout the past year, he has filed lawsuits against officials in Kentucky, Texas and Utah in an attempt to legally wed his laptop.
Next up are lawsuits against Colorado and California, he says.

“While it is undisputed that self-identified gays, polygamists, zoophiles and machinists can have wedding ceremonies, the states’ selective legal recognition of gay marriage violates the establishment clause insurmountably,” Mr. Seviersays in his latest filing in the Utah case.
In the latest lawsuit against the Colorado bakery, Mr. Sevier asks a judge to rule that the baker discriminated against the plaintiffs and orders him to provide service to machinists and polygamists just as he would traditional couples, and to reward monetary damages in the amount of $75,000.

“The Plaintiffs also want to use the government to proselytize the Defendants into converting to their worldview in name of love and equality,” reads the complaint.

He told The Washington Times that the goal of his lawsuits is to have the courts act honestly and restore the integrity of the Constitution. Mr. Sevier said the issue should be governed by the First Amendment, not under the 14th Amendment as courts have held.”

     This case is intended as a reductio ad absurdum of the existing US gay marriage law, but the courts may play the game, as the Supreme Court did in holding that marriage has nothing to do with the idea of reproduction and children, something held for all human history. No doubt, the ultimate goal is to destroy the institution of marriage, and once same sex marriage is legalised there is utterly no reason not to legalise polygamy as well. The same reasons for same sex marriage (love etc.) would also apply here.

     There is also a current of threats of violence against No campaigners, as noted here: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/now-gaymarriage-activist-suggests-raping-opponents/news-story/1e6fc492f4e40576fba34289addc88c8. I would not worry too much about threats like these: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-11/law-now-there-a-good-gay/3658776, as most people nowadays are pretty weak, and even body builders, get their muscles by light weights and steroids, my son says (he is big in gym training, and runs a fitness centre in Melbourne with his wife). So, don’t be afraid, there is nothing to fear except fear itself. I, for one, am quite ready to die, and dying in a political protest, if need be, as a Gandhian pacifist would be a good Christian exit, I think.

     If you can talk, even if you are in a wheelchair, do what you can by telephone to get people to vote No against this. Come on! Remember: ethnic Australia, especially Muslims and Chinese are in general traditionalists and not supporters. Urge conservative politicians such as Cory Bernardi  to work with ethnic leaders to oppose this. Talk to the chinese lady next door; You may not know her, but you may be surprised how much in agreement you are on this on. What about the old Greek lady down the street?
Be active, to your last breath.