LGBTIQ comparison to ISIS by Tele’s Miranda Devine sets off social media outrage
Controversial News Corp columnist Miranda Devine has triggered an angry reaction with a column likening the LGBTIQ campaign supporting marriage equality to the tactics of ISIS.
Devine’s claim that Christian lobbyists wanting to challenge gay marriage are being intimidated and threatened has been met with anger from opponents on Twitter. But the column has also garnered a fair share of supporters.
“It is true that the marriage debate has unleashed hatred from intolerant authoritarians. But the victims are not loved-up LGBTIQ folk,” Devine wrote in her column in the Sunday Telegraph.
“They are gentle Christians and other defenders of traditional marriage who have been vilified for daring to hold a contrary view. Those courageous enough to raise a head above the parapet are brutally made examples of.
“It’s the social form of warning off perfected by ISIS when they publicly behead people or lower them in cages into swimming pools or stage any number of elaborate tortures as a lesson to others who might dare even think of being disobedient.”
The column, headlined “To marriage ‘equality’ militants: Take our olive branch and shove it” quickly picked up an audience on Twitter slamming her position.
However, in the comments section of the column and on Twitter, her views also attracted support.
Devine retweeted the comments of many of her supporters as well as critics – including some who themselves threatened the writer with violence.
Australia already has marriage equality. The laws of marriage apply equally to every single Australian citizen. Every single Australian has the same right to chose from a range of people that he or she can marry – and are constrained by the same laws that prevent he or she from marrying. These are defined in the Marriage Act 1961: Section 5 defines marriage as being the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life. This applies equally, to everyone. Section 23 defines those people who you cannot marry. For instance – a brother cannot marry his sister; And a daughter cannot marry her father; And Section 94 makes Bigamy an offence with a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 5 years. Now, all these laws pertaining to marriage apply just as equally to me as they do to any homosexual man and apply equally to my wife as they do to any lesbian woman – it’s just that homosexual men and lesbian women choose not to marry this way. Marriage is always a choice. So where is the “marriage inequality” to which same sex marriage types continually refer?…..The real issue is not to be “equal” at all (they already are), but rather what they want is to broaden the range of people that anyone can marry by re-defining the word “marriage” – that is all. They want to be able to marry people of their own sex where that is currently not permitted and this is a restriction that equally applies to all (yes….equality already exists). So both the ABILITY to marry is applied equally to everyone and the RESTRICTIONS applies equally to everyone. There is already marriage equality. But same sex marriage proponents dress it up as a grievance using emotional poetry and propaganda so that they can milk the issue to deceive as many people as they can – mostly young people because they are more naive to political manipulations and easier to sway using emotive slogans. Just like the definitions of “homosexual” and “heterosexual” are a million miles apart (and never the twain shall meet), so too, the definitions between homosexual marriage and heterosexual marriage are a million miles apart – they cannot be legitimately defined in the same wording of the same Marriage Act as the same sex marriage proponents are trying to do…..to prove this point even further: homosexuality uses the term “gay” (for men) and “lesbian” (for women) to describe the sexual gender of their relationships. But with heterosexuality, we do not use a specific term that denotes male sexual heterosexuality nor a specific term for female sexual heterosexuality…..and the reason is?…..you guessed it, heterosexual relationships are infinately different to homosexual relationships!
User ID not verified.
I feel very sad for you Neil.
User ID not verified.