Ireland #VotesYes For Discrimination.

Ireland #VotesYes for Discrimination

… Against Christianity.

 

In other news, the former Emerald Isle has adopted six more colours to become a full-blown rainbow, and has voted to extend its informal policy of discrimination against Christians to a legally-binding imperative.

In a startling display of solidarity, the anti-Christian liberals who make up just 36% of Ireland’s population voted to protect the rights of the gay 2% and to suppress the freedoms of the country’s conservatives.

I haven’t actually read any headlines worded that way, but it’s a fairly accurate assessment of the outcome of last weekend’s referendum in Ireland. The little island of St. Patrick has voted against tradition, against the Church and against sanity. And now Australia’s Opposition are lobbying (again) for the same result here. Constitutional lawyers concluded two years ago that there was no room in our Constitution for a redefinition of marriage, but that hasn’t stopped our liberal friends from continuing their relentless  pursuit. It seems that with every attempt, a few more weak church leaders, politicians and ordinary citizens put their integrity to rest and jump on the ‘gay-marriage’ bandwagon. But do they really know what this will mean for our country?

Ireland #VotesYes to Discrimination

I remember going to my priest a number of years ago, when same-sex ‘marriage’ was first being lobbied for in Tasmania. I wanted the Church to take out a full-page newspaper advertisement, alerting the public to the implications of redefining marriage for the ordinary person.

“Oh no!”, he said, “We can’t draw attention to ourselves. We can’t have our names in the newspaper. The gays will find us and get back at us for criticising them. They’ll target our children, as well.”

As you can imagine, nothing was done, but Father was right about one thing: they will target our children, only not in the way he meant. Th gay lobby never stops at simply having the state recognise their ‘marriages’; that is only the thin edge of the wedge: they insist that we accept and promote their entire lifestyle.

If marriage is redefined, there is no facet of our public lives that will be exempt from the influence of homosexuality:

  • Education: Children at school will be targeted through the implementation of pro-sodomy sex education. School boards will make sure that conservative teachers are sacked and pro-homosexual ones are employed. And picture-books about same-sex households will be introduced into school libraries.
  • Advertising: Although there have been some examples of homosexuals in advertising, it will become increasingly necessary to include pictures of gay men and women, and same-sex families, to placate the gays and also to perpetuate the myth that they account for a large number of households.
  • In the workplace: it will be frowned-upon to stand up for traditional marriage and legitimate complaints against homosexual workers will be seen as victimisation based on sexual-orientation.
  • In the military: a feminised military, pre-occupied with homosexual rights will be ineffective and morale will decrease due to mistrust and lack of respect for superiors.
  • In the Churches and wedding-service industry: we have already seen examples of pastors being vilified for taking a stand against same-sex ‘marriage’ and for refusing to perform such ceremonies. Likewise, we have seen cases of florists, bakers and caterers being sued simply for refusing to assist at gay weddings.
  • And the media will keep up the narrative about the lovely, kind gays and the mean, intolerant Christians. How’s that for discrimination?

 

Conservative Christians will have little legal recourse if they wish to disagree with the loveable gays. For example, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Charter states in reference to hate speech and the distribution of literature, that “the Code does not require intent by the publisher or proof of harm”. This means that a Christian can be accused of hate speech simply by writing about or speaking negatively about any aspect of the gay lifestyle. There is no need to prove that any homosexual experienced any ill-effects, other than offence. This has already happened to anti-gay activist Bill Whatcott, who was arrested simply for distributing pamphlets. (Read more here:)

The same-sex ‘marriage’/ pro-homosexuality issue has other components, apart from discrimination against dissenters. Here are few things to consider:

  • You know that ‘lovely gay couple, who live down the road?’ The ones that have ‘been together for years’? Well, they aren’t actually monogamous. Promiscuity is part of the (male) gay psychology. Monogamy exists to provide security for families: for the spouses in a marriage and for the children they conceive. When children are reduced to a state-sanctioned ‘right’ of gay parents, the importance of monogamy is diminished.  High rates of divorce among homosexual couples reinforce this. (You can read a lot about their inability to maintain heterosexual-style monogamy at Joseph Sciambria’s blog: [Warning: graphic written content.])

 

  • Same-sex marriage isn’t just about ‘love’, it’s also about sex. Gay sex. For a long time I thought there was no topic I wanted to know less about than anal sex, but unfortunately, it’s part of the package if we want to be educated about this SSM phenomenon.You can read more here about the increasing rates of sexually-transmitted diseases among homosexual men in the US. Read more here about the side-effects of anal sex.

 

  • Recognising the right of children to know both their biological parents is the main thrust of most Christian organisations who oppose SSM, and rightly so. Children in same-sex households aren’t always (ever?) the carefree, well-adjusted offspring that the media loves to promote. More and more adults who were raised in these families are coming forward to give their side of the story. You can read one example here.

 

One major difference  between the same-sex marriage movement and defenders of traditional marriage has been this: that their side has always been free to publicly state that they disagree with us, throwing in whatever insults they find most useful at the time. Our side can express disagreement, but only if we carefully state our terms of reference, assure everyone that we accept the sinner, hate the sin, and so on. Even that is becoming more difficult to do. Disagreeing with same-sex ‘marriage’ proponents is increasingly likened to a crime. If we aren’t vigilant, and protesting loudly and backing that up with prayer and fasting, we will go down the same path as Ireland: we will #VoteYes to discrimination against God-fearing Christians. Once enshrined in law, that will be very hard to undo.

Author: genericmum

Share This Post On

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *