This is How the Homosexual Activists “Debate” – And This is How Democracy Dies
What debate? What democracy?
When Mark Steyn was last in Australia I of course paid close attention to what he had to say and took copious notes. One thing I recorded that especially stood out was this thought: “The Left does not want to win the debate, it wants to shut down the debate.”
That is as accurate as you can get. And I know this from firsthand experience. I have been to numerous public meetings on topics such as marriage and family either as a speaker or a listener which the radical leftists and the homosexual activists sought to shut down, disrupt, and/or turn into mayhem.
I have more than once even had to run the gauntlet, and be personally escorted into a venue by a line of police who had to keep the raging and hate-filled militants away from us. I have personally experienced being jostled and shoved by the angry activists, had things thrown at me, and abused me with all manner of foul and despicable language – all because I dared to think differently than what their agenda allows.
Democracy and freedom of speech obviously mean nothing to these leftists. They insist on their way or the highway. They do not seek debate and dialogue – they seek domination and despotism. And the irony of all this should not be lost on any of us:
-The group that shouts the most about tolerance is the least tolerant.
-The group that shouts the most about love is the least loving.
-The group that shouts the most about acceptance is the least accepting.
-The group that shouts the most about diversity is the least diverse.
-The group that shouts the most about inclusion is the least inclusive.
-The group that shouts the most about bigotry is the most bigoted.
-The group that shouts the most about hate is the most hateful.
Consider just the most recent appalling example of this. A meeting I and some others have been invited to to discuss marriage and family has had to be cancelled and relocated. Why? Because the tolerance brigade again has shown its true colours. Here is how one news report has covered this:
A ferocious campaign against Christian groups planning to meet on same-sex marriage has forced them to cancel the event at a major hotel next week, amid claims of physical threats from marriage-equality advocates.
The Accor Hotels group confirmed late yesterday that the function had been abandoned after a social media storm triggered phone calls that “rattled” employees and left the company concerned about the safety of staff and guests.
In the first test of the “civil” debate promised for a plebiscite on gay marriage, advocates for the “yes” case were being blamed last night for the kind of “hate speech” that Bill Shorten and others have claimed would come from the “no” case.
A spokeswoman for the Mercure Sydney Airport Hotel said the campaign by marriage-equality advocates had forced the company to close the hotel’s Facebook page, sparked phone calls that disturbed hotel staff and escalated the problem to the company’s headquarters. “We’ve conducted an objective review regarding the safety and security of our hotel guests and staff,” she said. “Following this review the event will no longer take place next week.”
The four Christian groups booked the hotel conference room for Tuesday to prepare for a “no” campaign in the potential plebiscite, even though Labor and the Greens appear certain to block the “people’s vote” legislation in the Senate. About 100 people were expected to attend from the Sydney Anglicans, Sydney Catholics, the Marriage Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby.
Gay news website SameSame.com.au alerted readers to the event. Activist Pauline Pantsdown urged followers to stop the “dangerous, predatory” ACL. “Are children safe at Mercure and Accor hotels?” one post said. One follower declared it “utterly horrifying” that Accor would host the Christian groups while another accused the hotel of supporting the “hateful, deceitful and extreme” ACL.
Sadly the hotel chain caved in to the nasty threats of the activists. That of course will simply embolden the militants to keep this up in the future. They know that if they simply make their ugly, militant threats loud enough they can close down debate whenever and wherever it seeks to take place. That my friends is how democracies perish. That is how we crush freedom. That is how the police state emerges.
Before the back down by the hotel it was bombarded by the militants with nasty anti-democracy attacks. Activist Pauline Pantsdown put it this way: “It’s time to call out the ACL for the dangerous fringe group that they are. Racist groups don’t get to hold events in reputable hotels, and neither should the ACL.”
And after the cancelation the homosexual militants were ecstatic knowing they had once again managed to trash democracy and trample on freedom of speech. Trans activist Stephanie McCarthy gloated: “Perhaps the ACL could relocate to the Sydney Airport departure lounge where they can fly off to Texas where they belong.”
Feel the lurve. On the other side, a few comments from those greatly concerned about marriage, children and society are worth offering here: Columnist Miranda Devine said, “Vicious, violent and intolerant. Proof, if you needed it, that the bigotry comes from same sex marriage activists.”
And ACL boss Lyle Shelton stated, “If this is what happens to Australians who support marriage now, what will it be like if the law ever does change?” Yes quite right. We see the jackboots of rainbow tyranny clearly on display all the time here in Australia, and sham homosexual marriage has not even been legalised yet.
Just imagine how bad things will get when it does. But we don’t have to imagine – we already know perfectly well how bad things can get. In my 2014 book Dangerous Relations I documented around 170 cases of people losing their jobs, being fined, and even jailed for daring to disagree with the homosexual agenda and their attempt to destroy marriage by redefining it.
If the activists can smash democracy and stifle freedom of assembly and freedom of speech so easily now, you had better be prepared for the real oppression of Big Brother coercive utopianism when it comes following any change to the Marriage Act.
You have been warned.
30 Replies to “This is How the Homosexual Activists “Debate” – And This is How Democracy Dies”
A massive disparity of power- Why is it acceptable for gay people to criticize and mistreat religious people freely but when religious people criticize gay people freely it is considered a form of hate?
I’ve just sent an email to the hotel asking them to not let the bullies win! They ought to be reporting them and see if they can get a restraining order or police protection.
Well done Steph.
Utterly disgraceful. Since when is the hard left judge and jury!!!
Homosexual radicals and their leftist foot soldiers should be easy to defeat as they all seem to be marching to the same book of rules.
The fact that they target Christians and accuse them of various crimes such as “hate-mongering” homophobia etc. comes directly out of Alinky’s “Rules for Radicals” under the 13th tactical rule:
” Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” If you can target Christians who naturally oppose SSM, and keep telling the community of their supposed nature (as per their chanting), those of the secular community who share the Christian world-view, are similarly labeled. The secular community, who are more interested in work, TV, the footy and holidays and who are agnostic about SSM (doesn’t hurt me so why should I care) will then easily support SSM, not wanting be be similarly labelled.
The Christian community is then polarised by the community as being the only ones against SSM.
As Christians, we all need to familiarise ourselves with this little book (download free here https://archive.org/stream/RulesForRadicals/RulesForRadicals_djvu.txt) Read it absorb it, understand the tactics of the radical left.
The really interesting thing is the number of biblical references Alinsky makes. It is also noted that Clinton,H (possibly the next POTUS, if she can survive physically) wrote a thesis on Alinsky in her student days. Obama was a great acolyte of Alinsky and BLM and SJW are obvious outcomes of his indoctrination.
The Rule for Radicals also pays homage to whom Alinsky refers to as the “first” radical in the following tribute
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins—or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.”
But remember Ephesians 6:12
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood [contending only with physical opponents], but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this [present] darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly (supernatural) places.
The threats by the LGBTI activists and the subsequent cancellation of the event has resulted in widespread media attention and, I believe, has done much damage to the ‘Yes’ campaign to redefine marriage in a possible future plebiscite.
Romans 8:28 NIV
 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
Yes quite so Kevin. I do indeed hope that this and other clear cut examples of pink fascism do wake up the masses. This is what the real debate is all about: a handful of tyrannical militants seeking to destroy freedom and democracy and silence the majority. It has nothing to do with “marriage equality” and everything to do with enforcing their radical agenda on all of society.
It stands to reason that this type of behaviour manifests – when you remove all morals and ethics you become like the animals!! Problem is it is only getting worse as the social engineers seek to pull down all authority and morals……
SSM is the Trojan horse and purely a way to allow the state to outlaw Christianity. If it becomes illegal to preach Genesis 1/27, 5/2 and Ephesians 5:22-33 (for example) what, next?
It really needs to driven home that what we see happening with SSM is clearly a case of what will become the “tyranny of the majority” A term is used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule. “It involves a scenario in which a majority places its own interests above those of a minority group, constituting active oppression comparable to that of a tyrant or despot. Potentially, a disliked ethnic, religious, political, or racial group may be deliberately penalized by the majority element acting through the democratic process.” (Wiki)
Alexis de Tocqueville (“Democracy in America,”)1835-40 had legitimate concerns for the “power of the majority” which he claimed could distort every sphere of human life.
If it can be shown through constant media hype, continuing demonstrations, boycotts and suchlike tactics, that Christian thought on marriage an family was hateful and destructive, the majority will come to believe it and will therefore not protest its ramifications Loss of freedom of speech, association etc.) This aligns with de Tocquevilles statement -“The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it, which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking.” (op cit)
Despots of the past tyrannized through blood and iron. But the new breed of democratic despotism “does not proceed in this way; it leaves the body and goes straight for the soul.”(op cit)
That is, the majority reaches into citizens’ minds and hearts. It breaks citizens’ will to resist, to question its authority, and to think for themselves. The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it, which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking. We see this happen almost daily: to stand against the majority is to ruin yourself.
The UN recognises this issue (“tyranny of the majority”) under the UNESCO Convention for the “Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH)”. Cultural heritage in general consists of the products and processes of a culture that are preserved and passed on through the generations and is the mainspring of humanity’s cultural diversity and its maintenance a guarantee for continuing creativity. Intangible Cultural Heritage means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.
Social practices, rituals and festive events are habitual activities that structure the lives of communities and groups and that are shared by and relevant to many of their members. They are significant because they reaffirm the identity of those who practise them as a group or a society.Social practices, rituals and festive events are strongly affected by the changes communities undergo in modern societies because they depend so much on the broad participation of practitioners and others in the communities themselves.
Knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe and are expressed through language, oral traditions, feelings of attachment towards a place, memories, spirituality and worldview.
By these objects and expressions of Intangible Cultural Heritage, could it not easily be deduced that the Christian marriage celebration and is meaning which is inextricably linked to the Christian concept family is a key ICH in our society and practiced by (2011 ABS) 60% of the population. So can it not be argued that any plebiscite result which supports SSM,which is directly in contradiction with the Christian community’s ICH of heterosexual marriage, will be in contradiction with Australia’s support of UNESCO’s Convention for the “Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH)”
I am encouraged by your daily comments Bill. This ridiculous phrase “same- sex marriage” is a contradiction in terms. Words have meanings and “marriage” is between a man and a woman. The English language already has a term for this nonsense – it is called “sodomy.”
I marvel at the reluctance of the wider community to use this term. Would supporters of the “Yes” campaign be offended by this term? If so ,why? It only describes their behaviour.
I am convinced that this sexual anarchy that has taken over has been sped up in the last 10 to 15 years in parallel to the internet age – especially the last 10 years when online video pornography has been much easier to access. It’s no coincidence that the push for ssm and the sexualisation of children has become much more mainstream in this same time period. The whole culture has been desensitised, therefore losing boundaries even more. I sometimes wonder if the internet wasn’t available for awhile how things might change.
Nice one Kevin.
Do hope you are correct. Let’s pray the Left continue to use the same vicious tactics and the General Population reacts negatively and sees the clear and present danger of SSM.
Kevin Mason comments above that the cancellation of the meeting ‘has resulted in widespread media attention …’ Like Phil Browne, I hope this is correct but doubt that it is so. Does anyone know if the story has been reported anywhere except in The Australian today?
If you do a search on the ABC web site, it appears to be the case that the proverbial “barrage of silence is deafening” certainly seems to apply to this story. One might conclude that the ABC is trying to minimise bad publicity for the “yes” campaign.
Bill, you’re spot-on in that “marriage equality” has never been the main-game for the radicals. In The Weekend Australian today there is an article about the US Commission for Civil Rights coming down on religious liberty in stating: “The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance.” Also today I see that a US LGBT organization called Campus Pride has put out a Shame List of over 100 Christian Colleges and universities. It is calling on corporations to blacklist graduates from these colleges, effectively denying them employment. With a great many big corporations already being supporters of LGBT issues, one wonders how long it might be for this to take hold. Because if it does, it would also force the closure of those colleges and universities who did not sign onto the LGBT agenda—they’d simply get no students if they were to be denied employment. And you can be blacklisted simply by hosting a speaker on campus who is critical of homosexuality.
WHY CHRISTIANS LOVE GAYS – NOT HATE THEM!
There is a God to whom we are all accountable – and Christians will willing die to tell you.
There is a judgement which we will all attend – and Christians will willing die to tell you.
There is good news that we can avoid condemnation for our sins – and Christians will willing die to tell it to you.
And in the words of Jesus, the Greatest Lover of all mankind, “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends”.
Pastor Bob Chapman
Dear Bill, I wasn’t aware at first you were involved with that planned meeting for Tuesday, but should have known, I guess!
Here are my thoughts on the matter: I am glad these people are showing more of their colours even before the plebiscite, maybe more hangers on will drop off because they realize they were on the wrong band wagon.
Is it important to have these meetings at such public places? I know we shouldn’t have to hide and so on, but I also believe that while we are not certain of our own courage and that of others, especially venue managers that may have no particular view on the matter, but just want to make some money, maybe those metings should be held in a more obscure location and maybe not advertised on FB either. As we go along with this though I believe we will not be able to do it without a firm handle on Mat 10:28, or else we will be seen to run from these brutes all the time and they will go home rubbing their hands in victory Aren’t there some Christian owners of venues which will stand firm amongst the threats, even death threats which will not bow down to their intimidations? Only when undecided people see us stand firm in the face of such hatred, will they gain the courage to strengthen their convictions on important matters
Courage grows more courage, it is very scary to go through the process though, but we must, we are commanded to over and over again.
Many blessings and thanks for being courageous enough to be in the thick of it again and again. I wish I had the opportunity to join you more often, but a blind person living in the country is somewhat restricted in his/her movements!
Thanks Ursula. Yes what has happened here and so often in other places is utterly shocking. We are watching militants destroy our freedoms and the democratic process, and hardly anyone blinks an eye. Scary times indeed. The event itself was not publicly announced, and the venue was at the airport making it handy for interstate attendees such as myself. So keep us in prayer as we scurry to find another venue real quick!
I seldom watch ABC news so I wonder if there were any reports there or on SBS of this or of the estimated 1.2 million Mexicans who protested in favor of retaining the natural definition of marriage. Seeing as they refused to report on the huge demonstrations in France until forced to do so and then only in an obscure daytime news broadcast with an offhand remark about Catholicism and well after the fact, I suspect not. People complain about the money spent on the plebiscite but fail to recognize the huge amount of public funded, one-sided propaganda the ABC and SBS have produced over nearly twenty years pushing for the change.
Unfortunately many people who are in bondage to sin (eg. drug addicts and alcoholics) do find the truth hurtful. Up until recently this was considered not be reason enough to not uphold truth. This now is changing and is another one of the many ways that redefining marriage and disrespecting the natural family is undermining people’s rights. Extortion, which this is an example of, is of course condemned in the scriptures as a major sin:-
Eze_22:12 In you they have taken bribes to shed blood. You have taken usury and increase, and you gained by extortion of your neighbors, and you have forgotten Me, says the Lord Jehovah.
Mat_23:25 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of extortion and excess.
Mal_3:5 And I will come near you to judgment. And I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those who extort from the hired laborer’s wages, and turning away the widow, and the orphan, the alien, and not fearing Me, says Jehovah of Hosts.
Luk_3:14 And the soldiers also asked of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said to them, Do not forcibly extort anyone, nor accuse any falsely. And be content with your wages.
1Co 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor abusers, nor homosexuals,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
It is also worth noting that in Israel, where there also is no SS’M’ they do allow SS divorce, so this argument against retaining the status quo also does not hold water.
Express Online, Feb 28, 2016 reported, “Sham marriages increased 850% and authorities are overwhelmed in the UK.” The immigration authorities in the UK should have accepted a significant increase in “sham marriages” when a legal “sham marriage practice” was created for same-sex couples by the British government. All that a same-sex married couple is required to purchase a legal state marriage certificate as evidence of a marriage. How can the government and government agencies discriminate against the majority of 2 people of the same-sex whom live together in a non-sexual relationship from a same-sex married couple that doesn’t have a sexual relationship? When marriage only means a legal union for same-sex couples, then we can except “sham marriages.” Same-sex marriage is a type of “open marriage” because the law can’t stop same-sex couples using their sexual organs for their designed biological function to create a family.
There is a massive spiritual battle going on. A direct attack on God’s creation. Currently in the firing line are, ‘men’, ‘women’ and God’s institution of ‘marriage’.
It is ironic that on one hand there is a desperate desire to precisely classify each (debatable) ‘gender’ (into L, G, B, T, Q, I, A or even +) while at the same time, and conversely, aggregating that which obviously different – namely to mash MM or FF type-‘marriages’ into MF marriages, so that the term ‘marriage’ become blurred and corrupted.
If SSM becomes a reality, there will be a requirement clarify terms. Rather than, “I am married” you will have to say, “I am, a-man-married-to-a-woman-type, married”. Or even to use the more ‘progressive’ clarification, “I am, a-cisman-married-to-a-ciswoman-type, married”.
There are further complexities other familiar terms such as ‘bride’, ‘groom’, ‘husband’ and ‘wife’. All of this could require this type of ‘clarification’, “I am the husband and my wife is a ciswoman” or even for some, “I am the a cisman husband of my transman husband”.
What a mess the world is in with 54 genders, children transitioning, gay-babies, Safe Schools: OMG I’m Queer, same-sex marriage (or is it same-gender marriage, and that term is too divisive make it even more nebulous by saying ‘marriage equality’).
Dear Bill. Thank you for your continuing in keeping up with the changes in our culture, and always presenting such well written entries.
If I may ask 2 questions of you..
1. What’s the situation in regard to upholding marriage in the Australian church as far as you’ve seen and heard?
2. If my church leaders don’t want to discuss this and teach the church the clear word of God, how to I make sure I keep honouring those God appointed leaders over me but still speak up and encourage the church around me to cling to God’s word and not compromise?
Thanks, God bless and strength to you.
Behold, I have made your face strong against their faces, and your forehead strong against their foreheads. Like adamant stone, harder than flint, I have made your forehead; do not be afraid of them, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they are a rebellious house.”
Eze 3:8?-?9 NKJV
1. Sadly most Australian churches are doing very little to protect marriage, either from the homosexual attack on it, or even the flood of easy divorce.
2. If your church leaders are not doing their biblical duty in speaking up on, and teaching about, what is important, it may be time to leave that church!
Hi Bill, keep up the good fight, whilst many of us may not comment on your blog, we are nonetheless following along and talking about the issues. I have sent information about the dangers of SSM to local MP’s etc, we all need to be doing this to let them know we are concerned about the negative effects it will have on our nation and the future of our children.
Thanks Fred and well done.
Bill, Barack Obama was/is a disciple of Alinski, right? The rebel in the heart is incorrigible eh! Thanks for keeping our vision straight. How queer our law system and so many politicians have become – unrestrained – in a few years.
Good point- the plebiscite seems to be about changing the definition of an existing word.
Macquarie Dictionary, which is Australia’s official legal dictionary defines marriage as
noun 1. the legal union of a man with a woman; state or condition of being married; the legal relation of spouses to each other; wedlock.
2. a like union between two people of the same sex, made legal in some jurisdictions, but not in Australia.
So could it be legally possible that the plebiscite cannot use the term same-sex marriage which doesn’t legally exist BEFORE a possible “yes” plebiscite?
Presents an interesting legal position and possible High Court challenge.
All the above is terrible but what seems even worse to me is that they are hell bent on getting our children. All the current issues are really part of the one agenda which is totally Marxist ie destroy family, destroy religion and destroy society. This means their worst, most subtle attack is on our children through education from Pre-school on. Our children’s minds will be so warped from an early age we will lose all influence, added to this the changing immoral culture our children are experiencing on every level outside of school as well through TV, IT, media and lifestyle, ‘shacking up’ ,’partying on’ and you see the battle they and we are in. We can’t give up for their sake, we must ‘fight the good fight with all our might’. Pray as though it all depended on God and fight as though it all depended on us. God is on our side. Take courage.
Former Federal Labor MP and Minister Peter Baldwin wrote a very thoughtful, actually quite brilliant (I thought) piece for the Weekend Australian which was headlined “Regressive Left puts Bigotry on a Pedestal” He concludes: “I believe the time has come for a rethinking of the lines of political division. At this time decent leftists must drop the masochistic obsession with denigrating post Enlightenment Western civilisation and join with liberals, conservatives and others in a concerted effort effort to defend it against the unprecedented threats it now faces”
I think the battle lines are going to be redrawn in surprising ways in the months ahead.
Quite plainly this is bullying and makes an absolute mockery of the tenuous claims that the Safe Schools Program has anything to do with bullying at all. The perpetrators have an agenda to push and they will bully to the death to establish it. There will be no debate. Silence or cacophony must ensue lest anything but the Yes argument be presented reasonably in the