Saturday, August 04, 2012

Julia says no to the knotting

As I have said in the past, I don't give two hoots for gay marriage. When I was young and saw things in black and white, I believed that a man and woman only need get married if they were to have children, for the children's sake. Time and I have moved on and I no longer think this and I doubt society generally does. However, I do believe if gays or dykes want to get married, then why shouldn't they.

While I suppose in some ways I have benefited from the long term gay rights campaign, it will perhaps be to my disadvantage in my old age.

What has puzzled me, and others, including Dina, who was quite rightly suspicious, is why Prime Minister Gillard is against gay marriage? It goes against almost everything we know about her.

Perhaps the answer is in this clip from gay and lesbian newspaper, the Star Observer. Long have Australian politicians made deals with religious groups, internet censorship being a still ongoing one, so the explanation is quite feasible.

Could it be true? Did Julia Gillard really sell her moral compass for power? Kevin Rudd allegedly spilled the beans to gay marriage advocates Kerryn Phelps, Jackie Stricker and Geoff Thomas, that Gillard made a deal with the Australian Christian Lobby and Joe De Bruyn that placed our PM on the anti-same-sex marriage bandwagon.

The full article can be found at this link.

11 comments:

  1. Julia is just like all other MP's if there is a few votes in it they will support it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. and also surprising because the daughter of The First Bloke is not straight, and one would think JG would be enlightened by this

    ReplyDelete
  3. An interesting clip, Andrew. Hitler made deals with every man and his dog. Chamberlain acted as though he believed Hitler. Stalin knew that Hitler knew that Stalin knew Hitler was full of it.

    If Julia made a deal with anyone did they actually believe it? What about her excuse for the about face on the carbon tax? She insists it is a leader's job to make unpopular and hard decisions. A leader's word is not supposed to mean anything, if we can take her word for it.

    She's a political ponzi schemer.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hahaha! As usual, FruitCake is on the money!! The deal/conspiracy theory is the only logical explanation for why someone who, in the early days of her power grab, was so insistent about 'respecting people's life choices' has found a life choice NOT to respect. The trick is to guess which of what she says is believeable and which is not.

    I guess wrong most of the time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Julia sold out? Why am I not surprised? She is a politician after all. Sooner or later they all sell out.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Windsmoke, in this case it might cost her a few votes too.

    Ann, I had forgotten that. Yes, the daughter of who she is living in sin with.

    FC, I think the carbon tax is different. She did deals to get into government after the election. I am not sure of the timing of deal with ACL, but it sounds like it was pre election to me. Plenty in the UK lived to regret their pre war involvement with Hitler. With the historical knowledge, should we judge them harshly? I don't know. I expect I could be convinced either way.

    Red, I really thought, nay hoped, that she might have been a no bull dust politician. I guess getting to be PM requires a certain amount of duplicity.

    River, that does seem true. Perhaps Malcolm T would do better.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The reason everyone has to have access to marriage is not so much about god's law as about the partners' legal rights. Widows and widowers can claim their late spouse's pension, superannuation and military allowances - partners cannot. I love Gillard and the Labour movement, but hers is an unfair decision.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Joseph, in Australia de facto couples, such as a man and a woman who live together in a relationship, have the same rights as a married couple. This has been extended to gay couples. There may be a couple of areas where gay couples are disadvantaged, but none come to mind. Who are disadvantaged now are gay couples who have lived a life together but not had the financial and other advantages of being considered a couple, yet now are by our social security system, much to their disadvantage. While I am Green inclined now, I am truly a Labor person too. I am just a bit disappointed in Julia, but she has done some great stuff while she has been in office.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with you and the article. It makes sense. It's the ONLY answer that makes sense...so far.

    It's sad that she would give up her values to stay in power.

    I'm sure it's a common thing though.

    I was just watching an old episode of Planet America and they were suggesting that Obama decided to be pro-gay marriage because he needed money from the gay-lobby.

    So...maybe we shouldn't care about what our politicians believe. We should care about the views of those who have the power to put them in power.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Lying seems to be a necessity in politics.
    For the life of me, I cannot begin to understand why anyone should give a damn if someone different from themselves gets married. There was a thing on one of the talk shows last night about guys who sell their sperm to women and how a lot of people feel this should be illegal. So, it's okay to go to a bar and get some for free but illegal to buy it from someone. Go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dina, we heard how the donations rolled in after Obama made the announcement. For him I would guess it was just a matter of timing, that is when was the best time to make the announcement rather than him being against gay marriage.

    Rubye, society's contradictions like you mentioned are very annoying. Media double standards are immense.

    ReplyDelete

Whenever I wish I was young again, I am sobered by memories of algebra.