Cory Bernardi: Not Learning From History


  1. Cory Bernardi is saying all the right things….I’ll be voting for him, for sure.

    For example, he seems to realise that the Institution of Marriage was given its “equality” by the institution of Australian law which operates to protect “equality” before the law. Marriage was thus given its rightful consideration and security in the wider life of all Australian citizens. The Family Court has had to work out many and various issues in all sorts of relationships. It makes little sense now for the gender activists to insist that all the gay community wants is for their sexuality and love to be treated equally under the law. It already is, but in ways which recognise their registered same-sex unions as legal contracts. They are equal in their sexual unions, but different by definitions which recognise the understandings gained from the centuries of human experience of connubial marriage and all its social, communal, economic and legal aspects. The SSM-Safe schools proponents ARE talking about themselves: what they wish for themselves as individuals, denying human physical realities, and insisting on changing social and communal values to reflect their particular ideas about themselves. The anti-SSM defenders ARE NOT talking about themselves. They are concerned about others – men, women, children – living social relationships that reflect individual and social reality. This is a central distinction which must be understood in this debate. Our individual impulses are not sound reasons for formulating any sorts of laws. To insist that connubial marriage must be equated with same-sex equality is a strange notion at best. The claim is rather like demanding that bicycles must be equal to a Rolls Royce car. They are both forms of transport; they can take you anywhere, but they remain completely different vehicles. “Transport equality” anyone? An even more depressing idea entailed in all this is that all the values that individuals hold should be constricted by the state. We must all park our personal values at the door when we go to work, and be forced to operate according to the “rules”, however defined and justified.

    The end result if people are forced to approve or participate in something that they deem “unconscionable” would be that slavery is in our society. The way that the homosexual activists are using the judiciary as a political tool to bully, intimidate and force people to endorse their same sex “marriage”, would only bring slavery to Australia.

Your comments

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous Posts