More Ugly Leftist Hypocrisy
It is getting to the point where if I am asked to define what leftism is all about, I simply offer the word hypocrisy. The two seem to go together so often, that they may be twins separated at birth. The examples of leftist hypocrisy are legion, especially surrounding all things related to the homosexual agenda.
Every day we see this rank hypocrisy in action, and I have documented countless cases of this over the years. Let me just share a few of the obvious examples. The homosexual activists have screamed for decades now, “Keep the state out of our bedrooms”.
Ha, there is no other group so intent on dragging the state into our bedrooms – and every other private and public place – than the homosexual militants. They want Big Brother Statism snooping around everywhere: every home, church and group that might dare to take a different stance on these matters than they do.
They want the heavy hand of the law brought in every time someone commits a “hate crime” – that is, takes an alternative point of view from the activists. No group has done more to bring about the rise of the Total State than the sexual revolutionaries. What’s that word starting with ‘H’ and ending with ‘ypocrisy”?
And then there is the homosexual agenda being daily rammed down our throats throughout the media, popular culture, academia, and the public square. They call this the right of free speech. But when our side dares to make our case anywhere in the public arena, all of a sudden it is no longer free speech but bigotry, hatred, homophobia and intolerance. Hypocrisy much?
And as I documented just recently, we actually had the Tasmania Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Robin Banks coming out saying that something like homosexual marriage should not be left to the “whims of the majority”. How very democratic of you Robin. You want the masses to just sit down and shut up while you dictate what social policies we must have.
And these guys have been insisting for years that the majority of Australians fully favour homosexual marriage. Why then are they so terrified of letting the people actually put that to a vote? One homosexual activist after another is running scared here, telling us the electorate must not have a say in this, and no plebiscite should be allowed. But why not, if they are so stinking sure it will go their way? Um, what was that ‘H’ word again?
Two articles in today’s press have also highlighted this glaring – and lousy – hypocrisy and double standards of the left, especially in regard to homosexuality. The first is by columnist Rita Panahi. She focuses on the recent homosexual pride round in the AFL. I wrote about it at the time here.
One of the teams most involved in this was the Sydney Swans. Writes Rita:
Less than two weeks after taking part in the inaugural Pride Game to celebrate the LGBTIQ community, the Sydney Swans proudly signed a sponsorship deal with Qatar Airways. That’s the state-owned airline of Qatar; a country where homosexuality is banned and openly gay men and women face horrendous abuse, including the death penalty in some instances. The government doesn’t permit an open LGBT community and an LGBT rights movement is unthinkable. It’s also worth noting the UN has found punishments in Qatar such as stoning and flogging breach obligations imposed by the UN Convention Against Torture.
If the Swans are serious about the rights of gay and transgender people, then how could they become involved with a despot nation that punishes homosexuality with canings, prison terms and worse? This isn’t just garden variety hypocrisy we’ve come to expect from the AFL; it’s the type of duplicity that treats fans like fools and undermines the club’s work for change and raising awareness of LGBTIQ issues.
Sharia law is hardly compatible with LGBTIQ rights and Qatar Airways is owned and operated by the same government that ruthlessly persecutes homosexuals. The Swans hierarchy would be well aware that homosexuals in the Arab world are considered criminals and treated appallingly. How can they trumpet the club’s progressive values in the lead-up to the Pride Game while negotiating a corporate deal with Qatar?
The Swans’ hypocrisy is repeated in the celebrity world with posturing stars very selective about their activism. Take Canadian rocker Bryan Adams, who earlier this year cancelled a concert in Mississippi over what he called anti-LGBTI laws.
“I cannot in good conscience perform in a state where certain people are being denied their civil rights due to their sexual orientation,” he said. “Using my voice I stand in solidarity with all my LGBT friends to repeal this extremely discriminatory Bill.”
Though Adams can’t bring himself to perform in Mississippi because of the state’s religious liberty Bill, he has no qualms about performing in Arab states that imprison and/or execute gay men including Qatar. Gosh, he might even go back there to perform at the 2022 Soccer World Cup that Qatar inexplicably won.
Also today we had columnist Andrew Bolt pointing out more hypocrisy from the left. He begins:
Why are same-sex marriage activists so scared of Australians and so against giving them a say? Why are they rewriting history to pretend an Irish-style public vote on same-sex marriage will unleash terrible gay-hatred?
Activists, politicians and journalists are now demanding the Turnbull Government call off its planned plebiscite next year. Labor leader Bill Shorten claims it will just be “a taxpayer-funded platform for homophobia”. Former High Court justice Michael Kirby this week insisted it would be “running out the old issues of hatreds and animosities, abominations and all the old arguments against gay people”.
This fear campaign is now so hysterical that campaigners even suggest that letting Australians vote — rather than have politicians decide for them — will literally kill gays. Take former Australian Marriage Equality convener Rodney Croome: “If there is a plebiscite, and when the first gay kid dies at his own hand because of the hate and fearmongering, I have to be able to look at myself in the mirror and know I did everything I could to stop it … everything.”
And now activists actually claim Ireland is a warning to us. That is bizarre, given at a referendum last year Ireland voted by an overwhelming 62 per cent to approve same-sex marriage, prompting ecstatic coverage even in far-off Australia. But now we’re told the Irish referendum in fact incited a vicious bigotry that a plebiscite will provoke here.
He cites various activists on this, and then concludes:
So, with so much to gain, what really is driving this bitter campaign against the plebiscite and this sad rewriting of the history of the Irish referendum? I suspect it is partly driven by the Left’s authoritarian streak. Just to hold a plebiscite seems to these new authoritarians to legitimise an evil argument that must be silenced.
But I’d bet they’re also scared that they don’t actually have the public support they claim. They know they can push around the politicians, but they fear the voters. What if the polls lie, they wonder? What if the support is exaggerated and a public vote on same-sex marriage defeated?
Frankly, you’d have to be paranoid to think that. The polls consistently show the support here that was seen in Ireland — two-thirds, or even higher. In a plebiscite, that would produce an overwhelming moral win as well as a legal one. No victory could be more complete and for activists that would be worth whatever the plebiscite costs. But let’s address their deepest fear — that the plebiscite is lost. Well, isn’t that how democracy works? Or do they really want to force the many to obey the few? Is that what this rage at a public vote is really about?
Nope, the left sure is not a fan of democracy, or of letting the people decide, or of free speech. The left is all about power and domination, squashing the common man, insisting that the leftist elites know what is best for them. But they do all this in the name of the “people”.
This hypocrisy stinks.
Top 6 on BarbWire.com
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.