Concerns for Democracy/ The Push for Same Sex MArraiage

I have resided in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) for over 40 years and have serious concerns about the way the ACT Labor/Green Coalition government tried to impose same sex marriage legislation on the ACT community.

The ACT Chief Minister has stated on more than one occasion that most people in the ACT are in favour of same sex marriages. But we, the people, have never been asked whether or not we support this controversial legislation. Before the last ACT election, the outgoing Labor/Green Coalition had the ideal opportunity to hold a referendum on this issue in conjunction with that election. This would have resolved this issue one way or the other. So why did the Chief Minister not use that opportunity?

As a minority government, I do not believe the Labor/Green coalition was given a mandate by the people of the ACT to introduce same sex marriage legislation but they went ahead with the legislation anyway. Fortunately for the people of the ACT, the legislation was annulled by the High Court of Australia because the ACT Assembly has no authority to overrule Australian Federal Marriage Legislation.

On the day in September last year, when the Labor/Green Coalition unconstitutionally passed same sex marriage legislation by a majority of one (Green) vote, Minister Andrew Barr stated, and I quote “It marks an important step in our journey to become the most LGBTI city in Australia” unquote. Such a statement from a minister of the crown is incredible. Minister Barr has sworn to represent all the people of the ACT not just a minority group of sexually challenged people. The minister’s statement indicates that there may be a government agenda to flood the ACT with LGBTI people.

I have serious concerns about what an influx LGBTI people will have on the ACT community. I do not believe for one moment that by doing so, the ACT will become a better place to live. Nor do I believe that we will enjoy a more peaceful and harmonious community. I believe the community that an influx of LGBTI people will create will be divisive, volatile and more violent than it already is.

Also, NSW Health figures show a 24% jump in HIV infections for 2012; with 81% of the infections being acquired through homosexual sex. How will the ACT health system cope with an influx of possible HIV infected homosexuals?

However, it would appear that such an agenda is in progress with the introduction of “sexual orientations” into the ACT. I was astonished and offended to note that, on my latest medical health plan; I have been assigned a “sexual orientation.” I am offended because my heterosexuality is not an “orientation” it is biologically normal and natural. Nor was I consulted about this addition to my medical records.

Is this ACT Government policy? It would appear to be so because Minister Simon Corbell is now pushing for a third “sexual gender category” for the ACT. This Minister also intends to introduce legislation allowing sexually challenged people to change the sex on their birth certificates solely on the medical advice provided without the need to undertake sex reassignment surgery. This means that a person with fully functioning male sex organs, who dresses as a woman, may use public facilities designated for women simply because his birth certificate states he is female.

I am certain that the introduction of “sexual categories” and “sexual orientations” into the ACT will, in the longer term, divide and separate communities far worse than religious or cultural sectarianism ever did because it is being forced upon us undemocratically.

And, what about the human rights of children who will have the misfortune to be brought up in an unnatural sexual environment? Surely, children have the right to live with and be brought up by their biological parents whenever and wherever possible. If same sex marriage laws are enacted in Australia we will have a situation where children will be brought into this world to be, deliberately and with aforethought, deprived of one or both biological parents simply to become accessories for a group of sexually challenged people who believe that they are normal sexual beings.

Why have sexually challenged people been convinced that they are being discriminated against because they cannot “marry” a person of the same sex? The truth is sexually challenged people make a conscious decision not to marry a person of the opposite sex but instead, “choose” to cohabit and copulate with members of the same sex so, where is the discrimination?

The social engineers behind this controversial legislation are relying totally on indoctrination and propaganda to get their message across; that is, the use of meaningless words, phrases and slogans. I am sure that the politicians who support same sex marriage legislation are aware that the first casualties of propaganda are facts and truth.

Today more and more heterosexuals are living as our ancestors lived; that is co-habiting and raising their children without having a religious or civil marriage ceremony. Are these people being discriminated against or disadvantaged by the lack of a marriage certificate: of course not. Such a certificate is simply a tool used by government for population census and taxation purposes.

Also, under the provisions of Clause 3 to Article 16 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, these natural and fundamental family group units are entitled to protection by society and the state. The key word here is natural; that is, mum, dad and the kid’s. I do not believe that Article 16 was ever intended to include same sex partners because when the UN Declaration was promulgated in the late 1940’s, homosexual sex acts where criminal offences in most western countries.

It is an indisputable fact that human beings, like most other mammals on Planet Earth are biologically heterosexual by nature and design. It is also an indisputable fact that there is no genetic or biological requirement for one man to engage in sexual activity with another man or a woman to engage in sexual activity with another woman. Being consensual does not change the facts.

As there are no genetic or biological reasons for same sex copulation there can be no legitimate or valid legal reasons to enact legislation and enshrines in marriage, one man wedding, bedding and copulating with another man. The same applies for women.

From the very beginning, human beings have been forming long term sexual bonds with members of the opposite sex the way nature intended. These long term sexual bonds between a man and a woman are what modern marriage is based on. Simply because these long term sexual bonds have been ritualised and formalised by religious sects and ruling regimes does not change the facts or the truth relating to human biology.

Society will be better served by conducting in-depth research into this human phenomenon to determine the cause of perverted sexual relationships. It could then be determined why the sexual arousal” triggers” of sexually challenged people are malfunctioning. I state “malfunctioning” because it is not biologically normal or natural to form long term sexual bonds between members of the same sex.

Proper research would determine if homosexuality is caused by genetic errors or by a chemical imbalance within the brain (the human being’s largest sex organ). It could also be determined if is it caused by underlying dysfunctional psycho-social problems: in other words, is it a sexual/mental health problem. The result of proper research would, I believe, go a long way in solving the problems associated with homosexuality.

I will finish my comments by quoting from the introductory paragraph of an article entitled “Poisonous Ideas” written by Global Analyst J.R. Nyquist, which was published on 18 June 2010.

“Suppose you were tasked with bringing down a civilization, and your only weapon was language. Could you accomplish your goal? Quite clearly, the answer is yes. To defeat a civilization language suffices if it can be used to divide man from woman, parent from child, the owners of businesses from the employees, the state from the citizens and God from the church………”

I believe this is exactly what is happening in western society today and will be instrumental in bringing down our civilization.

I now ask that any Australians who read this post (whether for or against same sex marriage) to access Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot’s web site, click on “Contact your PM” and request that the Federal Parliament hold a national referendum on this issue rather than the conscience vote that same sex marriage supporters are lobbying for. By doing so, this issue will then be resolved in a democratic manner by the people of Australia not through back door lobbying by sexually challenged people.

aquarianmist

Posted in Political | Leave a comment

Politicically Motivated Sex Propaganda

I am writing this post in response to comments made by snowylocks that my use of the word ‘propaganda’ is pejorative.

A pejorative is a word or phrase that expresses contempt or has disparaging connotations. Two words that spring to my mind that fit this definition are ‘homophobic’ and ‘heterosexist.’ These two words were coined by the homosexual propaganda machine to describe anyone who disagrees with what homosexuals want; homosexual marriage. These two words are also derogatory because they are used to disparage, belittle and offend people by intimating that there is something wrong with them because they disagree with homosexual marriage. In my opinion, ‘homophobia’ and’ heterosexism’ exist only in the minds of homosexuals.

Propaganda is a form of communication that presents facts selectively and in so doing so possibly lies by omission or uses loaded messages. The desired result of propaganda is to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information presented in an effort to change public attitudes about a particular subject which, in this case, is homosexual marriage. The first casualties of propaganda are facts and truth.

In propaganda, words can also be distorted by incorrect use to elicit a particular response and can become accepted jargon and even accepted into everyday language. Here are some examples: change the true meaning of ‘gay’ and use it to replace the word ‘homosexual’, replace the word sodomy with the words ‘anal intercourse’,  replace ‘homosexual relationships’ with ‘gay marriages’ or ‘same sex marriages’.

Into this mix, meaningless phrases such as ‘equal love’ and ‘marriage equality’ have been added. These phrases are being used to make us believe that, somehow, homosexuals are being discriminated against. In my opinion, homosexuals are being self-discriminating by choosing not to marry a person of the opposite sex. Homosexuals complain that they cannot help being what they are because they had no choice.

WE ALL HAVE CHOICES. Necrophiliacs can choose not to have sex with dead people. Pedophiles can choose not to have sex with little boys or little girls. Parents or siblings can choose not to engage in incestuous sex. People can choose not to have sex with animals. People can choose not to rape. People can choose not to engage in sexual bondage, voyeurism or any other type of sexual fetish in their quest for sexual self gratification. So why are homosexuals any different? After all, no one forces one man to stick his dick up another man’s ass.

Giving homosexuals preferential treatment has set a dangerous precedent. Already, the North American Man-Boy Love Association are campaigning for the sexual age of consent to be reduced or abolished to remove the fear of going to prison if they are caught having sex with under age boys. What, I wonder, will be next?

When is this lunacy going to end? What is it doing to western culture? Is this the beginning of the end for our civilization?

If the Messiah is coming, it had better be soon.

aquarianmist

Posted in Political | 11 Comments

The Politics of Religion

A few weeks ago, retired Archbishop Desmond Tutu stated that he could not worship a homophobic God. That is strange because the God that the Archbishop has worshiped for most of his life is the same God that destroyed the Sodomites for disobeying God’s laws by engaging in homosexual sex. What is the archbishop trying to say? Is he saying that God was wrong? Is he saying that God committed mass murder when he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because God is a vengeful homophobic God.

Recently, the Pope stated “who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord. What does this mean? Is the Pope washing his hands of this issue? Is The Pope leaving it to God to judge; if so will such judgment be here on Earth or in Heaven following death? In the meantime do homosexuals continue with their sinful ways in the knowledge that they will be forgiven if they confess their sins on their death-bed?

The Pope also stated that if a priest has sinned and confessed, the priest must be forgiven. Again, is this forgiveness here on Earth or is it in Heaven following death? Does this forgiveness also include homosexual pedophile priests?

It would appear that now the homosexual propaganda machine has beaten our politically correct politicians at their own game, they have now turned their virulent attention to the Christian Churches.

Look at the position the politically correct British Parliament has placed the Queen of England. As Head of State, the Queen is duty bound to sign off on all legislation that has been passed by the British Parliament no matter what The Queen’s personal opinion may be, so homosexual marriage legislation was recently passed into British Law. Because The Queen is also the Head of the Church of England, British homosexuals are using The Queen’s position as Head of the Church as leverage to demand to be married by a priest, in a church and in the presence of God.

Where is this lunacy going to end. When drafting this post, I was reminded of something Mahatma Gandhi said and I quote ” I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet.” This is what the homosexual propaganda machine is doing, walking through our minds with their dirty feet. My fervent hope is while doing so, they will also be sowing the seeds of their own destruction.

Amen to that.

aquarianmist

Posted in Political | 8 Comments

Psychology Today: disguised “NAMBLA-like” author trying to sabotage age-of-consent laws

Originally posted on Reflections, Reflections by Alessandra:

Many very good comments on this thread at this Psychology Today site. I copied them here to save them and think about some points further.

They were in response to an extremely irresponsible article promoting teenagers to have sex and wanting to abolish age-of-consent laws (or bring them down) by Marina Adshade. As you know, liberals who normalize homosexuality are the new NAMBLA light. They haven’t begun to advocate for sex with 2 yr olds yet, but they want to sexually exploit everyone teenager. Now they claim legal protections against sex at an early age are terrible and creates great injustices. Her main grotesque claim:

Age-of-consent laws impose high costs in terms of the personal hardship on the youth caught up in that enforcement (on both sides of the courtroom). So there must be pretty good evidence that younger teens are less capable of making healthily sexual decisions than…

View original 6,650 more words

Posted in Political | 3 Comments

ThePolitical Promotion of Homosexuality

In relation to the homosexual marriage issue, I believe that the word ‘gay’ is the most overused and abused word in the English language today. There are no ‘gays’ or ‘straights’ only heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Following New Zealand’s decision to introduce homosexual marriage legislation, the push is now on to introduce similar legislation in Australia. The fairest and most democratic means of resolving this controversial issue is to hold a national referendum in conjunction with the Federal election later this year. Because voting is compulsory in Australia, the result will clearly reflect the will of the Australian people. I am not however, going to hold my breath, because I have not heard one supporter of homosexual marriages lobby for such a referendum. This is quite odd because supporters of homosexual marriages claim that that the majority of Australian people are in favor of, or do not, oppose these marriages but, as yet, have not provided statistics to support that claim. Instead, they are directly lobbying sitting politicians whose only interest seems to be in retaining their seat on the gravy train that the public purse has become in Australia.

If homosexual marriage legislation is introduced into Australia, has anyone thought about the children who will be brought into a homosexual environment? Wherever possible, children should be brought by their biological parents; that is with heterosexual mums and dads. In homosexual marriages, children will be, deliberately and with aforethought, deprived of one, or both, biological parents. In my opinion, this will be an abuse of children’s human rights because they will have no say in the matter.

There is now a group in the USA calling themselves The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) whose aim is to abolish the age of consent laws in order to decriminalize adult sexual involvement with minors. For those who have not read the post by Reflections by Alessandra I have re-blogged it here. If NAMBLA succeed, this will take western society back to the days of the Roman Empire where homosexuals preferred youths between 12 and 20 years of age as sexual partners. Many hapless youths within this age group were sold into sexual slavery, sometimes by their own parents. Given the number of young women sold into sexual slavery each year, I am left wondering if young men are also meeting the same fate today. After all, where this a demand, that demand will bee met.

aquarianmist

Posted in Political | 9 Comments

My Apologies

My apologies to anyone who is awaiting a response to comments made regarding my posts opposing same sex marriage. I was taken ill 3 weeks ago and spent the last 2 weeks in hospital being discharged on Sun 10 Feb. I will catch up with the debate as soon as I am able.

Aquarianmist.

Posted in Political | 1 Comment

This WILL Cheer You Up!

aquarianmist:

It sure did.

Originally posted on Neurochemically Challenged:

I don’t care what kind of day you think you had, this will get a laugh out of you. Cats are a solid way to treat depression… go look it up if you don’t believe me. It’s in the DSM IV that way. Fucking SWEAR.

View original

Posted in Political | Leave a comment