After homo ‘marriage’ comes Islamic child-marriage & polygamy

….and pandering leftist loons are already preparing to serve it to their constituents on a silver platter.

Labor MPs  ignore huge ‘no’ votes in their multicultural electorates

Labor frontbencher Tony Burke told Fairfax Media he would not be changing his vote to “no”, despite “yes” securing just 30.4 per cent support in the postal survey in his electorate of Watson, one of the lowest results in the country.

“I went to the last election with a commitment to vote ‘yes’. That doesn’t change. My community knows that if they are treated with prejudice, vilified, or marginalised in any way I will stand up for them, regardless of polls.”

In Chifley, where 58.7 per cent of people voted no, local MP Ed Husic, a “yes”-voting Muslim, said the community would find a way to accommodate all points of view.

Related:

What comes after same-sex marriage?
 You only have to look to the countries that have already redefined the institution to get an idea. Here are twelve examples.

Quote of the Day comes courtesy of The XYZ’s Ryan Fletcher:

Australia, when faced with a democratic vote, decided to support those who fire-bombedthe ACL headquaters, vandalised private property, maliciously assaulted numerous NO campaigners, sent death threats to public officials and intentionally lied about the true intent of their agenda to redefine marriage.

Moral of story: Terrorism works.

Labor MPs across western Sydney – and in two Melbourne seats – will defy the will of their electorates and vote “yes” to legalise same-sex marriage in Parliament.

More than any other area in Australia, the people Muslims of western Sydney voted “no”.

Here, where up to three quarters of the population in the electorates of Blaxland and Watson voted against same sex marriage, the cultural clash of marriage equality and the conservative values of immigrant cultures told the story of the polls.

The same two factors repeated themselves in the only two areas to vote against same-sex marriage in Victoria: Calwell and Bruce.

The “no” campaign targeted conservative immigrant cultures and it showed.

Voters from Lebanese and Chinese backgrounds now outnumber those from Australian heritage in these areas, 72 per cent of all people had both parents born overseas. 30 per cent are from a Muslim backgrounds in Blaxland, 23 per cent in Watson, 10 times the national average of 2.6 per cent.

The “no” vote forms a ring around the whiter, wealthier, irreligious inner-Sydney suburbs, and almost all of them are Labor-held – with the Liberal seats of Bennelong and Banks exceptions – and historically working class.

“There are a lot of socially conservative people in my area. I voted ‘yes’ because I thought it was an important step forward for the inclusive tradition we have in this country,” he said.

“We have always accommodated millions of people who speak different languages, who wear different things and found a way to include people from all different walks of life.”

Fellow western Sydney MPs Chris Hayes and Julie Owens also indicated they would be guided by the national result, rather than the results in their seats, which were 36.3 per cent and 38.4 per cent respectively. So too did shadow treasurer Chris Bowen, despite more than 60 per cent of constituents in his electorate of McMahon voting “no”.

“I’ve said previously that if the national vote is in the affirmative I won’t use my vote to frustrate the passage of the legislation,” Mr Hayes said.

“That’s not to say I won’t work to get matters of religious liberty considered, but not in this bill necessarily,” he said, adding that he could vote ‘yes’ or could abstain.

Ms Owens said she would take 24 hours to consider the implications of the vote but “my inclination is still to vote ‘yes’, it was overwhelmingly ‘yes’ across Australia”.

“My job is to work with my community to see if we can find ways to make them more comfortable with the national decision,” she said.

Labor frontbencher and long-term same-sex marriage supporter Jason Clare, whose Labor electorate of Blaxland had the highest “no” vote in the country at 73.9 per cent, said he would not be changing his vote.

“I’ve always known the views of the people of Blaxland on this issue and I have been very upfront about mine,” he said.

Labor frontbench MPs Michelle Rowland (Greenway) and Linda Burney (Barton) also confirmed they would still vote “yes”, despite a victory for “no” in their seats, as did Liberal MP David Coleman.

ABC election analyst Antony Green said the pattern of the “no” vote in western Sydney correlates to electorate with large populations born in non-English speaking countries.

The story is repeated in Victoria where Bruce, one of only two electorates to vote “no” in the entire state, has three times the level of families with Chinese backgrounds, and in Calwell, where one of the state’s largest Iraqi communities resides along with the Turkish, and Lebanese diaspora.

They are more likely to be married themselves, but less likely to have a university degree, according to figures from the 2016 census. Median incomes here are a couple of hundred dollars per week less than the rest of Victoria and significantly less than the “yes” voting electorates in inner-Melbourne.

Local MP Julian Hill confirmed he would still be voting “yes” after 53 per cent of his electorate voted “no”.

In Calwell, religion has undoubtedly had an impact, with 17.7 per cent of the electorate from an Islamic background, six times the state average, while 34 per cent are Catholic, 12 per cent higher than the rest of the state.

The member for Calwell, Maria Vamvakinou, said she would still vote “yes”, despite 56 per cent of her electorate voting “no”.

“I understand where my electorate is coming from, I think a large number of my constituents’ views are informed by their religious faith and I will work with them on this issue,” she said.

 

2 thoughts on “After homo ‘marriage’ comes Islamic child-marriage & polygamy”

  1. Excuse me ….
    The “Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey

    Survey … Investigate the opinions or experience of (a group of people) by asking a question.

    It WAS only a Survey … >b>RIGHT !!!
    • The (modified) Australian Marriage Law has not been published (but drafted) yet !
    • Nobody is stupid enough to give Australia’s Politicians the power to pass a law that nobody knows what it contains !
    (sounds like another Politicians have Special Superannuation because they are islamophiles and are also in charge of the Hen House)

    (Oh! …
    Oops!)

    And now – next item please …
    for the islams …
    a gift from Australia’s islamophiles
    a “special” dispensation for multiple CHILD wives in Australia !
    (how about giving children the gift of their childhood w/o islamophilia gender bending and the brutality of islam)

    • incarcerate islamophiles !
    • emigrate the islams !

  2. Getting Tired of “Multi-Culturalism” and “Tolerating Diversity” (i.e: mere difference) yet?!

    HOW COME NOBODY HAS YET BOTHERED TO DEFINE THIS “CULTURE” THEY SO-VIGOROUSLY DEFEND!?

    As is usual with criminals (“liberals”; “muslims”) it’s an argument from emotion only!

    Holding “culture” (education level) as some sort of sacred idolatrous racial “right,” is primarily what’s wrong with the West these days. Individuals have differing levels of moral education, too, but that doesn’t mean we must treat them all as “equal!”

    Virtue-signalling one’s pious PITY of all self-determined criminals as “fellow victims” doesn’t usually cost one anything, (although it sure costs the real victims of the criminals one thereby defends) as opposed to the risk of personal and professional harm that comes with exhibits of righteous ANGER against criminals in the hope of ending their crimes.

    So, these days, being angry at (“hateful” towards) criminals is now the most vile sin, while pitying (“tolerating”) them all as “fellow victims,” is to be deemed the highest moral virtue!

    So much so, that the only advice we hear from “our” hypocrite governments, their pet media, and the corporazi globalist banksters who own them all, seems to invariably be:

    “Anyone who doesn’t automatically pity all criminals as fellow victims should be hated!”

    Which is why hurting the feelings of criminals by accusing them of their crimes, is now a “hateful” crime itself!

    When one doesn’t have facts on one’s side (no criminal can rationally or logically justify their “crime is good – for me, because you all do it, too!” stance) one only has emotions left, and defending hurt feelings and “dignity” doesn’t rely on cause and effect sequencing (where crime is defined as attacking thereby innocent other people first).

    But feelings or emotions aren’t thoughts – because unlike facts, they can be wrong: one may love an enemy who is still out to get one, and hate someone who is only trying to help – no, instead, our emotions are mere reflections of the three basic states of space-time (the static past, the fluid present, and the nebulous future, respectively): static fear, fluid greed, nebulous hope. Not exactly worth defending with one’s life!

    Selfish psychopaths hold their own CHOSEN emotions to be the highest moral virtues (“Hurt Feelings!” “Dignity!” “Respect!”) conflating subjective self-image with objective reality.

    People who have not yet been educated in this truth are prey to being manipulated, as are those who are distracted and tempted into forgetting it – one cannot make informed decisions, if one is lacking relevant information; hence the legal fiduciary (‘good faith’) duty of care doctrine.

    Manipulative swindlers and frauds like Cass Sunstein pretend people just naturally, inevitably and permanently are not “rational actors” in regards to their own economic self-interest; and so, since their brains’ perceptions CAN be tricked, SO they always SHOULD be tricked, by manipulative frauds (aka smarter shrewder people, like him).

    But in reality (and as exists in Law) if we owe our fellow potentially rational human siblings any real respect or dignity, it must be by allowing them an equal opportunity to earn it by becoming educated, and not by affording them it by merely conferring an unearned equality of outcome.

    Education IS “culture,” and ‘cultural’ indoctrination IS education.

    So, obviously, as not all levels of education and informed decision-making abilities are equal, so too not all cultures have developed as equal, either. Some are still behind others in cognitive and moral development and as such remain literally backwards and immoral, and as such should not be blindly afforded an imprimatur of moral equivalence or toleration, much less our false devotion or respect on the metaphorically politically correct altar of idolatrous multi-cultural “equality” defended as an inherent racial “right.”

    Cultures, like people, do not have a right to remain immorally and criminally WRONG, nor should ones which are proudly, violently dangerous to the health and lives of other people be “tolerated” just for the sake of the idolatrous concepts of “Tolerance!” or empty “Diversity!” them selves!

    And YES, I’m talking here about islam.

    As ex-Muslim Bosch Fawstin wrote:

    “Everyone feels. Imagine if everyone thought.”

    😉

    Bottom line:

    “Culture” is not some sacred religious tradition or right inherent to certain “races” (familial breeds) or “ethnicities” – it simply denotes varying degrees of education concerning objective facts and morality interpretations (and/or their lack)!

    Only crimbeciles who pretend all objective facts are mere subjective opinions defend culture as an inherent right.

Comments are closed.