The Pickering Post
Wednesday, 13th December 2017

If you would like to be involved or support the upkeep and further development of this site, it would be very welcome no matter how small.


A ROCKY ROAD AHEAD FOR GAY MARRIAGE

...because it will be all about the question

Larry Pickering

Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.

BLOG / FACEBOOK



At the moment the question something like “Do you agree to the marriage Act being changed to allow same sex couples to be married?” Sounds pretty reasonable eh? I mean who could possibly object to that? Unfortunately the gay Left intends changing far more than that. And if the “No” case is presented truthfully the plebiscite hasn’t got a snowflake’s chance in hell.

Labor doesn’t dare be honest about what they intend just yet and it’s the very reason they don’t want a plebiscite... simply because they suspect it will not pass a people’s vote.  

What the Labor Party wants changed in the Marriage Act is this, and it’s not merely a “change” to the Act as the question implies, it’s the entire “destruction” of the Act: First to go is the mention of him, her, she, he, groom, bride, husband, and wife. Of course there can be no religious or theistic connotations such as, “...according to God's holy ordinance” and all that stuff.

In place of all the gender specific nomenclatures above will be the gender neutral title of “persons”, although most of the words, “love”, “cherish” etc are to stay, but the despised word, “obey” will be stricken from all ceremonies as being highly sexist.

                           Tony Abbott's sister, Christine Forster with partner Virginia Edwards.  

The Labor fear that alternative lifestyles will be hurt by a national debate is unfounded as Australians are inherently fair and understand the dilemma, but the LGBT community must also respect traditional marriage and what it means to straight Australians.


                                Liberal Politician Tim Wilson with partner Ryan Bolger

Labor will claim a “yes” vote means yes to a gender neutral Act. And that’s where the fun starts. Using public funds the Greens, Wongs and Pliberseks will set out to mislead those intending to vote “yes”. They will lie in the best of the Left’s tradition and then claim that Australia agrees with trashing the Marriage Act.

But if the question put to the people was the truth, like, “Do you agree to the Marriage Act being trashed and replaced with neutral vows that only apply to gays, transgenders, dunno who I wanna bes and lesbians”, then of course the plebiscite “no” vote bolts in and gay marriage gets shelved for a couple more decades.

Aussies will never feel comfortable with the gay lifestyle until two blokes kissing becomes                                                   as acceptable as two girls kissing.

So the upshot is that the debate so far is a bloody joke and the LGBT activists are living under a misconceived rainbow that they themselves created.

... and really, the honest fair dinkum LGBT community deserves better than that.



Comments

Marriage = NO

Civil Union = YES

Marriage is the mortar of a society based on the union of man with a woman to naturally produce offspring from their own flesh and blood to form a family. It is undeniably a bond that reaches out to meld a community/country.

ON THAT BASE, we need to tolerate the peripheral community. If the homosexuals wish to celebrate a bond between themselves so be it, but don’t fuse it with the term “marriage”.
The blatant truth of the matter is that HOMOSEXUALITY IS AN ABNORMALITY.
The euphemism of referring homosexuals as “gay” was a good marketing ploy for us to accept it as being more normal than it actually is.

Let’s not condemn homosexuals but let’s not embrace them as being normal either.

Grow some balls Bruce and ask me yourself.

I was totally unaware that David had said those words, but it is not surprising that he did because we are of like mind about Bruce and our involvement with Pauline that is probably why I like the man and I am pleased to have him as a friend. if Harry wants to consider you a friend and to support you Bruce, that is his choice and he is welcome to it, but I certainly do not want someone like you, Bruce, in the same postcode let alone as a friend.

You are insane Bruce, where in hells name did I "You have hinted that also, and the same pos CS, rubbishes you too." Point it out to us Bruce. Can any of the other posters point to where I "rubbished" Harry?

I don't know how DE I mean CS could argue with that Bruce. I thought I just read where somebody just said on this thread that he "did not seek glory or recognition". These seem like familiar words, similar words used by Ettridge in that authorised book. Mmmmm....I'm thinking Bruce, something just does not seem ridgy didge Ettridge here???

Another Nark turns up. I'm through being nice. Get narked CS.

Looks like the visit to the hospital yesterday didn't prescribe a strong enough dose to counter your delusions Bruce. Unlike you Bruce , I don't seek glory or the personal recognition like you crave for your 6 weeks of support for Pauline Hanson. You continue your ranting and raving just for the moments of recognition as you described supposedly happened on the tram or at the hospital. For every one that praises you there are a hundred that shake their heads and say "Poor Bruce, he just can't help himself". which committee are you referring to Bruce, the committee of one that you formed after spitting the dummy?

Could be Harry, it fits Bruce to a T

Australia’s cyclones were originally named after politicians a weatherman disliked: As a result, he was able to report that the pollies were “causing great distress” or “wandering aimlessly about the Pacific”.

Do you think they derived the word NARK from Narcissus Bruce?

You and Narcissus know each other well Bruce?

according to surveys of sexual demography, 95% of Australians "identify " as being HETEROSEXUAL. (google it!) this demographic is near identical in most countries where research has been carried out. Where are the surveys that show that 75% are in favour of gay marriage being carried out? Surrey Hills? Leichhardt? the public are being manipulated by a very well organised ,very small minority. This lot have already hijacked and destroyed the meaning of the word gay, now they look certain to pervert the meaning of marriage. The 5% homosexual is people that identify as "gay" and lesbian, not sure if the other initials of the LGBT...etc etc are included here. -additional letters to be added when more of them think it's safe to go public with their own choice of mental illness.

Queensland lowers anal sex consent age to 16, ending 'archaic' law. Celebrations at the gayBC "Yahoo Hoorah three cheers for us sodomists" Who the fuck is in charge of the nuthouse. And they say poofters aren't pedophiles. Ending an archaic law, if any of you dirty arsed bastards try to pig root a 16 yr old near me, I will fuck you so bad, so BAD!

Could you please have a photo of two hot, smoking bull dykes next time? Maybe Tori Welles and Rosario Dawson. Looking at two fat and ugly bull dykes is not a good look. And please, no photos of two blokes locking lips. Two sheilas locking lips is smoking hot, if they are smoking hot and not two fat and ugly bull dykes. I know this is sexist but two blokes, no matter how handsome, locking lips, is blurgghhhh!!!!, erection killing. I will be voting no if a plebiscite gets up, not because I give a fuck about who can marry, but I don't like fags and dykes putting their manky bits in my face day after day, shrieking and screeching and flapping their wrists and mincing and lisping that I am a hater because I don't give a fuck whether they can marry or not. Intolerant coots.

And because retards like Susie O'Brien and deadset scumbags like shorten the rapist are all for it.

HH you got this part right " it seems I am wasting my time" to me it is a game and one I am enjoying playing. I sit here and laugh out loud at the idiocy and bluster of such an egotistical narcissist. He may be an annoyance to some he may just be a laugh to others ,but to me he is just a pompous ass and a liar proven by his own words.

Jesus CS ....where in any sentence did I say I was coming? That retort was hardly charitable, downright spiteful I might add. I am only trying to broker a peace but it seems I am wasting my time. Life is too short and the venom displayed is going to ruin two lives if not checked on shortly. After reading your post I suggest you both refrain from commenting to each other, you both have families and it will end badly if heads are not pulled in.

What I suspected and posted did happen the ALA cost one Nation at least one Senator and maybe a lower house seat by (1) Putting out that One Nation and Pauline were a spent force (2) by taking away potential election campaign workers Pauline and One Nation could not man as many booths as they would have. . . . My suggestion to people who now want to support Pauline and One Nation is to contact the One Nation head office and become a member and put your name down to volunteer on election day. If you know of any person like Malcolm Roberts who is knowledgeable in a politically sensitive field, raise with them the possibility of standing for election as a One Nation candidate. Who knows they may win a seat.