12 More Consequences of Redefining Marriage
Just over a year ago, during Australia’s debate about changing the millenia-old meaning of marriage, I wrote an article called, “55 Consequences of Redefining Marriage”. Unlike most of my articles, which are read by only a few hundred people, this one has been read by over 12,000, with several thousand shares. This is evidence of just how concerned ordinary people are about homosexual unions being called ‘marriage’ and the massive repercussions that has for everyone.
That article was a simple list of 55 examples of discriminatory laws, legal challenges, policies and persecutions taken from 13 countries where same-sex ‘marriage’ has been legalised. Now, twelve months on from that day when Australians learned that the majority of their conferes had voted to redefine marriage, it seems like a good time to revisit the topic. How many of those consequences have come to pass in this country? Were our fears unfounded?
The original article looked at three areas where the impact could be seen: infringements on human rights, new kinds of relationships that society was willing to tolerate; and the practice of marriage itself. In this article, I’ve added a fourth category – effects on culture and tradition. As art imitates life, it is evident that a sinister reflection of the gender mainstreamers‘ bizarre world is dominating the arts and culture.
While some may argue that transgenderism and its iterations aren’t directly related to same-sex ‘marriage’, I disagree: the end game of the marriage equality movement is the destruction of God in men’s minds by erasing the most fundamental aspects of our humanity: masculinity and femininity. Redefining marriage is just one major step along the way.
- number of same-sex weddings since Oct 2017 is 5,400 or 5.5% of all marriages
- every single electorate in Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, the NT and the ACT recorded a majority response for YES
- Victoria had the highest response rate and the highest overall support for SSM.
- Melbourne recorded the nation’s highest YES vote, at 84 per cent support,
- the electorate of Blaxland, in Sydney, recorded the highest NO vote anywhere in the country.
1. Traditional wedding services are being targeted
Stories of traditionally-minded cake-bakers and florists being targeted by homosexual activists overseas have become quite familiar and wedding-planners are being advised from within the industry that they should cater to same-sex couples or reap the bitter fruit of refusal. Australian wedding services have also suffered in the wake of the marriage plebiscite.
Christian couple, Luke and Carla Burrell, ran the internationally-successful wedding magazine, White, for 12 years until a campaign by activists led them to shut down. The couple were told their ‘house would burn down’, staff were threatened and advertisers discouraged from doing business with them. Well-worn accusations of bigotry and homophobia were thrown their way when mainstream media broke the news that White magazine would never feature homosexual couples. The owners have said that the magazine, which once sold in 17 countries, is no longer viable.
Even simply stating one’s beliefs on marriage are enough to spark cries of discrimination. Western Australian photographer, Jason Tey, was taken before an Equal Opportunity Commission, not for refusing to serve a same-sex couple, but for advising them that they may prefer someone who agrees with their beliefs to photograph their child.
Professor Neil Foster has written more about these cases here:
2. And the activists are becoming more aggressive
Not only are these anti-discrimination cases becoming more frequent, but the activists themselves are starting to believe that they can act with impunity; they are becoming more aggressive and provocative as they pursue the right to be offended.
Some cases have been covered on this website, eg that of baker, Jack Philips, who refused to decorate a wedding cake for two sodomites. Having won in the Supreme Court, Jack now faces further charges by the complainants in the original case. Like an unstoppable force, litigants hammer their prey with multiple lawsuits in an attempt to wear them down.
Activists are being emboldened to go to greater lengths to secure evidence: this lesbian couple wore hidden microphones into a bakery where they were refused service for their same-sex wedding – a wedding which they may never have intended to celebrate anyway. Apparently, the couple “immediately took to social media, and within 30 minutes Miller began receiving death threats and emails containing images of people engaging in depraved sexual acts. News crews arrived shortly afterward.”
The baker was acquitted in February of this year, but the two women brought another complaint in October, citing emotional harm and asking for an injunction which would force the baker to service same-sex weddings.
3. Polygamy and polamory are increasing in Australia
Britain has recorded an increase in the number of polygamous marriages among its Moslem population, and Cory Bernardi, of the Australian Conservatives, believes that the trend is similar here. In July this year, Bernardi drew attention to this increase while exposing families with multiple wives receiving multiple payments through the Centrelink welfare system. [See video below.]
Even non-married multi-person relationships are becoming more common. Real estate website, Domain, ran an article just a few months ago, promoting the idea of polyamory. It stated, erroneously, that “monogamy is actually seen as the minority relationship style around the world” and listed various combinations of partners identified within polyamorous circles. To see this kind of activity being casually discussed on a website that features lifestyle trends and interior design is off-putting, to say the least.
4. Discussing sodomy has become an imperative within churches
There’s no doubt that people with same-sex attraction should be shown love and sympathy for their struggle with their sin. Like all those with serious, ongoing problems like addictions or complicated marital problems, Christians with SSA need particular care and guidance. However, that need for particular care has turned into an imperative in some places, and could be said to have become an obsession.
For example, at last month’s Catholic Synod on Youth in Rome, the phenomena of SSA, which should rightly have claimed a small focus during the discussions, dominated reports on the synod, even though it may not have been discussed to the same degree within the synod itself. This preoccupation with all things LGBTI is largely being driven by the work of a particular Jesuit priest, Fr. James Martin.
Martin is very active on social media and has a huge following among those who seek to elevate same-sex relationships to the status of heterosexual ones. His comments are often ambiguous, but with increasing frequency, are making his stance quite clear:
“…Just look at what has happened in the last five years–since Pope Francis has been elected. First of all, Pope Francis’s comments about LGBT people like ‘Who am I to judge’. His five most famous words were in response to questions about gay people, right? He’s the first pope to use the word ‘gay’, you know, in a sentence.
“He has gay friends. He’s talked about wanting gay people to feel welcome in the Church. That’s a big deal. He has also appointed gay-friendly bishops and archbishops and cardinals, like Cardinal Tobin, the archbishop of Newark who, for example, held a ‘Welcome Mass’ for LGBT people in his Cathedral… So that’s one trend.”
This is all despite the Catholic Church’s clear condemnation of homosexual acts as being intrinsically disordered – a term which activists find extremely distasteful. Martin freely promulgates his message in many dioceses in the US and even internationally, at a time when many faithful Christians are being persecuted for maintaining the traditional, Scriptural view of marriage and sexuality.
5. Homosexuality and pedophilia have become more acceptable among Catholic clergy ….
As well as the preoccupation with supporting SSA Catholics, it is becoming apparent that there is a culture of active homosexuality among Catholic clergy, particularly in the United States. Catholics will by now be very familiar with the case of ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who has been credibly accused of sexually-abusing minors: including a boy he baptised as a baby. Those allegations were made by the Pensilvania Grand Jury and are yet to be proven, but it had apparently been common knowledge that McCarrick had homosexual liaisons with seminarians at a beach house he owned. Many senior members of the Church deny that homosexuality among its ranks is a problem, preferring to blame the current crisis on the ambiguous term, ‘clericalism.’ This failure to acknowledge and condemn homosexual clergy leads many outside the Church, as well as faithful members within, to ask exactly how widespread the practice is and to rightly criticise its proponents.
One Catholic journalist wrote about Notre Dame university’s refusal to revoke McCarrick’s honorary degree, and quoted its President, Fr Jenkins, as saying, “There’s a tendency, and I don’t think it’s a helpful tendency in this kind of situation, to turn the perpetrators into monsters.”
The journalist sought to explain away this troubling and insensitive comment as revealing Jenkins’ unique ability to see the ‘complexity in the abuse crisis’, something apparently obvious only to ‘an Oxford-educated philosopher.’ This is in contrast with the opinions of unenlightened cretins who have not been to Oxford – that is, to the majority of the public – for whom pedophiles and homosexual predators are actually monsters who prey on the vulnerable and bring disgrace on the Church.
Jenkins goes on to spectacularly fail to hit the nail on the head, when he tries to discern the most damaging aspect of child-rape: “Our deepest failures are those we don’t see as failures. There’s a sort of moral blindness in what we do, and that’s sometimes the greatest moral tragedy.”
One wonders how moral blindness can be in any way compared to the actual crime of sexually abusing a child. Except, perhaps, in the sense that those ‘monsters’ may well earn that title in the next life, if they fail to repent.
6 …And among protestants
Nadia Bolz-Weber is a self-styled pastor of a Lutheran church who congregation is predominantly members of the LGBTI community. Bolz promotes sexual experimentation and pornography (as long as it’s ‘ethically produced’), delivered with a smattering of Scripture quotes and a small dose of virtue. She has written a book called, Shameless: the Sexual Reformation, ‘calling out harm that’s been done to people as a result of what the church has taught them about sex, body, and gender. You can draw a straight f****** line from what people were told in church and the harm in their lives. The book explores that. I’m also instigating an art project where women mail me their purity rings.’
The rings are to be melted down and moulded into a sculpture of female genitalia.
7. The arts are becoming increasingly perverse
Ever since the arts lost their focus on the Divine, and substituted worship of man for worship of God, that discipline has tended toward perversion and nihilism. Now that the true meaning of marriage itself has been eviscerated in the public square, and even basic biological realities are denied, those godless tendencies have blossomed like a sick swamp flower on a carpet of slime.
Enter the Day for Night Queer festival,a 12-hour party described by its artistic director as “a space of radical togetherness, becoming, and possibility” that is “incredibly important in an era where queer communities are increasingly under threat”.
I’m not sure how this man could say that the queer community is under threat: they must be the most protected, coddled and safe-spaced community around.
The first Day for Night was held just before the plebiscite on marriage; this year’s party took place as the nation debates measures which would severely threaten the religious freedom of private schools in the realm of staffing-decisions. Neither of those two debates threatened the queer community: both however, represent extremely problematic consequences for conservative heterosexuals.
Here are some quotes from participants in Day to Night:
“I’ve gone beyond queer now and beyond labels. I just identify as a spirit in a body. It’s about accepting difference. That is actually what will change the world — not people being the same.”
“Queerness to me … stands for disruption, reclamation and pushing forward.”
“Queer to me is just a spectrum of multiple parts, and each of us fit into many parts of it. We’re all exploring and jumping through the spectrum [of sexuality] and we’re never staying in one place.”
” To be called queer is something a person or party or art project earns after proving themselves as inclusive, safe and supportive to the broader community.”
8. Important cultural traditions have been appropriated by the gender mainstreamers
In addition to add their perversions to the arts sector, gender mainstreamers are continuing their attack on our cultural traditions and history. One example of this occurred on Remembrance Day, when there was an attempt to wrench attention away from the self-sacrifice of those heroic, masculine men who defended our nations, and to instead focus on the inflated struggle of homosexuals within the defence forces. Now, it’s true that sodomites have been unfairly and even violently persecuted within the military in the past. This is the ‘unjust discrimination’ of which the Catholic Catechism speaks and rejects. But historically, the military’s policy has been one of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ which meant that homosexual men who kept their inclinations to themselves were evaluated on their merits and treated like any other member.
The rainbow poppy was designed by an LGBTI-promoting poet/performance artist , in order “to bring attention to the brave soldiers who died for our country during WWI at a time when their sexuality was still criminalised.”
Members of the Doncaster Pride Facebook page released this statement after a backlash when they shared a picture of the poppy:
“It was also our intention to remember and give thanks for the bravery of every member of our armed forces, irrespective of their sexuality, who by their sacrifices and actions have given us the freedoms we enjoy today.”
This may be spin on their part, but the statement certainly echoes the sentiments of most heterosexuals – conservatives or otherwise: we are very grateful for our defence forces, and no-one’s contribution should be politicised. Men like Alan Turing, the genius creator of the Enigma machine, were heroes because they were great human beings – not because they were sodomites.
9. Gender-neutral parenting is becoming mainstream
Celebrities are driving the trend for gender-neutral parenting- another offshoot of redefining gender and marriage. Singer Celine Dion has launched a range of babywear designed to eliminate differences between baby boys and baby girls. Referring to babies as ‘young people’, Dion litters her spiel with references to freedom, equality and possibility, eerily stating in the ad that ‘children do not belong to us.’ The whole ad is quite creepy – note the onesie printed with “New Order”.
10. Threats to religious freedom are growing
This is perhaps the most serious consequence of redefining marriage. Christianity is always under threat from a secular nation, but since the marriage vote, activists have been emboldened to make their attacks more directly. After the plebiscite decision was announced, Philip Ruddock headed an enquiry into the state of religious freedom in Australia. After a year, the report still hasn’t been released, despite repeated calls from marriage traditionalists. But just a few weeks ago, the saga took a sinister turn as some recommendations allegedly contained in the report were leaked to the media. Those leaks led to a dangerous and wide-ranging bill being put forward in the ACT which drastically restricts the religious freedom of religious schools. As Professor Neil Foster has written:
This may simply be aimed at organisations whose primary purpose is running a school or other educational institution, but it is so broadly worded that it could apply in many other circumstances. For example, will a church which employs someone to teach scripture or some other form of religious education in a school or university, be able to rely on their religious views to exclude someone from another religion, or an openly gay person, from being appointed? Perhaps not. The broad wording would seem to open up the possibility that this new clause would apply to such a case.
As Professor Foster also noted, the ACT Government claimed the bill would “… close a loophole in discrimination laws by removing the capacity of religious schools to apply their religious beliefs in staffing decisions. The law being referred to is not a “loophole”, it is part of the fundamental architecture of discrimination law around Australia…”
Although the ACT bill is widely thought to be unconstitutional, it represents a dangerous current that is swirling around under emotional calls for ‘equality’ and ‘tolerance’.
11. It’s now easier for children to access gender-swapping procedures
There have been other developments in Australia since the passing of legislation to redefine marriage. Just two weeks after the plebiscite results were announced, the Australian Human Rights Commission stated on their website that young people desiring hormone therapy no longer needed authorisation from the courts.
The announcement came as the result of a decision made in the Family Court, in which the AHRC intervened. In the matter of Re Kelvin, the Human Rights Commissioner, Edward Santow, said: “This decision will improve human rights protection for young transgender people in Australia. It also brings Australia in line with recommendations by the United Nations.” This follows a suggestion (perhaps that should be interference?) from the UN, that Australia “consider ways to expedite access to stage two hormone treatment for gender dysphoria, including by removing the need for court authorisation.”
This flies in the face of recommendations from medical professionals such as Patrick Parkinson, who have expressed grave concerns about the effects of gender reassignment on children.
12. Is there a small, silver lining?
Redefining marriage and its associated phenomenon of gender-swapping may have had one positive effect: a QLD senator, sick of being told that old, white men have no say in the abortion debate, announced that he was going to ‘identify as a woman’ so that he would be free to defend the sanctity of life. Queensland Nationals MP, Barry O’Sullivan, said:
“These people come and attack me for my religious basis the other day, using words like rosary beads, because I had the audacity to raise issues around late-term abortions where babies that are only minutes away from getting a smack on the arse and a name are being aborted under the policies of the Australian Greens.
“I will not stand silent, I will not stand mute while these people continue to marginalise policies and ideas … that I think are largely supported still by the majority of the nation.”
While Senator O’Sullivan was undoubtedly not serious about his intention to swap genders, his comments draw attention to the absurdity of claims from the LGBTI community that gender is a spectrum and that human beings – despite the presence of hundreds of sex-specific genes in each person’s DNA – are free to move along the spectrum at will.
Redefining marriage broke down more barriers than simply the man-woman paradigm. Number of partners, degree of commitment (or no commitment!), the creation of stable homes for biological children – all of these long-held traditions have become optional, and increasingly, are being seen as relics of a sexually-repressed Christian past.