Australian Labor party may force all their party to vote for homosexual marriage

-
English: Craig Thomson, Member of the Australi...
English: Craig Thomson, Member of the Australian House of Representatives for the Australian Labor Party and Dobell. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Further evidence of the intolerance of the leading voices in the same-sex marriage debate will be on display again at this weekend’s Australian Labor Party National Conference in Melbourne.

At its last conference in 2011, Labor changed its party policy to support redefining marriage in law. It was a terrible blow to have one of the two major political parties capitulate.

However, at that time, Labor made an important concession. Normally conscience votes on both sides of politics are reserved for life or death matters such as abortion or euthanasia.

But in this case, after tense backroom negotiations, Labor decided to depart from this political rule of thumb and allow its parliamentarians a conscience vote.

Under Labor’s party rules, parliamentarians who vote against party policy are automatically expelled. (The Liberal’s don’t expel in these circumstances but a politician’s career prospects can be curtailed.)

At the time, Labor did not want the prospect of booting out caucus members who did not support same-sex marriage.

Fast-forward to now and the tables have turned.

A motion will be put to the conference this weekend, which if passed, will bind Labor’s parliamentary team to supporting a same-sex marriage bill.

This will put a number of members and senators in a difficult position should the issue come up again in the Parliament.

What is worrying is the intolerance of such a move.

If same-sex marriage and the ideology it carries must be supported by politicians, what message does that send to the rest of the population?

Millions of us will never support a definition of marriage that requires a children to miss out on their mother or father.

Christian schools will always want to teach Jesus’ definition of marriage in defiance of the state’s definition.

To have a major political party entrench in its policy platform the idea that there is no room for dissent, is chilling and shows just how intolerant those driving the political debate are.

I’ll be at the ALP conference, principally to chair a symposium on persecuted religious minorities.

But I will be watching Labor’s debate on marriage with interest (and tweeting @LyleShelton). If a major political party decides to be intolerant with its own members on this, it is sure to be intolerant with the nation when it is again in government

Related articles

Popular posts from this blog

Ontario Catholic school board to vote on flying gay ‘pride flag’ at all board-run schools

-
Image
A Catholic school board in Ontario will vote next week on a motion to fly the rainbow-colored homosexual pride flag at all board-run schools during the month of June. Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) Trustee Brenda Agnew gave notice of her motion titled “supporting our diverse school community” during an April 6 board meeting. Quoting Pope Francis along with LGBT talking points about “equity and inclusion,” the motion calls for the Board’s Director of Education Pat Daly to “direct all HCDSB schools including the Catholic Education Centre to fly the Pride flag during the month of June starting with 2021.” The motion is expected to be voted on by the Board at their next meeting on April 20. With nine trustees, the motion requires five votes to pass. A tied vote results in a fail. The HCDSB states on its website that its mission is to provide “excellence in Catholic education by developing Christ-centred individuals enabled to transform society.” The Catholic Church, basing i
Read more

Christian baker must make ‘wedding’ bakes for gay couples, court rules

-
Image
DENVER, CO ,  – A Colorado board has ruled that a Christian business owner must make wedding cakes for homosexual "marriages" despite his religious objections. Business owner Jack Phillips came under legal fire in 2012, when he refused to bake a cake for Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig , who had traveled to Massachusetts for a marriage license, and wanted to celebrate in their home state. They sued on the basis of a state law that prevents the application of religious beliefs if one owns a business. The Commission's ruling, which was issued verbally on Friday, orders Phillips to report every three months for the next two years on anti-discrimination training for his staff, and any customers who are refused service at his establishment. "I can believe anything I want, but if I'm going to do business here, I'd ought to not discriminate against people," said one of the Civil Rights Commission 's seven members in a public statement. Phil
Read more

Australia: Gay Hate tribunals are coming

-
Image
Are Hate Tribunals Are Coming In Canada , it is considered discriminatory to say that marriage is between a man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his or her biological married parents.  It is not just politically incorrect in Canada to say so; you can be saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, fined, and forced to take sensitivity training. Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified under “sexual orientation.” It takes only one complaint against a person to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking fo
Read more