Australia: the Homosexual Marriage Con!

New polling shows the people might vote to preserve the definition of marriage. This is being used as a reason not to have a peoples’ vote. Go figure.

Polling which questions public support for changing the definition of marriage in law is now being used as an argument to deny the people a say.

Australian Christian Lobby Managing Director Lyle Shelton said news today that the Australian Labor Party was using polling which showed a lack of public support for changing the Marriage Act to undermine the plebiscite was extraordinary.

Asked on morning television about the polling, the Prime Minister said it was ‘anti-democratic’ and that it ‘destroyed the credibility of the argument’ against conducting a peoples’ vote.

“The Prime Minister is right to call this out,” Mr Shelton said.

“It is disappointing that those advocating such a big change don’t trust the people to have their say.”

Mr Shelton said the Parliament has rejected changing the Marriage Act on at least 17 occasions, including by a margin of two-one back in 2012 and again as recently as last June when Opposition Leader Bill Shorten tried.

“This is an issue that has been prosecuted by fatiguing members of Parliament over many years. It is only right that the issue now goes to the people to decide what is a very big change with big consequences.”

Mr Shelton said the Greens’ argument that minority rights should not be subjected to a democratic vote was illogical and dangerous to democracy.

It was also strange given the Green’s support for a plebiscite just last August.

“A public policy change for a minority which has big consequences for the majority should be allowed to be discussed by those whose rights and freedoms will be affected by the change,” Mr Shelton said.

Consequences include denial of mothering and fathering to children, legal persecution through anti-discrimination law of those who dissent and compulsory programs like “Safe Schools” teaching children, among other things, that their gender is fluid.

“There is no reason why Australians cannot have a respectful and mature debate about this far-reaching change. This opportunity should not be denied the Australian people.”