AUSTRALIA: Haters Thank Anti-Gay Pols With Flowers, Take Out Ads Against Marriage Equality Bill

Via the Associated Press:

Thousands of flowers have been placed in front of Parliament House from Australians who want to thank Tony Abbott for standing by traditional marriage. But the prime minister was unable to personally accept their thanks. The gesture was organised by the Christian Federation, which has called for a civil conversation on changing the Marriage Act. “There are millions of Aussies who very much feel in their heart the best way to raise children is with a traditional mum and dad,” executive director Peter Kentley told AAP. The way marriage is now is pretty good, the federation believes. “No one’s being discriminated against with civil unions and de factos,” Mr Kentley said. Family First senator Bob Day, who greeted the organisers, said it was refreshing to see an innovative and “nice gesture” instead of a gimmick. If there was a referendum over the issue he predicts the public would vote no.

Also today the recently-formed Marriage Alliance published full-page ads in major Australian newspapers.findanotherword

  • BearEyes

    which has called for a civil conversation on changing the Marriage Act.

    if you want a civil conversation, take religion out of it.

    • Judas Peckerwood

      As the old saying goes, “If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people.”

      • Schlukitz

        There is no reason to try to reason with unreasonable people.

        • Reality.Bites

          Well… lions aren’t native to Australia.

          • Prixator

            But, they seem to have more than their fair share of jackasses.

    • Gustav2

      When they say they want a civil conversation they are saying they don’t want to be called “bigots, homophobes, zealots imposing their religion.”

      • Reality.Bites

        More importantly, they don’t want to lose on an issue where there can be no compromise.

      • BudClark

        [insert “Blanche” quote here]

    • Lamb Urgini

      why would anyone use flowers to make a stink ?

      • GayEGO

        Because they are religious nuts and don’t know any better. :>)

  • Joe in PA

    and the obvious irony: many of those flowers were purchased from GAY florists. Stupid fucks.

    • Bad Tom

      Who did not refuse to sell them, even though they likely knew the purchasers were dingbats.

      • BudClark

        And laughed all the way to the bank!

  • MacCrocodile

    It’s. Not. Marriage.
    Find. Another. Word.

    That’s clever guys. Always. Talk. Like. This. It lets us Know. That. You. Are. Serious. I can practically Feel. The. Intense. Eye. Contact. Implied.

    • Reality.Bites

      I wonder if they tried to get William Shatner to narrate their ad.

    • Herald

      For better or worse there is no other word! Equality is equality, they need to get used to it.

    • Anastasia Beaverhousen

      They only want one word. I can think of 2. And the second one is “YOU!”

      • GayEGO

        Oh, and the first word is phuck? :>)

    • BudClark

      It. Means. That. They. Are. Mentally. Spiritually. And. Emotionally. Deficient.

      I’LL give ’em “eye contact:” your face, my arsehole. Get. To. It.

  • bkmn

    Two of the major television networks in Australia refused to air the anti-same sex marriage ads from “Marriage Alliance” (I guess that is NOM’s equivalent in Australia).
    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/seven-and-ten-reject-anti-samesex-marriage-advertisement-20150807-giu2f0.html

  • “Find another word” um no. marriage is the word we use to describe these unions. Using a different word creates a system that is supposedly separate but equal only we know that such systems are never really equal.

    • NowAnAgnostic

      Didn’t Delaware try that following a State Supreme Court decision which left marriage or civil unions up to the legislature? The legislature choose civil unions, of course. UPS denied health coverage to couples in civil unions because they could. The word Marriage was the key to health coverage.

      • Reality.Bites

        New Jersey and Vermont too.

  • LovesIrony

    you fucking bigots will get not get a fucking civil fucking conversation from me until you treat me as an equal. you fucking bigots.

    • BudClark

      Fcukin’ A!

  • Merv99

    In the US, 19 of 31 state marriage amendments also prohibited civil unions. If the Christians in Australia are anything like those in the US, then it’s not just the name they have a problem with.

  • Ausman

    Nah, we’re not going to find another word you cunty bigots. You’ll just have to deal with it.

    • RaygunsGoZap

      Not only will we not find another word but we will change the pronunciation to may-REE-ahg for referring to bigots’ marriages.

  • LonelyLiberal

    Celebrating with cut off reproductive organs. This is, somehow, appropriate.

  • Ragnar Lothbrok

    ” Christian Federation ” ??

    Sounds so militant.

    • vorpal

      Methinks it’s time to perform a Christian Federation infiltration followed by taxation, deflation, litigation, cessation, castration, and cremation so they can experience everything from frustration to damnation.

      • People4Humanity

        Your creative writing prof must be sO proud!

      • RaygunsGoZap

        Well, tarnation!

      • 2guysnamedjoe

        Don’t forget taxation.

        • vorpal

          LOL it’s already in there… but I’m game to go for double taxation!

          • 2guysnamedjoe

            Gotta make up for lost time.

  • Ninja0980

    No different then the bigots here.
    Sorry, there is no way to have a “civil” conversation about why someone should stay a second class citizen.

    • Blake Jordan

      The Australian haters have probably consulted with the American haters, but it will fail and a lot quicker, because Australian public support is significantly higher than the American public support for marriage equality.

      • Reality.Bites

        Public opinion doesn’t really matter – it’s whether or not the government will bow to it or not.

        • That is true; but even in Oz, governments that flout public opinion have a tendency to be short-lived.

    • 2guysnamedjoe

      I know what. Since they allege that civil conversation is their primary goal, let’s enact marriage equality and then we’ll converse civilly until the cows come home.

  • Blake Jordan

    So much hatred and lies in that “advert”!

  • StraightGrandmother

    I know Joe doesn’t read all the comments and today especially he is probably really busy with rolling out his new webssite, but just in case,
    Yeah, Ryan Anderson is on his way to Australia
    It is in this article from MercatorNet which is a website run out of Australia that is an affiliate of, wait for it…. drum roll…. The Witherspoon Institute. As we all know Ryan Anderson is the creator of Public Discourse at the Witherspoon Institute and remains the Editor.

    It looks like that visit DownUnder from top US marriage debater Ryan Anderson can’t some too soon

    http://www.mercatornet.com/conjugality/view/how-big-media-do-not-promote-debate-on-gay-marriage/16642

    I tweeted this info out to Joe and Evan Wolfson today but I know he gets so many that he doesn’t read all his tweets. I assume Evan is in Oz, don’t you think so?
    Edit: I think I better tweet to Marriage Equality Australia and let them know that Ryan Anderson is on his way.

    • Sk3ptic

      He’s going to make some nice Log Cabin Republican a great husband one day.

    • Craig Howell

      I have no objection if Ryan Anderson wishes to go to Australia. I only object if he wishes to come back.

      • RaygunsGoZap

        Perhaps he’ll meet a lovely spider, snake or box jelly and end up staying forever

        • What have you got against spiders, snakes or the box jellyfish?

          • RaygunsGoZap

            Nothing when they do their goddamn jobs!

        • Or a blue-ringed octopus. Not that he’ll be likely to go swimming on his visit; too cold.

      • What have we done to deserve him? In any case, he’ll hate Australia.

        • Beagle

          How about re-routing him to Pitcairn?

      • BudClark

        He should go evangelise Alice Springs … permanently.

    • He’s going to find that virtually nobody here has ever heard of him and that the media will pretty well ignore him, just as they did “Doctor” Brown when he was in Sydney a couple of years ago.

      He’s also going to find himself learning first-hand that most Australians strongly dislike foreigners coming here and telling us how to run our country.

    • 2guysnamedjoe

      Maybe some Aussie pranksters can set him up for a debate that turns out to be a boxing match with a kangaroo.

      • Reality.Bites

        I heard today – I forget where – that an ostrich kick can kill a man.

  • Sk3ptic

    How about “Marriage: It’s. Not. Holy. Matrimony. For. Fuck’s. Sakes.”

  • lukefromcanada

    getting married and raising children are and i am going to only say this once. TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES!!!!!.

  • Rod Steely

    Wow- they’re REALLY honest about what assholes they are over there.

  • SockMikey

    Anyone know an Australian florist that could throw together an arrangement of Audreys to send?

    http://www.newnownext.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Baby-Audrey2_500.gif?width=500&height=284

  • zhera

    Find another word?

    So it’s the word that’s important? Not the recognition, the equal rights in law and society?

    They are fools to follow the strategy that has failed in country after country. Good!

  • Lumpy Gaga

    White people. Amirite?

  • Tom (Winnipeg)

    What do they think of the rainbow now? It has grown so beautiful in the past few years. May it continue to speak of power and charm.

  • Kenster999

    “Use. A. Different. Drinking. Fountain.”

  • Harry Underwood

    That quote from Masha Gessen is a frequent boogeyman that I see in YouTube comments. That single statement, from someone who wants polyparentage, immediately “invalidates” everything else that has been evidenced by millions of others. Good job, detectives.

  • NedFlaherty

    Similar to America’s NOM, Australia’s “Marriage Alliance” tries to stay secretive about its owners, operators, and donors.

    But the primary financial sponsors are — no surprise — all Roman Catholic organizations that were approved, founded, and funded by the Vatican:

    Knights of Malta
    St Thomas More Society
    St Vincent’s Hospital
    University of Notre Dame
    Campion College
    Sisters of Charity
    The Benenson Society
    Brisbane Catholic Education Council
    Garvan Institute
    Catholic Education Office
    Marist Finance Commission

    • Reality.Bites

      That’s because Australia’s Mormon population is only a quarter of a percent of the population.

      • BudClark

        Lucky bastards!

  • NedFlaherty

    Similar to America’s NOM, Australia’s “Marriage Alliance” tries to stay secretive about its owners, operators, and donors.

    But the primary financial sponsors are — no surprise — all Roman Catholic organizations that were approved, founded, and funded by the Vatican:

    Knights of Malta
    St Thomas More Society
    St Vincent’s Hospital
    University of Notre Dame
    Campion College
    Sisters of Charity
    The Benenson Society
    Brisbane Catholic Education Council
    Garvan Institute
    Catholic Education Office
    Marist Finance Commission

    • BudClark

      Knights of Malta … that’s Cardinal “Let’s Play Dress-Up” Burke’s outfit.

      St. Thomas More was made a saint for burning protestant heretics.

      The Sisters of Charity are some DANGEROUS bitches!!! They’ll slit your throat with the sharp edges of their rosary crucifixes.

  • Porkie

    “The gesture was organised by the Christian Federation, which has called for a civil conversation on changing the Marriage Act.”

    Prior to 2004, the Australian marriage act was gender neutral and then this little bit of “christian” love and tolerance was inserted:

    “Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.
    Certain unions are not marriages. A union solemnised in a foreign country between: (a) a man and another man; or (b) a woman and another woman; must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.[3]”

    So we would only be going back to the TRADITIONAL definition of Marriage. Isn’t that what they wanted?

  • Chris Larosa

    Joe. My. God.Thought. Of. This. First.

  • Jude Newton

    Latest polls (as of July) show 71% SUPPORT marriage equality… We have more flowers.

    • 2guysnamedjoe

      and much more attractive arrangements.

  • Bradford Kelly

    As an Australian, I find this so embarrassing. The main problem is the Catholic church and their influence in Australian politics albeit through the vehicles of trade unions, hospitals and schools. Our PM is also a religious nut which doesn’t help. His mentor is George Pell – the former Archbishop of Sydney and who is now implicated in the massive cover up of child abuse in the Catholic church which was subject to a Royal Commission amongst other organisations who deal with Children. The JW’s are the current target. Pell is currently the Pope’s right hand finance man in the Vatican.

    So we now have a showdown between corporate Australia where all major corporations have signed on for equality and the Catholic church who have threatened to move their (tax free) business elsewhere. Given that the major banks have signed on that should be interesting.

  • Gay Fordham Prep Grad

    Why are we reinventing the wheel here? There MUST be an Irish advertisement somewhere that dealt with this issue. The Irish left no stone unturned when putting forward the case for marriage equality. I am sure there is something, pithy, funny and eviscerating to run against this group.

  • No matter how many of them might go to Canberra, flowers don’t vote. (And how may were there? By my count on that picture, maybe a hundred or so bunches, which hardly qualifies as a “sea of floral colour” — unlike the one we saw in Martin Place a couple of months ago after the Lindt Cafe shooting.

    And it’s all very well for Mr Kelly to speculate about referenda. The High Court has already ruled that this is not a matter for a referendum.

    • Nexus1

      We all know that they love the possibility of a vote on marriage so that they can relive their last big moment of Prop 8 and make a ton of money off of it. It’s amazing that they don’t realize that Prop 8 accelerated Marriage Equality in the U.S by 5 years to a decade. It completely backfired on them, but I guess it shows just how obtuse they are that they haven’t realized it yet.

      • I would think that most of them are only dimly aware of the Prop8 business, let alone its repercussions.

        They are behind the 8 ball, and the best they can hope for is that the status quo will remain for the life of the present government.

        • Nexus1

          For the ones that are though it’s their dream to keep marriage rights away from LGBT’s via a public referendum. Too many of the financial backers of the anti gay movement are international sadly, but I have no doubt that the Australia based bigots think that it will work for them in Oz, but it will just fail harder and faster. They might get their wish to preserve the law until Abbott is out, but the international pressure is so much more now than it was even a year ago. I would get such a kick out of Marriage Equality coming to Australia under Abbott’s government. You know it would just eat him up inside if it did. lol

          • Let them dream on. In Ireland it was necessary to amend Section 41 of the Irish Constitution to permit same-sex marriage, hence a referendum was necessary; but the Section 51 of Oz constitution merely lists “marriage” as one of a number of matters over which the Commonwealth, not the States, holds the power to legislate.

            In ruling the ACT’s Marriage Equality Act as inoperative in December 2013, the High Court held that the Commonwealth Marriage Act is “[the] comprehensive and exhaustive statement of the law with respect to
            the creation and recognition of the legal status of marriage”. But it also noted that the very amending of that Act in 2004 to exclude same-sex marriage showed that “the status of marriage, the social institution which that status reflects, and the rights and obligations which attach to that status never have been, and are not now, immutable.”

            In other words, should the Commonwealth Parliament choose to again amend the Act to bring about ME, there will be no need to change the Constitution to permit it — and hence no need for a referendum.

            http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-13/fact-file-high-court-decision-on-act-same-sex-marriage/5155754

            Of course the minute ME becomes law the haters will go running to the High Court; but if the HC follows its own precedent they will be sent home empty-handed.

  • Dreaming Vertebrate

    Leave it to the haters to “weaponize” flowers.

  • Gyeo

    I like how they’re trying to use “the 1%” in a piss poor attempt to paint us as rich and exploitative. From my experience, rich and exploitative is a Christian going thing.

  • Nexus1

    “Find another word.” huh? Yeah because this is all about a word. Bullshit! It’s about not wanting to share the table of rights and dignity with LGBT’s. My partner is Australian and I can tell you that gay couples do not have equal benefits, they have more than many civil unions in the U.S did in the Australian States/territories that even provide them, but it’s not equal. Plus as in the U.S the partnership benefits aren’t the same from state to state and they aren’t always recognized across states and territories. They don’t have inheritance rights the way married couples do either.

    One of the things I have never understood with the ‘reasoning’ of the bigots is what benefit they get from giving gays the same rights as marriages supposedly, but keeping the word separate? What does that change? Do they really think that if you call all the rights, protections and responsibilities of marriage by some other name that it will keep people from using the word marriage to describe their relationship? Language and people don’t work that way. LGBT’s have been calling themselves married for decades, long before it was legal and they will continue to do so in the countries where is has yet to become legal. The word and concept of marriage already belongs to the gay community, it’s just a matter of getting the government to recognize the relationships that already exist. They can try to keep it away from us, but they will fail. The government and society can only keep it’s head in the sand for so long before they must eventually acknowledge reality and that is that gay and lesbian couples are forming families and homes and that they are equal citizens under the law and cannot and will not be treated as second class citizens for much longer.

  • Lumpy Gaga

    tl;dr

  • Porkie

    IT’S. NOT. CHRISTIANITY.
    It has nothing to do with the teachings of Christ.
    Find. Another. Word.
    .

  • Robert W. Pierce

    If the haters believe civil unions are equal, how would they react if the government were to abolish marriage and have civil unions for all? They’d be the first to protest while exposing their hypocrisy and bigotry more than ever.

    • Stev84

      They’ve fought CUs just as hard. Or any other small advance in gay rights for that matter. CUs only became an acceptable option for them once they were losing.

  • GayEGO

    Gee, don’t they see the rainbow colors in their flowers? :>) Probably not as they have been brainwashed by their religions.