The gay lobby should step very carefully in joining with the left in marginalising those holding traditional values. Should real discrimination based on sexual preference ever again raise its ugly head, they may well find conservatives to be their most effective supporters and protectors
White men deserve no better treatment than white women, or men and women of non-white appearance. They deserve no special privileges in any walk of life. All of us are equal under God. And for the unbelievers among us, all are equal as a basic human right. There should be no question about that. We should all live it out in our daily lives.
This having been said, white men have been predominantly responsible for the development of the modern Western world, which shines as a beacon of progress, of prosperity, and of hope for the future. Therefore, why are the current crop of such men singled out for scorn and disparagement on Q&A and on other of the left’s propaganda mouthpieces?
Before attempting an answer, it is best to be clear about the left. The left of today has nothing much to do with the mainstream working-class movement of yesteryear. The honourable cause of trying to protect and further the interests of working men and women, however misguided that was at times, is long gone. When union and Labor Party leaders and apparatchiks march in step with the Greens to destroy jobs, by supporting onerous environmental regulations and taxes, it is a sure sign that something rotten and alien has taken over; just as it has taken over universities and schools and much of the media.
Why attack white men? I suspect that the ‘new’ left believes, and rightly in fact, that lots of these men are torch bearers for traditional values. Undermine the men and you undermine their values — family life; mum, dad and the kids; self-reliance; national pride and patriotism; free speech; and tolerance.
What values would they want to see replace them? Well, let’s see, how about politically-correct speech and intolerance for starters
An example has just been provided by the effective sacking of Brendan Eich, newly appointed CEO of Mozilla (owner of Firefox). He had the temerity to donate $1000 in 2008 to the campaign promoting anti-gay marriage laws in California, and this largesse was revealed by publicly available documents. At first the company supported Eich, but then caved.
Mitchell Baker, Mozilla’s executive chairwoman, apologised for not acting more quickly to take his head. “We failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community,” she blogged in obeisance to the baying mob. Part of that mob was the dating website OkCupid, which told those using Firefox that they would prefer them to use another browser because Eich ‘opposed equal rights for gay couples’.
Obviously not understanding what he was up against, Mr Eich responded by saying that he remained “committed to ensuring that Mozilla is, and will remain, a place that includes and supports everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, age, race, ethnicity, economic status, or religion.”
His senior colleagues weren’t much help. A number expressed their sanctimonious concern at Eich’s appointment, showing just how uncommitted they are to the First Amendment when it comes to the pointy end. In other words, when it matters. Mozilla’s head of education, Christie Koehler, wrote: “It’s hard for me to think of a scenario where someone could donate to that campaign without feeling that queer folks are less deserving of basic rights.”
Marriage is a ‘basic right’, eh? That must have been inadvertently missed off the list of basic human rights I was taught. I confess to being white and of the older variety. I oppose gay marriage while at the same time supporting equality for all people who do no harm to others, no matter their ethnicity, culture, gender, sexual preference, girth or height, physical or mental capacity.
I was recently taken to lunch at a women’s club in the city by my son-in-law’s mother. I am not allowed to join. I don’t regard this as any abrogation of my rights to equal treatment. It is a women’s club. I am not a woman.
Marriage is between a man and a woman and always will be to my traditional mind and always should be. If you don’t qualify you don’t qualify. That is not inequality. We mess (and in this case on a whim and at unseemly speed) at our peril with institutions that have served us so well down the ages. There are always consequences and usually unpleasant ones.
The gay lobby should step very carefully. It is best they don’t join with the left in marginalising those holding traditional values; those who will be their most ardent and effective supporters and protectors if ever real discrimination should rear its ugly head again. No prizes for guessing where that could come from.
The left has become a plague on the body politic. It would undermine everything we hold dear. As a previous Labor leader of some stature and integrity once said in another context, ‘it is time’. It is time for working men and women to take back the Labor movement from the parasites that have taken it over. That would be a good start in turning back the tide and restoring a political contest between two sides equally loyal and committed to the interests of Australia and Australians.