Totalistralian Open


From today’s papers – “Stacy Cole and his husband Brian Hewitt have travelled from Dallas, Texas for the first Grand Slam of the year but won’t be buying tickets to Margaret Court Arena after the stadium’s namesake expressed her views on same-sex marriage.”

CM thoroughly endorses their right to choose not to watch matches in it. What CM doesn’t endorse is the motive behind the action. The Margaret Court Arena was named after her for sporting achievements. Period. Just because she possesses different values on marriage is not an excuse to go down the path of vilification which seeks to remove the name. As they said,

I hope that the Australian Open takes the fact that her name is on his Court very seriously and maybe considers having another name because it does make us feel a little uncomfortable buying tickets to go in.

As John McEnroe would say, “YOU CAN’T BE SERIOUS!!!?” Uncomfortable? Perhaps the Australian Open can compensate them for their trauma. Had they stayed in Texas, would they have turned off the TV were any matches played on the Margaret Court Arena? Give me a break.

Stacy & Brian identify their same sex union as a traditional husband and wife sense. The 2016 Census highlighted same sex couples as 0.7% of total relationships. Those identifying as husband & wife in same sex couple relationships was less than 0.03%. So the media are giving Stacy & Brian a platform to shove a message down people who voted overwhelmingly to support SSM in a plebiscite. What purpose does it serve? Surely victory is already theirs on SSM? They can toast the fact that all of Margaret Court’s activism on the NO campaign was fruitless and now a law confirms her lost cause. Yet the left can’t let go. True victory only comes when the enemy is completely crushed, humiliated and stripped of any accolades richly deserved for the manner in which they were awarded.

What the left consistently forget is that they only push the very people they are trying to bring around to their way of thinking further away. What can’t be argued with reasoned logic must be protested with threats or acts of force.

Welcome to the tolerant left. Margaret Court should be forced to watch her name being removed from the stadium for extra effect. Maybe the International Tennis Federation should retroactively strip all of her championships and prize money indexed with inflation? Setting examples is the only way forward for totalitarians.

National Re-education League (NRL)


Welcome to the world of assigned re-education.  The sanctimonious ritual of blatantly using a venue to promote one side of any debate. In Australia the NRL (National Rugby League) has decided to have Macklemore as half time entertainment at the Grand Final to sing  “Same Love”. For all the lame excuses as to how his song has zero to do with the same sex marriage (SSM) debate Macklemore has been on the radio waves in Australia banging on about the tweets he’s getting from white homophobes. If the “No” side gets up in this plebiscite I’ll have absolutely no sympathy because this finger wagging just has the opppsite impact of the goal it seeks to achieve. People just get tired of the name calling and in your face campaigning. Trump, Brexit, Merkel etc – if the onslaught continues people tune out and vote in secrecy. Then people are shocked? How clear can it be? I’ve yet to meet a person that likes to be on the receiving end of condescending talk

Let’s not forget I firmly believe in civil rights. That has never been in question but it’s the blatant propaganda that is tiring  (for most people). There is one issue which is clearly defined. This isn’t an election. We are not debating energy, housing, taxation, poverty or superannuation ahead of an election yet it’s day in day out. If indeed the “Yes” side has already claimed an emphatically victory then why not just give it a rest. No no  we must have the rainbow flags flown on the town hall, rainbow stickers on the work security gates and now the Finals – non stop

Why doesn’t the NRL have Kevin Bloody Wilson sing for the “No” case? Would the NRL allow a gospel choir group singing about “we are family” a la Aretha Franklin? Of course not.  There in lies the issue. Why can’t sports finals be just that instead of propaganda filled events.  Once again 99.999% of the population have already made up their minds over the subject so this is just senseless droning. PM Turnbull was on ‘The Project’ lamely submitting to the idea Macklemore’s just an entertainer and people are reading too much into his song.

To be honest – whether yes or no – the subject should be well and truly kept out of sporting events. It is the obsession with people claiming “free speech” therefore it should be fine.

OK I’ll be knocking on your door at 9:30pm with yes campaign leaflets and a ghetto blaster playing Macklemore on reasonable volume because it’s free speech and it isn’t disturbing the peace legally. So if you think it’s ok to re-educate me at the footy. I feel it’s ok to re-educate you at home. “Sorry, did I wake the kids?”

The idea of watching the game is to get away from the grind of work, stress, financial woes and so on. Now that sanctuary is being destroyed because indoctrination is part and parcel of everyday life. Shut up and submit!

If you do it for churches make sure you enforce it for every other faith too – no exceptions!


In 2012 Denmark ruled that churches would be legally forced to marry gay couples regardless of the beliefs of many of the clergy. With Australia’s same sex marriage (SSM) debate on the table will parliament protect the rights of the church to decide on the way it chooses to conduct its affairs? If Australia votes in favour of SSM then we should accept society’s decision on the matter. Period. However, will churches be forced to do things against their will like Denmark? Why only churches? Shouldn’t gay people of the Buddhist, Shinto, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish and any other faith be equally able to force their relevant house of prayer to conduct a gay wedding ceremony? It must be one rule for all, not just the soft target. Where are the activists demanding this? Exactly, nowhere to be seen. Given we live in a world where certain sandwich chains refuse to sell pork products to avoid offending certain customer groups perhaps we should insist that hardware stores refrain from selling timber and nails because it might offend Christians.

The question is not about whether gay couples have the right to marry. If they are allowed to do so is it fair that people who hold different beliefs to them (which does not equate to homophobia) be forced to do things against them? Surely the whole purpose of marriage is to celebrate love, togetherness and commitment. Will that day feel more special when you know the priest has a gun to his head? To reiterate – if we are to force one religion to tow the line, we must prepared to accept without question all other faiths to obey the law. No exceptions.

Same Sex Marriage – Shaming didn’t work before. Why now?


Ahhh. Where have we seen this before? 2016 US election? Brexit? Yes. It’s the name and shame game. Make people feel that failure to vote “yes” in the same sex marriage (SSM) plebiscite makes Australia as backward as predominantly Muslim countries (which ironically are the same countries the liberal left will scream unwavering support if any criticism is thrown at them, despite their stance against homosexuality), a few former communist states and Thailand. The irony of SSM is the campaigning and advertising is probably the worst spent money ever. How?

If I asked all the Aussie people who adorned their page with “I’m voting yes” I’m guessing 99% had already made up their mind and nothing would change it. So any “No” campaigns should have slid like water off a duck’s back. The same goes for those in the no camp. 99% have probably made their mind up and no amount of “Yes” campaigning will change that. Posting memes which aim to shame people has the opposite effect by further cementing their “No”  vote.

I’m not confident this plebiscite will pass. No amount of tears from Senator Pratt, $1m from Alan Joyce, rainbow banners forcibly added on my blog draft page or friends telling people they have a moral obligation to vote Yes will have any effect. Why the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) is charged with handling the plebiscite and not the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is beyond me .

Going a step further, we see that the ABS has sent multiple ballots to some addresses because of  outdated information of former tenants, rogue postmen have threatened to use torches to  throw out “No” votes they find and a government that introduced emergency laws to ban free speech on SSM. Personally I think the plebiscite fails but the more concerning thing about the SSM debate has been the attack on free speech. How?

Anyone that would seek to tamper with an official vote (mail tampering is an offence), vote multiple times or seek to get people who are in the “No” camp deregistered from the medical profession or think government leaders using tax payers to support the “Yes” cause only to influence an outcome indeed would place Australia in the right column which contain countries that in many cases don’t believe in democracy. Having emergency laws on free speech to curtail it in a way that would only punish the “no” side tells us all we need to know. A gay journalist can happily tweet he’d “hate f*ck the homophobia out of conservative politicians” and that is passed as a racy joke but if conservatives said they’d “hate f*ck the homosexuality out of a gay progressive politician” they’d be hounded into the courts.

Indeed Australia is rightly positioned in the above column. Just the heading of the study should be “rights to free speech” not “equal marriage rights”