According to the ‘Yes’ Campaign, equality isn’t for everyone – it is a one-way street which only same-sex marriage supporters can travel.
Once again, an employee was fired for publicly stating their opposition to same-sex marriage, while same sex marriage supporters are allowed to publicly state their opinion on marriage – and denounce the ‘No’ supporter:
Madlin Sims, who owns a children’s entertainment company, posted a message explaining her decision to fire the contractor on Facebook, saying in part:
“Voting no is homophobic. Advertising your homophobia is hate speech. As a business owner I can’t have somebody who publicly represents my business posting hate speech online.”
The “homophobic” post from the contractor was actually a Facebook conversation between the employee and Sims’ own brother, who addressed the matter and then let it drop:
Sims owns a children’s entertainment company, and had recently brought on a new contractor – a friend of her brother’s, who works for the company as well. Although the new worker had been doing well for the month or so she worked for Sims’ business, Sims was disturbed to hear about an argument her brother and the contractor had got into.
Sims told PEDESTRIAN.TV: She had one of those temporary Facebook frames for your profile photo, saying, “It’s okay to vote ‘No’.”
My brother reached out to her and said, ‘Hey, I don’t think that’s okay’ – because we have lots of gay friends we have friends who have gay parents. I think if you have that opinion [on same sex marriage] then whatever, but it’s really hurtful to put that online … Sims says her brother dropped the matter and continued to work with the contractor, but when Sims heard about the argument and the worker’s public support for the ‘No’ campaign she couldn’t let it go.
‘“ I had a look at her page and I could see it there, and I was a bit disappointed because [along with] this profile picture she’s got photos of her at work events, representing the business, and I was like, ‘Oh, that’s not cool.’”
After finding herself unable to reconcile the contractor’s views with the values of the business, Sims chose to let the contractor go.
Sims then took to FB to explain her decision – a post which has been curiously removed. If Sims is really for equality, then why is it okay for HER to publicly post her support for the ‘Yes’ Campaign, but NOT acceptable for someone to publicly support the ‘No’ Campaign.
The employee in question is believed to have asked this same question, but was told only LGBTI employees are protected from discrimination:
Apparently the contractor got in touch with Sims’ brother to threaten legal action, but as Sims says, being let go from a work agreement because your views and the values of the company do not line up is not the same as being discriminated against for being LGBTQIA.
The entire situation is a slap in the face to true equality of rights – a slap “FROM”, not “to”, the ‘Yes’ campaign. As Andrew Bolt nailed, this discrimination shows exactly how the ‘Yes’ campaign would treat freedom of speech if a ‘Yes’ vote prevails. In other words, they will flatly deny it:
There is hypocrisy here. Same-sex marriage campaigners say it should be a crime to deny service to a gay wedding, but see nothing wrong in sacking someone who simply believes gay marriage should not be legalised.
Can't we leave both decisions to individuals and public opinion? Or shouldn't both forms of discrimination be banned?
Bolt also points out how the proposed marriage law itself has this same inequality:
The Liberal senator [Dean Smith] who drafted the bill to legalise same-sex marriage in Australia says it won’t provide safeguards for business owners who refuse to provide services to gay weddings...If Sims had sacked her contractor for being for gay marriage that could be against Smith's proposed law, but if she sacks her contractor for being against gay marriage that's fine?
As to the contractor in question, she stands firmly by her decision, courageously affirming that her freedom to express an opinion should be the exact same as those who disagree with her:
A Christian kids entertainer who was fired from her Canberra job for saying she would vote 'no' in the same-sex marriage survey has hit back, saying she is "not afraid to stand up for my beliefs" and should not have lost her job.
The 18-year-old, who only identified herself as Madeline, was hired as a contractor and worked just two shifts for Capital Kids Parties in Canberra before she was "let go" on Sunday.
Madeline had updated her Facebook profile picture two weeks ago with a filter designed by the Coalition of Marriage that said "It's OK to VOTE NO".
Capital Kids Parties' owner, Madlin Sims, wrote her a private Facebook message on Sunday saying that "homophobic views being made public are detrimental to the business and don't align with my personal values or morals as the owner of the business".
Madeline hit back on Tuesday, saying she was not a homophobe and should not have been fired for having an opinion. "That is the point of this vote," she told conservative commentator Andrew Bolt on Sky News.
"This is a democracy and we were given the options and asked, as Australians, to vote yes or no and it is my opinion to vote no. And I don't think that my job should, you know, be taken away from me just because I have an opinion that someone disagrees with."
Madeline’s experience is an affirmation for what a ‘Yes’ vote is actually advocating: it’s a ‘yes’ to discrimination, it’s a ‘yes’ to silencing free speech, it’s a ‘yes’ to putting the average Australian at the mercy of a politically-correct tyranny .
Free speech is clearly at risk with a ‘Yes’ vote. From free speech, we derive the ability to hold our own opinions in the workplace, to speak out against discrimination, to vocally oppose programs such as Safe Schools, to even vote according to our own beliefs and preferences!
A ‘No’ vote is the only way to protect the rights of all Australians, and is the best chance Australia has to achieve true equality of rights. It’s not homophobic to vote ’no’ – it is however, heterophobic to vote ‘yes’. It is not discriminatory to vote ’No’ to forcing people to accept same-sex marriage against their conscience – it is discriminatory to vote ‘Yes’ to allowing same-sex marriage supporters to enforce their opinions, while denying this to their opponents.
Madeline was right: it’s okay to say ‘No’.