The furore over comments made by tennis great Margaret Court last week began with just a simple letter published in the editorial pages of the West Australian newspaper.
In the letter, Margaret Court simply expressed her disappointment at Qantas’ activism in the same-sex marriage campaign, advises the company that it will influence her choice of airline, and express an openness to dialogue.
Qantas CEO Alan Joyce has said numerous times – including as recently as Monday – that the response from Qantas stakeholders has been “overwhelmingly positive.” Ms Court’s letter challenged that narrative.
Activists supporting “freedom of choice to marry” and “tolerance” responded in their typical fashion: bullying. Banding together, the LGBTI lobby is calling for a tennis court arena named after Court to be renamed, since they believe Court’s view of marriage renders her “unworthy” of such an honour. Never mind that the Tennis Arena being named after Court was in recognition of her tennis achievements, NOT her personal beliefs.
As always, the same-sex marriage lobby is fraught with hypocrisy. While activists are being very vocal about boycotting the arena named after Court, as well as calling for it to be renamed, they lack the courage to do the same to Etihad stadium:
THE marriage equality lobby group says it does not think Etihad Stadium should be renamed or boycotted, despite harsh anti-homosexuality laws in the United Arab Emirates. It comes amid growing calls for Margaret Court Arena to be renamed after the tennis great last week sparked outrage for saying she would no longer fly with Qantas over the airline’s stance on gay marriage.
Some on social media have accused Ms Court’s critics of double standards for not calling for Etihad Stadium in Melbourne’s Docklands to be renamed. Etihad Airways is the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, where homosexuality is a crime punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment.
While Margaret Court’s comments are the subject of conversation this week, Andrew Bolt reminds us that her treatment is exactly what we have come to expect from anyone who opposes same-sex marriage:
Same-sex marriage activists claim they campaign for respect and tolerance, but many show none themselves. We’ve seen them bombard a hotel with threats and abuse until it cancelled a meeting of the Australian Christian Lobby there. Activists also forced a Catholic archbishop to face Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Tribunal, and trashed the office of Senator Cory Bernardi. They took aim at IBM until one of its top executives resigned from a Christian organisation against gay marriage, and they forced Coopers to scrap a commercial it sponsored of a Christian MP politely debating a colleague.
It’s not only those who want to protect marriage who are attacked. A gay journalist has been pressured to leave his post at an LGBTI activist group simply because he works at News Corp. The LGBTI lobby seems to have no problem with corporates weighing in on the marriage debate as long as it suits their agenda. Yet, when a person or a company is not 200% on board with the same-sex marriage agenda, everyone involved, even LGBTI community members, are subject to bullying.
Gay or straight, corporation or individual, sports star or journo, no one is immune.