Redefining marriage is not the be-all, end-all goal of the “Yes” campaign – and it never was.
When the hard push for same-sex marriage began, the silent majority agreed that changing the definition of marriage had consequences.
As the push to redefine marriage progressed, it became clear that some of those consequences are not unintended – they are the true goals of the same-sex marriage movement. Whether it be the gender ideology running rampant in our education system, the hyper-sexualisation of children, or the subtle (and not so subtle) retraction of our rights, denying Australians basic freedoms –such as speech and religion – was all part of a larger plan.
At the time, advocates of the LGBTI agenda tried to hide this fact, insisting that the redefinition of marriage would only affect same-sex couples. However, as the postal vote draws closer, they have thrown caution to the wind and are confirming our suspicions: they are demanding far more than changing a legal definition.
Earlier this month, staunch “yes” vote supporter and LGBTI agenda proponent Maeve Marsden, wrote an article in the Brisbane Times admitting the “Yes” movement’s true agenda:
Yes, marriage is not the final frontier. Yes, we want safe schools. Yes, gay conversion therapy is child abuse. Yes, we want transgender kids' agency to be respected and supported – regardless of what their parents want. Yes.
We are equipped to deal with this. Ours is the community that fought through the early AIDS crisis; we demanded services, we built communities, we redefined family and relationships.
Lyle Shelton and his cronies are correct, this isn't just about marriage. And it won't end if marriage legislation passes. We're here, we're very queer and we're in for the long haul.
After lying for so long, the LGBTI agenda has removed their guise of “equal rights” crusaders to reveal – and attain – their true motives. Sadly, we were right all along.
As a nation, we cannot turn a blind eye to the fact it’s not the LG movement – it’s the LGBTIQ movement. The assumption that it will “just stop” with same-sex marriage is a fantasy which we cannot entertain. With the postal vote weeks away, all Australians are finally seeing the greater implication of the “Yes” campaign.
Is a “yes” vote really what Australia wants? Sure, some are proponents of same-sex relationships, but do they want to say “yes” to the sexualisation of children? The breakdown of the family unit? Or the mass indoctrination of the youth? These are all part of the package deal of redefining marriage.
Before we vote, we must weigh ALL the implications of our decision. There are far greater consequences that just the ones being presented. Saying “Yes” would indeed legalise same-sex marriage. But it won’t stop there: the true changes to Australia will begin