Disregarding the pleas of those in the silent majority and their place in the political realm, influential corporations such as Qantas, ANZ, Google and eBay, have aggressively taken up the crusade for same-sex marriage. Partnering with Airbnb’s “Until We All Belong” campaign, the corporate alliance has ordered approximately 250,000 “acceptance” rings.
These black rings, featuring a gap in the middle which stands for the ‘gap in marriage equality’, are to be distributed among their collective employees. Employees are encouraged to wear them. Sam McDonagh, country manager of Airbnb Australia, gives his insight on the matter:
Qantas staff and cabin crew would wear them, he said, while Google Australia has also provided rings for its 1300 staff to wear. “Our goal is to build momentum around the issue of marriage equality and spark those conversations about acceptance,” Mr McDonagh said.
But are they sparking conversation? Or division?
In a recent interview, Marriage Alliance’s spokeswoman Sophie York gave voice to some real concerns of Marriage Alliance supporters and many other like-minded Australians regarding the rings. Rebecca Urban of The Australian states:
[Sophie York] pointed to the recent harassment of a PricewaterhouseCoopers executive and a Macquarie University academic by gay activists over their links with a Christian institution as a sign of what could happen when individuals failed to comply with the “same-sex marriage agenda”.
“Almost every day, Marriage Alliance hears from an employee who has come under pressure at work to participate in an activity or donate funds to support the push to redefine marriage,” Ms York said.
“Now we see big corporates giving away free jewelry to those who take the pledge, while providing an easy way to identify those who disagree with the company agenda.
Of course, Qantas and Google quickly released a disclaimer saying that staff was in no way obliged to wear the rings.
“We usually let our people know when we’re involved with a campaign like this, but there’s certainly no expectation that they will be part of it themselves,” a Qantas spokesman said. “They are welcome to join in, but it’s certainly not a requirement.”
Aussies Know ‘Acceptance Rings’ Divide
However, considering that many of these business leaders have publicly declared their opposition to allowing the Australian people to decide the issue of same-sex marriage, it is no wonder that their own employees are sceptical.
As one Qantas employee said in an email: “I’d hate to be a Christian flight attendant explaining to their manager why I wasn’t intending on wearing the ring... or to a gay colleague on the other end of a cart doing a meal service. Talk about a bad initiative for crew cohesion and its impact on service, let alone safety.
“Of course Qantas would say they’ll never force someone to wear the ring. But the spokesperson and the CEO are not the ones at a safety critical coalface being forced to deal with the potential fallout of rainbow ideology being shoved down people’s throats and potential conflict in an environment where teamwork is critical.”
An employee of one of the big four banks, who is “constantly bombarded” with same-sex marriage propaganda, also expressed concern that: “As a Christian, this puts employees like me in the position of having to justify my faith against my employment... A sad state of affairs in a country where freedom of religion was once a prized right.”
But it’s not just employees themselves. Many Australians agree that the ‘acceptance rings’ will foster anything but acceptance, as is evident by some of our favourite comments on the article in The Australian:
Make no mistake - this is a real game-changer. We are heading in to MAJOR discrimination territory here. NO surprise to see who is behind it. The usual suspect who believe they are.. just more equal than others.
Silly me, I thought most companies serving the public required their employees to dress either in company uniform or in appropriate, socially acceptable attire. In many cases, this excludes overt displays of religious or political symbols, such as Christian crosses, Sikh turbans, Islamic head or face coverings , bikie tattoos, slogan tee shirts etc. There have been numerous cases where conflict over these symbols has been raised both by employer and employee. Mostly, it seems employers have won and the public/customers can conduct their business without having an individual's personal beliefs and affiliations confronting them in the face.
Now, however, employees of certain companies are being 'asked' to wear symbols of political belief. While the company professes there is no compulsion in this, it takes little gumption to see who will be praised and promoted for their acceptance of the company's political stance and who will be ostracized. Hello Qantas.
Worse yet, in service industries, lack of display of the symbol exposes the employee to insult and aggression from members of the public/customers/clients who themselves support that particular political ideology.
Getting back to Qantas, how long will it be until passengers will be 'encouraged' to wear this stupid ring, and later denied boarding if they decline?
A little black band on the finger to signify support for SSM and implement a bullying structure against those who may not comply. All the time we have concrete boots on our feet, which is the union movement, threatening to trash industry. We have the heavy anchor chain of debt and deficit around our necks, trying to drown our future and the future of our children. We have the gaffer tape of political correctness across our mouth, preventing free speech.
I think that it is crystal clear now that these CEOs and also parts of the MSM believe that the majority of Australians doesn't actually support SSM. Which also explains the plebiscite resistance. It all makes sense. The only way out of it, in their minds, is intimidation. We must stand firm on this and should stop buying their products. Enough is enough. Intimidation shouldn't have any place in Australia! The SSM lobby has lost the fight. There never was an convincing argument for pro-SSM anyway. Marriage is between a man and a woman. No other constellation allows children (naturally) and that's where the argument should have stopped ages ago.
This ring looks like it is designed to go through the nose...which is no doubt what they would prefer so that the "ELITE" (our betters) can lead us exactly where they have decided we should go. Excuse me for actually having an opinion of my own.
But despite the dissent of the majority, corporations are now actively assisting the LGBTI community in tearing apart the Australian people. Despite their claims, we all know full well that these rings will be used against the silent majority. We won’t be forced to wear them because it has never been about who was wearing the ring. It is about targeting who isn’t.
When these rings are distributed, we will not ‘all belong’.