Canberra Couple Make Same-Sex Marriage Debate All About Them in Cringeworthy Display of Virtue Signalling

5

Bat 21

A Canberra couple have taken cultural appropriation to dizzying new heights by vowing never to get married until same-sex marriage is legalised. This might be a selfless and impressive gesture if both of them were so deeply respectful of the sacrament that they were virgins and willing to wait. But as you can see from the article, they have a toddler, which is a bit like saying, “I’m doing Dry July this year, but I’m only quitting shots…”

Canberra. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Now for decades, the same kind of people who might pull a cringeworthy publicity stunt like this have been telling me that the institution of marriage is an obsolete, archaic, oppressive ceremony intrinsically linked to ‘religious nutters’ with their pomp and ceremony, and as such should be avoided at all costs in favour of a simpler, less hypocritical, and way more progressive de-facto or civil ceremony (both quite legal and acceptable for same-sex couples, I might add).

But much like their remarkably positive attitudes toward Black Gospel Churches, Buddhist Temples, or Islamic Mosques flies in the face of their blanket contempt for ‘all of the white people’ seeking solace in any kind of faith that isn’t worship of the state, these privileged and very secular Cultural Marxists who widely regard traditional marriage as somehow being beneath them will fight until the bitter end to encourage as many same-sex couples as possible to participate in it, merely to f— with Christians.

I would personally see same-sex marriage legalised tomorrow if only to take some of the wind out of shameless displays of virtue signalling like this. We may not all agree on the issue, but the hundreds of comments beneath social media posts of this story seem unanimous in their appraisal of this particular couple as narcissistic twats hijacking the issue and making it all about them.

I think that most of us are fine with same-sex marriage anyway. We’re tired of Cultural Marxists trying to micro-manage our thoughts and feelings, so the last thing we feel like doing is legislating against relationships between consenting adults. What we aren’t down with is the ‘f—ing with Christians’ aspect, which the cynic in me suspects that most of it is about.

The most sensible policy addressing this issue is that of the Liberal Democrats, which would see same-sex marriage legalised, but also give more traditional churches a right of refusal (a right that they currently and very justifiably exercise when the wrong sort of Godless heterosexual couple walk in). To explain this in a way that the left might understand, it’s a bit like refusing to help a worker out against a bullying boss because he isn’t in the union. Same same. A church is like a union site or a Curves gym: if you aren’t a comrade or female in gender, you probably won’t be invited in.

The left see selective discrimination as unacceptable, but would no doubt be very selective in which religious organisations they forced to perform ceremonies. If same sex marriage were legalised tomorrow, I wouldn’t hold my breath in waiting for Labor or the Greens to pressure Lakemba Mosque to allow same-sex couples to tie the knot within their walls, so obviously Liberal Democrat policy makes more sense than the boycott of a Canberra couple who probably never intended to buy what was on sale anyway.

Photo by MoreFunkThanYou

  • aussiegooner

    I couldn’t give a rat’s rear end whether this pair of SJW PC buffoons ever get married. Better still, and proving their convictions in a more robust manner, let them go on hunger strike until gays and lesbians fall into marital bliss.

  • entropy

    “I think that most of us are fine with same-sex marriage anyway.”

    Don’t be a cuck. Even if that were true, you lessen your position by virtue signalling about it.

    No, we’re not fine with gay marriage FFS. That’s why there hasn’t been a plebiscite. You not get the memo?

    I suspect most people are fine with gay couples having substantively the same legal rights as married couples. As an egalitarian, that is my position, but that is already the case, which makes the hysterical faggotry surrounding SSM even more ridiculous.

    Marriage is between a man and a woman. Marriages are fundamentally different to gay partnerships and, if you don’t understand how, ask your (biological) parents.

    Calling different things by different names is common sense. Doing the opposite is propaganda.

  • Deplorable Steve

    I am never OK with fag marriage. I can think of no worse assault on a cohesive society than having this perversion validated…

  • Warty2

    As with wondrous Entropy, I’m not fine with SSM either, and I suspect the majority would vote against it were we to hold a plebiscite. Why else does Labor and the Greens call for a parliamentary vote? Why else do a growing number of gay Liberal MPs feel quite comfortable with such a vote? Might it be that they actually fear the plebiscite won’t go their way? Could it be that they realise that the more intolerance demonstrated by the LBGTI fascista, the greater the outrage felt by the silent majority (otherwise known as the Aussie Outsiders/ the Australian Deplorables).
    Warty.

  • Sadsak

    Ssm. Is juzt another way that lefties go about the destruction of western culture. Destroy the aura of Marriage , break up the family, devide the community in debates like this…….hurrah, we win.