Thursday, November 19, 2015

The reptiles do saucy doubts and fears the way others do I do ...

The pond has long been an admirer of the reptiles' skill at dissembling, as a way of raising saucy doubts and fears ...

Let us also admire the jingoism of its orange-flavoured editorials ...

It's what might be called the Tony Abbott gambit ...

(Shovel it here)

But back to the saucy doubts and fears strategy.

It always runs this way.

The reptiles have no problems with in principle support of ... climate science, doing something about it, gay marriage, income equality, you name it ...

The support is often cunningly framed in the negative. You know ... As a supporter of individual choice, The Australian does not oppose climate science/a fair go/same-sex marriage, or even yadda yadda.

It's such a mealy-mouthed, half-arsed line, that negative routine. It would stick in the reptiles' craw - do reptiles have craws for the sticking? - to say something positive, such as "As a supporter of gay rights, The Australian supports the equal rights of gays, and if they so desire, the right to get married and live in a relationship that's equal in every way to heterosexual marriage in the eyes of the law."

But that would leave no room for the fine print, and there's plenty of fine print allowed when it's "does not oppose."

That's why the reptiles offer up that libertarian line "as a supporter of individual choice", which equally might support the right for the nation to roam around fully armed, or indulge in any kind of drug, or drive on the right side of the road, or any of the other routines favoured by David Leyonhjelm.

And along with choice, and not opposing, and the right of all to be bigots comes what might be called the gay wedding cake syndrome ...

.... or in this case, the right of the clergy to ongoing bigotry and the damning of sinners to a lifetime in hell .... even if said sinners might well end up sharing eternity with all those who looked the other way while the child molestation factories made victims freely available ...

Well there's the prejudicial judgement; now it's time for the gobbet:

It is, in its own humble and small way, a perfect example of how to proceed, and in a way that has done much disservice to climate science and other pressing matters.

Allege that the Catholic booklet is moderate and respectful in tone. Because that makes bigotry acceptable. Pity the Christians for their eternal suffering and persecution. Worry about the freedom of religion and conscience to maintain a bigotry that has survived for well over a couple of thousand years ...

Don't worry how this might work with the anti-semitic streak that ran through the Catholic church for nigh on a couple of thousand years. Remember, everyone has the right to be bigoted and prejudiced.

Ask a lot of unnerving questions. Build a mountain out of a mole hill? Raise the spectre that bigotry might be disallowed. Ponder the pitfalls of church bodies losing tax breaks, because it seems, Caesar's cash must be given unto church in paw.

Note the questions have been overlooked. Ponder at how potential pitfalls have been shown. Challenge the legislators ... and so on and so forth ...

It is, in its own way, a splendid warm up for the sort of campaign that will be conducted during the plebiscite.

Malware has optimistically talked of the capacity of Australians for an intelligent conversation, and for a caring and compassionate vote.

He reckoned without the relentless hostility of the Catholic hierarchy, and the faithful reptiles of Oz ...

This sniping and dissembling and questioning - the uncertainty principle leading to a cauldron of bubbling fear and prejudice - will continue up to the day of the vote ...

And so to an old Pope salute to the libertarian ethos, and more Pope here ...


  1. Yes the so-called 'libertarians' at the Oz will be dragged kicking and screaming into the slightly less distant past on gay marriage but that's to be expected. I can't say i share your concerns for a plebiscite personally, it will pass i don't think there's any reason to doubt that after the ireland example. The campaign will be ugly from segments of the right but it's already ugly, their claims get a more respectful hearing in parliaments around Australia than anywhere else.

    The votes just aren't there in parliament, i think even the marriage equality lobby group concedes as much. If only our pseudo opposition had leapt at the chance to involve itself in a campaign for a cause supported by 65% of Australians we might have even had a chance of passing marriage equality in this term.

    1. In turn KnifeySpoony, I think you underestimate the capacity of Tony Abbott and others of his ilk to be difficult ... but then the pond has always looked on life with a jaundiced, cynical, existentially despairing eye, and all too often found it was so and thus ...

  2. Not knowing a great deal about religion, its my understanding that some religions allow marriage of extremely young girls, and another that allows a man to marry multiple women (not many religions seem to have a lot of upside for women it seems....).

    Yet oddly - the Oz and IPA seem to accept the states interference with these religious freedoms that are outside the hetronormative model

    You can prove sexuality. But as far as I know you can't prove there is a God. So shouldn't the freedom not to be discriminated against trump the freedom to discriminate against someone based on something that can't be proven that a "God" actually wanted?

    1. Come now, Anon, as if logic had anything to do with tooth fairy lovers ...

  3. Naturally, DP, since The eight terror suspects named so far are not refugees and all have EU passports it's time to move on to fields where the prospects of division are riper. Leave the French connection till the fuss dies down, then we can return to a full-blooded assault on those devilish bastions of liberty.
    I know, I know, the tones of cognitive dissonance are ringing again.

  4. If the religious schools are going to take the money of secular taxpayers or indeed gay and lesbian taxpayers, perhaps they should start paying more attention to general community standards.

    1. Time to end the tax rort GlenH? Or can they argue that too is a general community standard ...

  5. Ms Pond, I rarely have the opportunity to use the actynym, however ROTFLMAO came immediatly to mind as I watched Greg Sheridan explaining teh internet, cloud, and technology on "The Drum" this PM.
    Oh dear, maybe Tones has explained it to him.

    1. :)³ The pond saw the extraordinary spectacle too ... and wasn't it fun, for a man in the grip of reptile madness, to talk of madness at large ...

  6. This cartoon at TNYer proves that some cartoons are brilliant, while others are just shit and wouldn't be out of place in an updated version of Protocols.

    1. Excellent link to a good source of daily fun UC, but we should all read the distinction below it between laying and lying low...


Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.