LGBTQandA: Feel the diversity and love

Apparently, the homosexual movement is all about diversity. You know: equality, everyone being respected, rainbows and all that jazz.

So it fits nicely with QandA. It’s all about diversity too. Remember ABC managing director, Mark Scott, telling a parliamentary committee that it’s all about debate while defending the show amid claims of bias:

“ABC managing director Mark Scott acknowledged Q&A had been accused of having more left-leaning panellists but refuted the suggestion it favoured Labor supporters.

“I think it’s rare to watch a program where you haven’t felt that there haven’t been a range of issue­s raised,” he said.

“I think the test is: were there a range of issues raised, were all voices­ and perspectives heard, was there an opportunity for the viewpoints to be expressed.

“Was a range of views in evidence? And I think that’s always the case on Q&A, that the debate is held, that a range of viewpoints and perspectives are held and the audience is smart enough to make up its own mind.”

I think Mark Scott would have been very happy with the diversity on display in last night’s show. Just prior to QandA, the ABC ran a show about the making of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. What a lead in! And then there was last night’s panel:

The show was hosted by the neutral Tom Ballard – vegetarian, animal rights activist and formerly the boyfriend of Josh Thomas.

Finally, there was Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile MLC. His job was simple: to be the token Christian and ritual sacrifice.

So you’d think that the diversity loving crowd would have been upset at this blatant bias. And you’d be right.

The Twittersphere, which is also known as the home of diverse, modern, hispter views of tolerance and acceptance, was a sea of seething rage last night and it’s still in convulsions as we speak. This bastion of diversity let rip. And it wasn’t pretty. Don your helmets as we dive in to get just a small digital sample of the rage expressed at the ABC for last night’s completely inappropriate and one-sided panel.

Now that we know what the pro-homosexual crowd thinks of diversity, let us move onto love. After all, the homosexual movement is all about the love. Again we plunge into Twitter. Caution: read on from here at your own peril: 

 

I could have gone on much longer. But you get the picture by now. These are by no means ‘isolated’ tweets. But they are an insight into the tolerant minds of those demanding and seizing power to direct our social policies. I’m sure we have nothing to worry about.

Finally, the Sydney Morning Herald has today published an article praising the ABC for its courage last night. This is the view of Neil McMahon:

There was much criticism of the ABC for including Nile on this panel, but it proved a worthy exercise – nothing could have better highlighted the jurassic nature of his arguments. His supporters in the audience helped that cause – stern-faced hectoring on the agenda to “oppress” the majority and “enforce homosexuality on our institutions, our families, our children”, in the words of one questioner.

It’s easy being brave when you outnumber the opposition six to one on a show that is allegedly a place to ‘debate’ issues of national interest. But it is arrogance – pure and simple – to then pretend that somehow this ratio is generous. And note the real danger here in this piece. McMahon’s implication is clear: you are a bigot if you want to protect your children.

UPDATE:

Bill Muehlenberg has also written about the bias on display last night. He offers a suggestion for action:

Leave aside wherever you sit on these issues for the moment. In the simple name of fairness, there should have been a bit more balance here. But no, there was none. All pretence of neutrality or objectivity was blown out of the water tonight.

Of course I knew this would exactly be the case. I have penned numerous articles about the secular left ABC in general, and the appallingly biased Q&A show in particular. I grow tired of having to do this over and over again. But I am still outraged.

Outraged at the blatant bias and anti-Christian bigotry of the ABC. Outraged that I am forced to subsidise this horrifically bad network with my hard-earned tax dollars. Outraged that these guys have so long ago given up even the slightest pretence of fairness and even-handedness.

I have asked people to complain to the ABC about this in the past, and I will do so again, even though it seems to make not the slightest difference. So for what it is worth, you can contact them here and offer your protests: www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/contact-us.htm

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

11 Comments

  1. Luckily the Catholic Church points out what Marriage truly is in fact.

    Sadly due to degenerates, most people have been brainwashed some how too think, that a partnership is a Marriage.

    With a partnership, one can drop out and be on their way, finished with the deal.

    A Marriage is truly consummated when the man and woman have a child and that’s the whole point of a marriage ?
    One can not just drop out, as they have a responsibility for ever, as the child is truly their own in every way.

    The position of a Marriage should not to be dragged down by degenerates, that only try to bastardise the facts.

    If two people want to have a partnership, sure that’s ok, but please don’t try to bastardise, what truly a marriage in fact is.

    Such disregard for the true comprehension of marriage, is in fact a workings of Satan, leading people astray. When one truly comprehends the satanic workings of where all this hair brain foolishness all leads too in the future, one understands it’s not for the common good but it’s just obtuse.
    History has proven Satan always uses short sighted narrow minded dimwits to it’s advantage.

    Post a Reply
    • CHANNEL TWO ABC IS INSTRUMENTAL IN SOCIAL ENGINEERING OF THE LEFTY AGENDA I’m afraid more cuts are needed from Mr. Abbott.

      Post a Reply
  2. Great job did Fred nile.Hammered home just the same.Now thats a warrior.

    Post a Reply
  3. You might as well give it away. Seems every idiotic person who holds a position of authority in this country is living in some sort of fantasyland, or is a muslim. Stick your country. If I’d known what was coming, would have left years ago. What a pathetic bunch of losers.

    Post a Reply
  4. So much for the tolerance and love. No more rainbow colours, now showing their real colours.

    Post a Reply
  5. When Fred said something, he received, at most, 6 claps. The exception was when he stated that he chaired an inquiry to remove the homosexual defence for murder (i.e. “He touched me up so I stabbed him.”). Fred received barely a few more for that. You’d think the homosexual audience would have stood and applauded him; but no, they were so intent on hate that there was an almost complete silence.

    Their hate was no more evident than when a shot of the crowd captured a silent “What a fuckwit!”, directed about Fred from one gay man to another.

    Fred and the few other dissenting voices made one error. They should have raised the following points:

    1. Marriage between a man and a man, a woman and a man, a woman who thinks she’s a man and a woman, and, finally, a man who thinks he’s a woman and a man, are biologically inert relationships. That is, they cannot produce children as a consequence of biological, semantic and analytic necessity UNLESS they break the bond of marriage, and thus the promise of fidelity given at their ceremony, by receiving a third party’s sperm or egg. That is, by definition, it no longer is a marriage between two but a polyamorous relationship.

    2. If evolution is true (and it’s not!), then homosexual relationships contradict evolution. Evolution’s sole purpose is to get as many genes of yourself into the next generation i.e. differential survival. Because homosexuals can’t produce then they are fighting against Nature. (And I think this is why they hate us “breeders” and so they must convince people that being homosexual is indicative of a lifestyle diversity and choice in order to increase their numbers or they must LIE to their heterosexual spouses and children and secretly hang out in toilets.)

    3. If a homosexual couple decide that one of them will “donate” sperm or an egg (I use inverted commas because donations are meant to be altruistic but their idea is obviously not as it has selfish ends in mind) in order to “make” a baby, one of the two will become a step-parent. Researchers have identified the Cinderella Effect in which children are harmed far more by step-parents than by biological parents.

    Post a Reply
  6. A week ago, I couldn’t give two hoots about the topic. Today I watched a piece about Massachusetts , the first state to legalise gay marriage. My option has changed as the stat has been on a downhill slide of moral dilemma ever since passing the law and heterosexuals have no rights.

    Post a Reply
  7. What does Tom Ballard’s vegetarianism have to do with a LGBT conversation? Why was that mentioned?

    Post a Reply
    • What does marriage have to do with an LGBT conversation? Why was that mentioned?

      Post a Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. ABC’s Q & A – Queer n Arrogant | rossrightangle - […] Check out the storm of hate-tweets (if you can handle the foul language) which broke on the night of…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares

Share This

Share this post with your friends!