As the High Court sits today to ponder the insane arguments of the marriage equality crowd, it’s also worthwhile pondering the qualifications of the leading proponents of homosexual marriage.
But let’s just stick with insanity for a sec. The ACT is arguing that its marriage equality laws are legal because gay marriage is not the same as real marriage.
Yup. Insanity. And so much for marriage equality. Clearly, it’s not that at all.
It is simply ridiculous to suggest that marriage and the glorification of homosexual relationships are the same thing. They are not and that is exactly what the pro-gay lawyers are arguing at taxpayers’ expense in the High Court right now.
When governments start spending up big on such silliness you should not be surprised that we are in so much debt.
But that’s a whole different story. Back to the proponents of gay marriage.
You may have heard of Christine Forster. She’s the Prime Minister’s sister. Her link with Tony Abbott and her vocal lesbianism makes her the most high profile campaigner for gay marriage in Australia.
So just exactly what does Christine Forster know about marriage?
Quite a lot really.
That’s because she was married. She did walk down the aisle. She did promise to spend her life with the man she supposedly loved. She did mumble something about ‘until death do us part’.
And then, four children later, she left to shack up with another woman.
So we know that Christine does not hold the institution of marriage in high regard at all.
And not just in a general sense. But in a personal sense. As in Christine has a public track record of making public commitments about marriage and then publicly abandoning them altogether.
In fact, Christine has said that she knew this decision would destroy her family. And she went ahead and did it anyway.
Instead of the ‘dignified’ campaigner for gay marriage as the media makes her out to be, the truth is that Christine ruined her own marriage in the pursuit of lesbian love. And the celebration of Christine by the LGBT community proves nothing more than that the Mardi Gras mob hold no respect for marriage whatsoever either.
What a disgrace.
And yet Christine thinks that she can speak from on high about the urgent need for national marriage reform, when she couldn’t even stick her own one out.
Christine Forster is the last person in the world that should be talking about marriage, let alone speaking utter nonsense about the dignity of ‘gay marriage’. There’s no dignity whatsoever in the trail of destruction Christine has left behind her in this selfish pursuit.
She might be able to talk the talk when it comes to ‘loving’ relationships.
But Christine cannot walk the walk.
And as any grade two kid can tell you, actions speak louder than words.
What I want to know is why have the media treated Christine like some goddess of love, who dispenses insights on marriage and relationships to the rest of us somehow struggling to attain her perfect approach to life-long commitments.
Why haven’t they asked why she bothers talking about marriage with her lesbian lover when she has already abandoned a life-long commitment previously.
Why haven’t they asked if she really means ‘until death do us part’ this time, when she didn’t mean it last time.
And the most insulting aspect of Christine’s hypocritical advocacy of gay marriage is that she doesn’t even want you or me to have a say.
Because she’s just one of the long line of LGBT activists seeking to change the law but resisting a call for a referendum.
Christine has the gall to say that the issue is too divisive for a public debate, but she seeks to thrust her divisive, hypocritical views on the Australian public. The same public who overwhelmingly voted for her brother and his well-known opposition to gay marriage.
And there is another aspect of Christine’s life that is a little troubling. And it also provides a glimpse into the deep, dark and hypocritical underbelly of the LGBT world.
If anyone mentions that it is possible to stop being homosexual, they are taken away to the modern version of the torture chamber, dismembered, and then their body parts are displayed in the four daily newspapers as a warning to others, lest they utter the same vile heresy.
However, just for a bit of fun, I will point out for the record that it is actually possible to stop engaging in gay or lesbian ‘sex’, just like it is possible not to commit adultery. And while the mob gather up their pitchforks and unleash on Twitter, I’ll let you think about whether I have said anything wrong, or whether the raging horde is just a sad proof that some people actually believe that they are nothing more than sexual slaves or robots, unable to control themselves. Just like the next-door neighbour’s dog.
But if it is heresy to say that you could stop being homosexual, why has the announcement that a married mother of four has found lesbianism been greeted with such joy?
Or would she also be feted from Liverpool to Lithgow if she ‘restraightened’ tomorrow and wanted to restart her life with her actual husband?
Surely if you can become gay today, tomorrow you can become ungay. Or is it just a one way door? Once you’re there, you’re there forever. Kind of like the Hotel California. And we all know what that song was about. Hell. Good luck with that.
The only other explanation that Christine can offer is that she was always a lesbian. That her married life was a sham. That it was deceitful and that she lied on her wedding day.
I’d like to think that Christine did not do this. I would like to hope that one day this mess could be rectified. That’d be a good ending, but it would mean that Christine would need to start living up to her marriage vows.
But if it was a lie, if Christine really did deceive her husband at the end of the aisle, then she is a living, walking, breathing example of contempt for marriage.
So please, spare us from Christine Forster and her destructive views on marriage. She is not fit to speak on the issue.