The real reason the same-sex marriage plebiscite never saw the...

  1. 46,394 Posts.
    The real reason the same-sex marriage plebiscite never saw the light of day is because advocates feared that it would lose.

    The vast Majority of Australians dont support Same Sex Marriage.

    Only a plebiscite will decide this Turnbull.

    Once again its the loony extreme left greenies are pushing this rubbish that a majority support it.




    They also know that support for changing the legal definition of marriage is much softer than is widely believed.
    Professional large-scale polling by Marriage Alliance — revealed exclusively and for the first time to readers of this column today — gives the lie to claims that almost 75 per cent of Australians favour same-sex marriage, and that, therefore, the debate is settled and should be rushed through a parliamentary vote.
    According to the poll of 2,500 people taken in December by Sexton Market Research for Marriage Alliance, just 33 per cent of Australians “strongly support” legalising same-sex marriage.
    A further, softer, 19 per cent said they “somewhat support” it, making for a total of 52 per cent in favour. On the other side, 25 per cent were undecided, 20 per cent “strongly opposed” and three per cent “somewhat opposed”.
    Digging deeper into focus groups, however, found that numbers of supporters decline significantly, especially among “soft” supporters, when same-sex marriage is linked to consequences such as sex education and gender politics, with 81 per cent concerned about losing terms like “mum” and “dad” and 75 per cent worried about unisex toilets.

    Did the anti-plebiscite campaign backfire on those who wanted change? (Pic: Brendan Francis)
    For example, 81 per cent of all of those polled were “concerned” about the gender of newborns removed from birth certificates, and about words in the English language such as “mum” and “dad” being replaced by “Parent 1” and “Parent 2”.
    And 69 per cent were “concerned” if children are being taught in school that “gender is flexible and they can choose whether they’re male or female”.
    On restrictions to freedom of speech in the workplace for “people with strong beliefs that marriage should be between a man and a woman”, 67 per cent of those polled were “concerned”.
    Breaking the figures down further, most “soft” supporters of same-sex marriage said they were concerned about social consequences.
    For instance, one question asked if you agree with the statement, “Parents should have the right to know exactly what is taught in sex education classes and have the right to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to any content that goes against their family beliefs”.
    Two thirds (66 per cent) of those who “somewhat support” same-sex marriage agreed with the statement, compared with 49 per cent of strong supporters.

    The same-sex marriage plebiscite bill passed in the lower house last year but was later blocked by Senate. (Pic: Kym Smith)
    Of those who are undecided about same-sex marriage, 65 per cent agreed with the statement, compared to 84 per cent of those who strongly oppose same-sex marriage.
    On the question of replacing male and female public toilets and school toilets with unisex toilets, 80 per cent of “soft” supporters of SSM were “concerned” about the idea, as were 60 per cent of “strong” supporters.
    Over time, support for same sex marriage has also eroded, according to Marriage Alliance polling data. In August, 2015, support was at 59 per cent, with 18 per cent undecided.
    Marriage Alliance says the controversy around the Safe Schools program has helped their campaign, as have revelations of harassment and intimidation of Christians by the militant arm of the same-sex marriage lobby.

    Safe Schools, formerly known as “Proud” Schools, is a sexual indoctrination program designed by university gender studies academics, disguised as an anti-bullying program, which is designed to revolutionise family relationships and transform the way children think about gender and heterosexual sex.
    It teaches children, often without parental consent, that gender and sexuality are fluid concepts.
    When Marriage Alliance asked: “Do you think young schoolkids should be taught and encouraged to explore homosexuality and transgender ideas?”, 65 per cent of those polled answered “no”.
    Only Greens voters were in favour, with 76 per cent answering “yes”.

    Support for marriage equality isn’t as high as defenders claim it to be, this poll suggests. (Pic: Brendan Francis)
    While same-sex marriage advocates deny the program is linked to the push to redefine marriage, La Trobe University academic Roz Ward, an architect of Safe Schools, has explicitly drawn the connection, telling a rally in 2013 that traditional marriage was “state-sponsored homophobia”.
    Far from being inevitable, change barely has majority support according to this polls, and that’s without factoring in a “shy” no vote in ethnic and faith based groups.
    Marriage Alliance polling found key ethnic communities are overwhelmingly against same-sex marriage, including 75 per cent of Muslim and Hindu Australians.
    Support plummeted for same-sex marriage when it was linked to a social change agenda, including Safe Schools, and when freedom of speech and religion are threatened.
    The irony is that, if the plebiscite had been held in February, as the government planned before Labor scuttled it, Marriage Alliance sources say they may have lost. The poll would have occurred just before Valentine’s Day, which would have helped frame the issues as being just about “love”, the Royal Commission into institutional child sexual abuse was in the news, effectively silencing the churches, and the intimidation of opponents was not as evident.
    But the cynical campaign against the plebiscite by Opposition Bill Shorten, using it as political wedge, has backfired on those who want change.
    That is why they want to force the decision through parliament. The intimidation of opponents, so vicious that Christian organisations have had to suppress the identities of board members, serves a useful purpose.
    It warns individual politicians, especially those who might have skeletons in the closet, about the ruinous consequences of resisting.
    Only a plebiscite can legitimise the result, whichever way it goes.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.