Jacqui Lambie says No voters are “hurting right now”
Image: Image: ABC.
Jacqui Lambie appeared on Q&A last night to defend the “40 per cent of Australians hurting right now” over the postal survey result.
Fresh off the back of her resignation from the Senate, Lambie reiterated her own opposition to marriage equality and said she’d received calls from people “in limbo” over the outcome.
“There is still 30 per cent of those Australians that lost out on that vote and they are feeling the hurt from that. I don’t hear anyone talking about that which I find quite disturbing,” she said.
“What they’re worried about – people that have been ringing me that have garden weddings, they’re making cakes.
“I had a bloke ring me about two weeks ago saying, ‘I want to know what my rights are right now because I only want to marry a man and wife in my garden’.
“I said, ‘Mate, I’m sorry, I can’t help you out with that’. He’s going to be in limbo for months. He has a freedom in this country and a right to say, ‘because of my religious beliefs, I cannot marry you in my backyard’.”
Lambie also criticised politicians for trying to pass marriage equality too quickly, saying “they haven’t filled in the gaps.”
“How long are these people going to have to go through more pain? They’ve lost. They’re feeling the pain. How much longer do they have to feel more pain?”
Australian Christians for Marriage Equality recently endorsed Dean Smith’s marriage bill, which is already before the Senate, saying it adequately protects religious freedoms.
Christian broadcaster Stephen O’Doherty also appeared on the panel, and was taken to talk by Melbourne high school student Milly Roper, who asked about prevalence of “the conservative views of older Australians” in the debate.
O’Doherty countered by claiming that “there’s more protection now for people on the basis of sexuality than there is on the basis of their religion.”
The radio host and former Liberal politician said that “the same protections that are awarded to people for sexuality ought to be awarded to people who hold religious views.”
Roper’s response to O’Doherty summed up Australia’s marriage equality debate perfectly.
“People of Christian and Catholic views haven’t been persecuted and they haven’t been systematically oppressed”.
“People of the LGBTIQ+ community have, for centuries. I think this debate was about improving their rights and in doing that we need to make sure discrimination can’t happen on any level.”
“When people say that it’s OK to discriminate against a gay couple, when it’s legally and morally wrong to discriminate against a single gay person, it’s just unjustified.”
Watch Lambie’s response below.
.@JacquiLambie says no one is talking about the pain of the people who voted ‘No’ in the survey #QandA pic.twitter.com/OyjsdzJv6c
— ABC Q&A (@QandA) November 20, 2017
Why is it that so many people seem to find Jacqui Lambie so amusing and endearing (I thought one bloke was going to propose to her on last Monday night’s Q&A, and George Brandis actually smiled at her – three times!), whilst despising and denigrating Pauline Hanson?
How are these two homophobic wingnuts any different from each other?
Is it a case of Schapelle Corby Syndrome [SCS]? Is Lambie more rootable than Hanson? Is that what’s going on here? I wouldn’t know about such things myself. Perhaps a heterosexual man or lesbian could explain it to me.
Following one of Lambie’s particularly disturbing, out of control rants on Q&A, one tweeter summed-up her tantrum-filled behaviour most succinctly with the tweet: “Has anyone ever seen Jacqui Lambie and Bob Katter in the same room together?”
Roper’s response to O’Doherty sums it up in a nutshell as does Arthur’s comment.
Frankly if someone wants Legislation to get protection from the gay community, then Legislation is also needed to protect the gay community equally from that someone.
“Please help me, I had a bloke ring me about two weeks ago saying, ‘I want to know what my rights are right now because I need to know how I can discriminate legally”.
Please! Help me!!!
There, fixed it for you.
D*ckhead. You.Are.A.D*ckhead. There’s no cure.
From my experience, I was disappointed to find out that she was *not* interested to listen to our valid reasons, including academic proof from Yale Law School of supported and celebrated same-sex marriage through history, including Anciet Egypt and Indigenous cultures.
Such a closed mind to equality through factual reasoning is just pathalogical; therefore proving homophobia.
I was once a Jacqui fan, but her stubborn preference to not listen and grow from reason is a good enough reason for me to feel that she’s a hypocrite (ie: whinging about no one listening to her concerns, while dogmatically ignoring other points of concern).
Boo and ???? to Jacqui.
It’s almost like asking us to feel sorry for anti women’s suffrage people.
No voters don’t get to prevent others from living their lives as they wish without affecting anyone else. A bloo bloo.
If I was refused access to wedding services because of my gay wedding then I would simply get over it and find another business to deal with. I would not be wanting to give my money to a business intolerant of my happiness. I would also not be inclined to take the business to court. I didn’t grow up in an atmosphere where everything needed lawyers to get involved. Better to have a cake shop that looks forward to my business than one forced to deal with me, plus I don’t want a wedding cake that someone may have spat in……
I agree but I would like these people to put up a big sign announcing that they do not cater to SSM for 2 reasons. Firstly, the sign will alert me not to ask them in the first place, as I do not want the embarrassment of being turned away. Secondly, it will also let others who don’t agree with them, to take their business elsewhere.
Arthur that’s okay if you live where there’s a choice of cake shops and venues to hold your wedding. Legal discriminstion is abhorant and against our reasons for wanting marriage equality in the first place
Jacqui Lambie is not to blame for the stupid statistical survey with its even more stupid No campaign but she as a No voter with the power to speak and vote in the Senate take her share of the blame for her pals who are “hurting right now”.
The fact is that the No campaign’s bargaining position as at right now would be a lot stronger if they’d bowed to marriage equality (like the British Tories did) but made it conditional on their religious freedom arguments. Instead, they announced that “this is too important for politicians to manage, we need to hand it over to the populace” in the desperate hope that the Yes campaign would boycott the survey.
While pro-marriage-equality campaigners were very right to challenge the survey in the High Court, the fact that we didn’t fall into their trap of boycotting (except Michael Kirby) has now given us a massive upper hand.
So Jacqui, just admit you blew it. Just admit you should have handled this much smarter on behalf of your religious and conservative communities and say sorry to them for your own failings. Don’t bitch at the rest of us.