On Sunday, Herald Sun columnist Miranda Devine accused the “militant arm of the gay lobby” of “intolerance and standover tactics”.
Firstly, I would love to meet this brawly band of queers. If they existed, I’m certain we wouldn’t be having the same frustrating conversation every week.
By the “militant gay lobby”, I assume Devine means ordinary people who dare to speak up and ask for equal rights. Not more rights than straight people — equal rights.
In the case of same-sex marriage, the same rights our friends and family have to marry the person we love.
But it’s the how that seems to have bothered Devine.
“The vitriol and vile abuse heaped on anyone who speaks up for traditional marriage is no way to win hearts and minds,” she said.
Can the LGBTI community debate around gay marriage sound a bit shrill? Sure it can and, frankly, it does at times veer into unnecessary hostility, often manifest sexism.
If comments under stories on the Star Observer website are anything to go by, sometimes those in our own community have some of the most intolerant views.
But I don’t believe these few exceptions represent the majority. At the end of the day, everyone is entitled to their view.
Earlier this year the Australian Christian Lobby announced it would not take part in a debate about same-sex marriage at the University of Tasmania for fear of “personal attack and vitriol”.
I believe restraint is required when opponents of same-sex marriage are automatically labelled homophobic. But those who oppose same-sex marriage need to know, when they get up and denounce it, that there are people who cannot marry their loved one, who will passionately disagree. That’s all part of the debate.
In playing the victim card, I think Devine exposes her underlying fear that the war against same-sex marriage is being being lost.
Not in the squabbles between the gay community and the Australian Christian Lobby. But outside of that, ordinary people really don’t care if gay couples marry, and they’re not really sure why Devine does with such venom.
It’s been a while since I’ve read Miranda Devine. At my age, I don’t have enough time on earth to read that sort of malarky.
How does calling Miranda Devine “venomous” rank as more positive than calling her “homophobic”? The first is subjective and the second is merely a fact …
Agreed on the fallacy of “everyone is entitled to their own views”. If I fervently ‘believe’ that a metre is 90cm, then I’m just wrong, plain and simple. My being wrong may not harm anyone. If I then mount a vocal, widely-publicised campaign promoting my belief, bridges won’t meet half-way and buildings are gonna fall down.
We see the same problems over and over again in other areas, such as infant vaccination deniers and climate change deniers. When 95% of reputable scientists agree that climate change is a real and imminent threat to our survival as a species, you DON’T get to deny it simply on the basis of (unfounded) personal opinion. Of course, the issues around marriage equality are more subjective than these issues, but when people’s “valid beliefs” create real harm for others, they do NOT get a pass on the basis of ‘everyone is entitled to their own opinion’.
I am over people telling me that those who speak with hatred, and “venom” (to use this writer’s description) towards same sex attracted people should not be labelled homophobic. If their well-expressed fears are not homophobia, then how do we define them? Homophobes like Devine cry loud and clear if anyone labels them, yet they feel free to label others at the drop of a hat. To me, equality either exists or it doesn’t, and hate-speak, the kind which Devine engages is, becomes not only an anachronism, but totally unacceptable and illegal, and I can label it however I want to, thankyou very much.
well said …
If I was a racist and my comments incited hate and caused distress and hurt. Would society say “At the end of the day, everyone is entitled to their view.” ?
Why are we as a community so apologetic of homophobic views? No other minority would (rightly) stand for it.
I thought the last Gay militia died with Mishima, however there is such a group on Facebook, and a self identified group in the United States. Interesting. Devine might be referring to the Spartans that were actually a Gay militia, although ideologically unsound.
Perhaps we should get one going, although without further research I am unsure where we would source the Kalashnicovs.
Propaganda is not associated with facts; read my entry under, ‘Do your research before you howl’.
This editorial is why Andie Noonan is fast becoming the most respected journalist in Melbourne on GLBTIQ issues. Balanced, going below the surface and showinga sense of calm. Take on queer Australia next Andie!!