An Open Letter to Cory Bernardi
Dear Cory Bernardi,
Before you ignore this letter like all the other outraged mail you must be getting in response to your book, The Conservative Revolution, you should know that this is not a letter of grievance. It is one of congratulations. I want to congratulate you for your honesty and your commitment to your ideals, which you are obviously unwilling to hide whether you’re causing yourself and your government political pain or not. Well done Cory. Brave man.
I also want to congratulate you for forcing this honesty onto Tony Abbott. Some in the media are already reporting that Abbott is distancing himself from your published work, but when you actually scrutinise what Abbott has said, he’s done nothing of the sort. Today, through a spokesperson mind you, Abbott released this statement:
“Senator Bernardi is a backbencher and his views do not represent the position of the government”.
I’m sure you’re just as interested in this statement by Abbott as I am, so let’s scrutinise it further. The first few words are nothing because we already knew you were a backbencher. You chose to step down as Abbott’s front-bench-attack-dog-in-chief after public outrage concerning your interest in bestiality. Note you made the decision to resign. Abbott didn’t fire you. This is an important distinction. Abbott called you ‘ill-disciplined’ which I can only assume meant you were ill-disciplined in hiding the real values of Abbott and his right-wing crazies. I mean colleagues. Like you.
The next part of Abbott’s very brief statement, which I also note is wholly lacking in condemnation, says that your views do not represent the position of the government. These words were selected very carefully I assume. And I’m sure you’ve noticed the same thing I have Cory. I’m sure you are fully aware of the little back-handed way Abbott has quite consciously refused to censure what you said. He’s decided not to make any personal comment about how he feels about the horrid nature of what you call ‘ideals’. He’s commented about the position of the ‘government’, which he, I’m really sorry to say, is currently in control of. These are weasel words that do nothing to personally distance Abbott from anything you have said. This is like me saying ‘Senator Bernardi lives in Adelaide and his views do not represent the position of the state of South Australia’. Abbott’s statement neither approves nor condemns what you have published, and in no way distances him from what I can only conclude from this lack of distancing is a shared opinion on abortion, on family structures and on the relationship between church and state.
So now that I’ve conclusively cleared up the shared values that you have publically outed on behalf of your right wing colleagues, including Tony Abbott, I just want to summarise for you how disgusting you and Tony Abbott and others who share your views are. From one of the many outraged Australians who can’t stand the idea of people like you representing our interests, I want you to know that Abbott might not be distancing himself from you, but your book will ensure the electorate distances itself wholeheartedly from you at the next election.
How dare you say that the children of single mothers are promiscuous and lawbreakers. Apart from the fact that you have no research or data to back up this abhorrent assumption, you also have no right to judge families who for many reasons, often outside of their control, are not viewed as ‘traditional’ by you. How dare you accuse women of using abortion as birth control. The outrage I would like to express about this sentiment is too overwhelmingly expansive for this letter, but let me just try to explain it with one descriptive word that sums up you and your mate Abbott. Hateful. Full of hate.
The thing that upsets me most about you, if it is possible to rank my objections without diminishing how outraged I am about some more than others, is your idealism around bringing the church into your government. If it wasn’t bad enough that you’ve ripped science out of your government, now you are trying to do exactly what progressives like me feared you were going to do, and what we warned people you would do, and what no one wanted to hear when they were busy giving you and Abbott a free pass and what people who voted for you refused to admit after you all promised not to do this. You want to turn the secular nation of Australian into a religious state. You want to impose your biblical wrath on all of us. Through policy. Just like Julia Gillard warned us all you would do, but no on listened because they were too busy accusing her of playing the ‘gender card’. If Gillard was playing the gender card, you, Cory Bernardi, are currently playing the religious-zealot-hateful-judgemental-lunatic card. And Abbott is privately cheering you on.
I don’t want you to feel that this letter has gone from a congratulating tone, to one of negativity. So I will leave you with this message. Thank you again Cory for being brave enough to continue with your un-disciplined campaign to remind us, and to show the entire country exactly what you and Abbott and the rest of your conservative blue-tie wearing dinosaurs really think. We salute you. And we look forward to ripping apart future statements from Tony Abbott’s office full of weasel words that refuse to distance his views from yours.
Yours sincerely
Victoria Rollison
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Vic_Rollison’ show_count=’yes’]
Apologies that this is low resolution, it’s a screen print from my iPhone of a conversation I had with a random anti-abortion-nutter:
98 comments
Login here Register here-
cordannao -
JohnB -
Fed up -
Matters not. -
Olivia Manor -
Gina -
Kerri -
cordannao -
bighead1883 -
cordannao -
Peter -
Stephen -
doctorrob54 -
Shirley Green -
gailgoodwin -
strobedriver -
silkworm -
Maree -
lawrencewinder -
trishcorry -
Mike Wilkinson -
trishcorry -
Bill Morris -
Mike Wilkinson -
Mic -
hannahquinn -
Miles Gibson -
Bec Brown -
Kaye Lee -
Kaye Lee -
Kaye Lee -
Kaye Lee -
cornlegend -
John Kelly -
Kaye Lee -
Umberto Ledfooti -
patsy -
Umberto Ledfooti -
cornlegend -
patsy -
-
Daemon Blake -
Daemon Blake -
morf -
Dan Rowden -
Kaye Lee -
Fed up -
Kaye Lee -
Fed up -
Dan Rowden -
Kerri -
Zathras -
Michael Taylor -
John Fraser -
Kaye Lee -
infinite8horizon -
silkworm -
Fed up -
Norman -
diannaart -
Möbius Ecko -
Dan Rowden -
MargL -
FSM is coming. -
Chris Knott -
Chris Knott -
diannaart -
Alex Satrapa -
diannaart -
frontad84 -
VoterBentleigh -
diannaart -
VoterBentleigh -
-
doctorrob54 -
bighead1883 -
David -
TechinBris -
Balancenotposition -
-
diannaart -
bighead1883 -
diannaart -
bighead1883 -
Andrew -
doctorrob54 -
TechinBris -
Balancenotposition -
John Fraser -
Fed up -
Balancenotposition -
Balancenotposition -
Ricky Pann -
Ricky Pann -
Ricky Pann -
silkworm -
TechinBris -
flohri1754
Return to home pageThank you Victoria Rollison “you took the words right outa my mouth”
I couldn’t say it better Victoria.
The cunningly deceitful religious zealots/corporate puppets are in charge.
Must we wait ’til 2016?
What Cory ignores, that most single mothers started off in a relationship. In the past, meant they had married.
Very few are young single girls. That is a myth.
Many of the women that sought abortions in the distant past, where mostly women let down by men.
Women do not choose abortion as the way out.
Also there are no figures for abortions. There are figures for D&C operations,. Does not necessarily mean the woman has had a abortion. It simply means the womb has been scraped and cleaned,. Many complaints require this treatment.
The evidence seems to be, there are fewer abortions, than there has ever been.
Howard managed to political correctness and black arm band of history off the ground. I do not believe it is going to fly anymore.
Mr. Bernadi, the reaction to what you have put in the book has sunk like a lead balloon. Time to shut up.
By the way, only a fool would believe that Abbott did not sanction and encourage you in your endeavors.
It may or may not be valid but certainly he’s got away with it because the MSM didn’t ask for any ‘evidence’ in the form of stats and the like.
What I can say with some certainty is that Cory is an adherent to a religion that has a long track record of child abuse yet he remains silent of that issue. Why? Has he ever been asked? If not then why not?
Who finances the Menzies House? Or more importantly who finances the IPA/
If only we had a MSM that actually moved beyond the ‘he said’ ‘she said’ nonsense and bought some intelligence to the public discourse.
Well said Victoria. Let the rage continue!
Reblogged this on In my own opinion and commented:
You’ve written what I was thinking. Well said!
Women should only be legally denied abortion when men are legally denied heterosexual intercourse.
yes Kerri, but will that ever happen? Men have the power and women (rightfully or wrongly) have the burden.
Just like the US Republicans whom you are emulating Cory Bernardi what right have you as a male to espouse anything to women.
You are a shame on us males who value women for their ability to know not only own their own bodies but their own psychological well being as to how they function in society
What gives you the right as a male to preach your sick and archaic dogma to women
What gives you the right to say to people of the same gender who love eachother that their union is bestial
You Cory Bernardi have an affliction in your own immorality which should never have been allowed the light of day for you to become an MP
I only have this to really say to you Cory Bernardi
Stay out of women`s wombs and stay away from their vaginas because they belong to women and they know what they require of themselves.
Thank you Victoria,well said.
sad part is, he came from a woman’s womb and we can’t send him back to where he came from.
Victoria, you’ve done it again – brilliant.
Eloquently expressed.
He’s a shameful human being.
I would like to know how Bernardi and his ilk feel about a rape victim or a teenage incest victim that then find themselves pregnant and wish to terminate.Is this a beautiful thing and part of his Gods plan.
This is a great letter. Thank you so much. We have dangerous and stupid people in charge of our country. It is very depressing.
The best comeback I’ve ever seen! A brilliant letter and my sentiments exactly.
The reality is that CB’s comments will (hopefully) alienate the Liberal Party even further and people will (at last) understand that what they voted in was in fact a Conservative government and not a Liberal one – which theri label implies. Australia is becoming more and more secular and his comments will only add to this growth.
These are not Bernardi’s original thoughts. These are the thoughts of the Catholic hivemend.
people need to be educated to understand the rip off… that both parties work for the same 1% elite.
The Contradictions of Capital – David Harvey
http://www.youtube.com
Professor David Harvey delivered his lecture on 14 February 2013 at the University of Warwick.
Good Stuff.
Bernardi, Pyne, Vanstone … what have the S. Aussies done to annoy the “Big-DoughNut -in-the-Sky”?
Can we have a referendum with the double dissolution that defines Australia as a secular state and that personally held religious beliefs have no part in determining policy making?
Except for the “Big-DoughNut -in-the-Sky” of course.
Reblogged this on polyfeministix.
“I was unaware women could wear condoms”! Bang! Zing! Ba.dum.TISH! argument over!
Best comeback I’ve heard in years!
Well Done. Thank you.
Bernardi, Abbott and their like don’t see themselves as the hateful bigots. Far from it they see themselves as truly righteous leaders charged with, if not rescuing us non-believers at least ensuring that we curb our wicked ways and laziness on pain of punishment or deprivation. And they do this because they are good people who know what goodness is and they do it out of love, but it is not an easy job which sometimes justifies harsh measures, but as they don’t like doing it that makes it OK. For them religion is the custodian of moral correctness, of course ignoring centuries of evidence to the contrary.
@ Fed up! “Women do not choose abortion as the way out” but men choose abandonment of THEIR responsibilities as a way out 😉 Who is at fault? 😉
.
Dare I suggest that a sheep is more attractive than Cory Bernardi? of course this is an extreme example, but once again it’s linked to the far-right judgemental agenda of the so-called “Liberal” Party,
Reblogged this on The Kettle Press and commented:
Sadly, some political parties do have them. Dangerously, most of the right wing in current Australia are them. Bernardi is extreme in his views, but he isn’t alone and that is the truly worrying truth. Many are saying he has gone too far this time, is outed by his own extreme dogma, but let’s not forget that much of this was known before he wrote Conservative Revolution, he’s been demoted from the junior front bench of opposition by Turnbull and forced to stand down as adviser to Abbott and still he stands proud, determined and utterly unchecked in his extremes, which are unpalatable to most. There is no condemnation by Abbott, no distancing by Abbott, in fact, no public statement by Abbott. One must, therefore, conclude Abbott agrees. Even if he comes out tomorrow, next week, eventually to refute Bernardi or downplay Bernardi, his tardiness can be seen as nothing short of agreement and of complicity. I’m disgusted in the Bernardi’s views, and I’m deeply concerned for Australia with this lot of government politicians, so many of whom are purveyors of extreme and who seemingly want to suppress everything and everyone that is not personally believed in by them, and/or which does not turn a profit.
Very true, however it needs to be more of an elevator speech to reach the morons.
I am not surprised by Bernardi, he has expressed similar views before and its consistent with his fundamentalist religious bigotry. I am also not shocked by Abbott’s lack of condemnation. This LNP government has shown that they will happily ally themselves with all kinds of right wing extremist scum, corporate interests and wealthy media moguls in order to keep power. I am more than disappointed with the quality of our opposition however.
Christine Milne is relentless and is in the media every single day beating the drum for action and calling Abbott to account for the cuts and the absurd policy decisions we have endured for the past few months.I was prepared not to like her, simply because I was a Bob Brown fan, and was very sad to see him go. I have been pleasantly surprised and enjoy seeing Senator Milne’s perspective.
Of Shorten, I hear nothing. The faceless man indeed has now fully come into his moniker. Labor surely cannot sink any lower in morale, they are like a whipped dog. Australia has become a one party polity and it dismays and frustrates me.
This guy condemns homosexuality and single parent or step-families but he is more than happy to promote the Lingerie Football League during Senate Estimates
“Senator Bernardi said “… people like to go and admire the athletes not only for their sporting performances but, in many instances, for the way they look or their physiques. That is not unusual and it is a very reasonable thing. I found it an unusual thing for you to wade into as sports minister, when many people out there would regard it as entertainment more akin to the WWF—and that is not the World Wildlife Fund.”
http://www.acl.org.au/2012/05/mr-lingerie-football-league-has-no-place-in-australia/
Gives an insight into what he truly thinks about women if you ask me.
Senator BERNARDI: But specifically it is about the attire they are wearing. As I said, people have referred to your comment and said, ‘What’s the difference between what they’re wearing’. I did not know they wear suspenders. If they do, it is entertainment.
Bernardi also encouraged people to ignore Earth hour and to turn on their lights, go to the cinema, drive their car and watch tv.
“Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi’s certainly thrown his hat into the Ring of Fear with his recent founding of anti-Earth Hour organisation ‘Human Achievement Hour’ (or, as it’s known in more colourful vernacular, ‘The Sarah Palin Memorial Circle Jerk’). The HAH (are they taking the piss?) encouraged households ‘to go about their normal business during Earth Hour from 8.30pm Saturday March 27 to recognise ”the incredible accomplishments of the human race”’.
”Don’t be stuck in the dark with the communists. Turn your lights on!” the group urged on its website, cheerily unafraid of dusting off a few tired scare tactics to reach a new, pliable audience.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-03-29/leave-your-light-on-the-anti-earth-hour-campaign/383624
“The burqa isolates some Australians from others. Its symbolic barrier is far greater than the measure of cloth it is created from.
For safety and for society, the burqa needs to be banned in Australia.”
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/society-and-culture/for-australias-sake-we-need-to-ban-the-burqa-20100506-ubun.html#ixzz2pekEcyae
I wonder how he feels about nuns?
https://twitter.com/JointDestroyer/status/420057614299701248/photo/1
We’ve had to put up with nutters like Cory in the past and doubtless they will continue to emerge from the dark corners of the far right in the future. But, let’s enjoy a note of optimism; the Tea Party in America has overplayed its hand with its agenda such that the Republicans will take a belting in this year’s mid term elections. Far right extremism has never succeeded there and it will never succeed here. So, don’t be too alarmed at the nut cases that spring from conservative ranks. Their own people will eventually shut them down. If not, the electorate will.
We are stuck with Bernardi for another 6 years. In my opinion he should be sacked. He is obviously spending all his time writing hateful books and blogs whilst collecting a handsome salary from Australian taxpayers as well as funding from places like the Heartland Institute and the American Legislative Exchange Council. I cannot believe that he is representing the views of the majority of people who elected him. How do you measure the productivity of a politician? Are there any safeguards to protect us from nutters like this man or do we have to just put up with him spreading his hatred and fear and hope that the people of South Australia wake up in 6 years time?
I would post a link to this awesome letter on Bestiality Boi Bernardi’s Facebook page, but Cory banned me; his definition of ‘free speech means that he is free to speak his lies, hate, and bigotry with being challenged.
well done again good article………my friends daughter who was mentally disabled as well as physical was raped and pregnant……was it wrong for her at her doctors advice to abort…..I am confused….the mother was single and battling to survive…….I am catholic but I believe there are cases in which this is appropriate…the girl has since died…….there is aways the exception to the rule…..who can judge these people…how do we know that bernardi and abbott do not have skeletons in their cupboards….our religion says look at your self before you look down on others….these problems hit all kinds of families not only single mothers…..and at times these morons project their own sins onto others less fortunate to make themselves look good…..
PS – typo; my comment should conclude “…. withOUT being challenged.”
https://twitter.com/xx_Alexandra/status/420114102745194496/photo/1
really love you carrie……you read my mind
Pingback: It looks like we’re stuck with him | Café Whispers
Of course, you do realise that what he will be advocating next is ‘Corrective Rape’ as practiced in South Africa to ‘cure ‘ lesbians of homosexuality! All this from a man who likens same-sex marriage to bestiality!
Of course, you do realise, that Bernardi says what Abbott believes, and can’t say. Is Abbott REALLY the kind of fellow we want as PM? 1.”My Year 8 Religion teacher said he knew Abbott back when he was studying to become a priest. My teacher set up a fundraising event for homeless people in Sydney and in the middle of it Abbott came over and whispered in his ear “Excuse me, but there are no poor people in Sydney””
2. It’s common knowledge that when he was running for SRC President at Sydney Uni, he would walk into lecture theatres shouting “if you hate poofters – vote for me”;
3. It’s also common knowledge that when he was running for SRC President at Sydney Uni, he punched the wall either side of a female student’s head to intimidate her.
It’s always “the children of single mothers”, rather than “the children of absent fathers” or even “the children without two-parent families”. Funny how much their misogyny is right there for the world to see.
Can someone please direct me to a site where Bernardi directly likens homosexual marriage with bestiality? I’m well aware of his now infamous slippery slope argument regarding such things, but that’s a totally different thing.
Dan he suggests that it will lead to bestiality. That sort of commentary from a politician must not be allowed to go unchallenged.
“The next step, quite frankly, is having three people or four people that love each other being able to enter into a permanent union endorsed by society – or any other type of relationship,” Senator Bernardi said.
“There are even some creepy people out there… [who] say it is OK to have consensual sexual relations between humans and animals.
“Will that be a future step? In the future will we say, ‘These two creatures love each other and maybe they should be able to be joined in a union’.
“I think that these things are the next step.”
I often wonder what the mothers of people like Cory Bernadi think of their offspring.
lead to bestiality being recognised*
I suspect they obtained their twisted view of the world from their fathers.
Kaye Lee,
Challenging it is one thing, distorting and misrepresenting it is another entirely. I’m well aware of his slippery slope argument. Without supporting data or argument, slippery slope arguments are inherently fallacious. But nowhere did he directly liken homosexual marriage with bestiality. It is an outright lie (or significant failure of comprehension) to suggest he did.
From a certain conservative point of view, his slippery slope argument has some prima facie power. When a pluralist society begins to accept and legitimise elements of society that fall outside certain statistical and traditional “norms”, those conservative types get restless. There are already lobby groups for polygamy and even human-animal marriage. There are more people out there who would marry their pets than we might imagine. Personally, I don’t give a crap, but I can well understand why particular conservatives and religious types would find it disturbing. It’s quite reasonable for them to do so given their worldview. It does not make them nutters (their worldview itself probably achieves that).
Is it the case that we’re making something of his argument that it isn’t because we find it hard to counter his argument for what it is? If a conservative said to me, “If we allow same-sex marriage why wouldn’t we also allow polygamous marriage?” I would have no real response because it’s a damn fine question. The step to human-animal relationship is a bigger one, but it is not automatically stupid or irrational given there already exists elements of society who are advocates of such freedoms.
Naturally his argument was a blatant pitch to the concerns and insecurities of the conservative electorate, but it requires a more substantive response than “I’m ferociously outraged by your blatant nuttery”.
The subjugation of womens rights, the imposition of elevated moral standards, intolerance of others plus the return to some sort of theocracy by the elevation of one specific religious group over another?
Sounds just like the Taliban.
I wonder the USA will invade to liberate us – or are they striving for the same Tea Party ideals.
Abbott is very much like Howard in letting others put his own thoughts out into the public arena under the guise of free-speech while seeming to remain “presidential and above it all”.
If he doesn’t explicitity disgaree with such comments then he remains in favour.
Dan, I wouldn’t be surprised if all traces of it have been removed from the internet. A lot of that seems to be happening lately.
<
Reports his office is being inundated with feminine hygiene products.
“it requires a more substantive response than “I’m ferociously outraged by your blatant nuttery”.
-gay marriage is a slippery slope to bestiality
-children who don’t live with their wedded biological parents are likely to commit crimes and be promiscuous
-religion should play a greater role in politics
-women use murder for birth control
-girls playing football in lingerie and suspenders is entertaining and it’s quite proper to go ogle them
-trash earth hour by using as much electricity and gas as you can
-ban the burqa
Dan I understand that you object to emotive or partisan slanging but can I suggest that this represents a pretty “substantive” reason to label Bernardi a nutter.
While Bernardi’s personal views are abhorrent and deeply disturbing, what’s much more dangerous is the process that’s clearly unfolding before us. With the tea-party movement as a template, there’s no doubt in my mind that Bernardi and fellow zealots are going to force the current government further and further right whether the government wants to or not.
Leave aside for a moment Abbott’s own well-documented history and long-term position on matters feminine and biblical, even as Prime Minister he cannot unilaterally move the entire Party to the right. His own rhetoric took a noticeable swerve to the centre when he became Leader of the Opposition because, as a politician, he knows he can’t leave his base too far behind. What Bernardi, with or without Abbott’s tacit approval, is doing is continually driving pegs into the sand further and further to the right, and daring the Party to disagree. This is exactly what the tea-party did so successfully to Republicans in the U.S.A. Until and unless the LNP clearly says it REJECTS those positions, it is tacitly giving them currency, if not approving them.
Now any move in the other direction by Abbott or anyone else is impossible. No matter how far right they are currently, they can only move in one direction. Without saying a single word, the entire LNP government has just been moved a significant distance to the right.
They WANT polarisation, they WANT outrage, and they WANT the debate to be framed in terms of their own crazy rhetoric, not in realistic positions not too far from the real Centre. They’re no different from any revolutionary of either side, at any time.
Sure, Bernardi is an odious and frankly disturbed person. But he’s not the real danger, he’s just the attack dog. It’s the process and the silence that follows each of these far-right announcements that’s the real danger. If we want to bring pressure to bear, we should be leaning on all of the moderates in the LNP to publicly distance themselves from this horror. They are the ones who must speak now, not the Left, or women. If the rest of the LNP doesn’t speak, it’s because it’s lying gagged in the back of the Bernardi bandwagon.
Bernardi has published his book at a time when there are no political programmes on TV such as Q&A that can take him to task.
The other significant thing about the timing of the publication is that it has coincided with the government’s announced proposal to privatize the Post Office. Thus while we are outraged over this blatant piece of culture wars, we are distracted from the rollout of their neoliberal agenda.
Silkworm, that book was published in December. Why has it emerged only yesterday?
Here in Canberra, the majority of abortions are for Asian students.
I assume that they arrive in Australia with little or no sex education.
How to reduce the number of abortions in this situation is a complex problem.
Thanks for this Victoria, I needed that.
Cory Bernardi is a walking talking insult to human intelligence.
http://forums.auscelebs.net/acnet-images/27131/carrie-bickmore-585190.jpg
Kaye Lee,
I’m only going to respond to this bit because that’s the only thing I’ve been speaking about. My grievance was that of us distorting and misrepresenting an argument.
Bernardi’s worldview makes him a nutter. His views couched within that worldview are simply internally consistent.
Your version of his slippery slope argument continues to be a distortion of his point in that it leaves out the most important element – social acceptance. He did not and is not making an argument that gay marriage itself leads to bestiality. He’s making the point that the social acceptance of certain features of human behaviour leads to acceptance of others. It’s a totally valid point. We have to keep in mind that from his type of conservative perspective, he’s witnessed just such a slippery slope unfolding in western culture for decades. So, when he projects into the future and nominates things he sees as a continuation of that slide he’s doing something perfectly legitimate – from his conservative perspective.
What is required are arguments that that conservative perspective – per se – is invalid. If Bernardi is the nutter we say he is – and I have no issue with that overall judgement – then we should be able to tear his worldview down with ease and absent of intellectual dodgyness.
How do these people get elected!
I bet he doesn’t comprehend the word ‘shame’ or ’embarrassment’
However, this is good news:
“Amazon flooded with reviews mocking Cory Bernardi’s book The Conservative Revolution”
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/amazon-flooded-with-reviews-mocking-cory-bernardis-book-the-conservative-revolution-20140107-30f4e.html#ixzz2pgqxGpGG
The real issue here is belief systems. That’s the foundation. So to solve the problem, solve the foundation/basis on which the statements are made.
Cory Bernardi is a believer in one section of a belief system. There are numerous other belief systems around the world. Logically, they can’t all be right. Time will show that they are ALL wrong, just as we now know that the ancient Egyptians belief in the “sun god Ra” was wrong.
If those people with a belief system then want to start claiming that they are worship one god, but there are different paths to get there, then that logically results in the understanding that their own rules are irrelevant.
I use the term “belief system” because that is what they are. A system of ideas that have to be “believed” without question. Religion is too kind a word. What people need to do is “think” and also be willing to accept that they don’t have all the answers right now. No need to ascribe unanswered questions to an imaginary being.
So when we attack Cory Bernardi for his views, we need to look at the foundations first as that is the root cause of the problem. Only by moving his mind from “belief” to “thought” will the issue truly be resolved.
Dan Rowden
I agree with your post. We all agree that Bernardi is a “nutter” but his statement about acceptance of one thing potentially leading to another is technically valid. This has in fact been used as a strategy by groups seeking change, ie the thin end of the wedge. Hopefully we all agree it is a very unlikely that acceptance of gay marriage will lead to acceptance of sex with animals !!!
Dan you are making the assumption that a step in acceptance of equal marriage inevitably leads to bestiality – there is no proof.
In countries where equal marriage is accepted – no reports of increased bestiality has occurred – why should there be? Your argument assume that:
1. There is an inevitable movement in a certain direction. There are no guarantees that there will be any changes towards a particular direction ie, one that Cory Bernardi fears.
2. That there will be any movement down this ‘slippery slope’ at all – where is the evidence?
I know how much you love to play devil’s advocate and please don’t stop, it is good to give people pause for thought (or should that be paws?). Sorry for appalling pun. Your argument is based on a premise that may never happen, there is no evidence for it to have happened and it is, therefore, a false argument.
Linking homosexual marriage to bestiality is first treating humans as animals (because bestiality involves sexual relations between humans and animals, not humans and other humans of the same sex), and second is supposing that people who support equality between people (of women, of homosexuals, of people-with-a-skin-colour-other-than-white) also want animals to be recognised as people and that this will then lead to the legitimisation of bestiality.
In some cases it may make sense to recognise animals as people: for example recognising higher primates and dolphins as people because they are intelligent, make decisions based on forward planning, display emotions, have social bonds in their societies, and feel loss at the death of others. Recognising higher primates as people will have the unfortunate side effect of allowing orang-utans to sue land developers for taking away their jungles (to plant palm plantations, for example), or allowing dolphins to sue industries for polluting their breeding grounds and suing fishermen for over-fishing their feeding grounds.
So on the one hand we can use such a recognition of animals-as-people to prevent their habitats being destroyed, there is the danger that we could then start to think of them as “people just like us” rather than “people who happen to be dolphins.”
The interesting argument then becomes: why shouldn’t we allow a human to marry an orang utan as long as the relationship is consensual and has all the other hallmarks of a good marriage? How many humans have married other humans only to find that the human they married is less functional than an orang utan? At least an orang utan goes out to collect food each day!
Marrying a dolphin is quite clearly a different matter: after all, a dolphin isn’t even a primate! A dolphin lives underwater. A human lives on land. Sure, they are both mammals and breathe air, but that’s about where the similarity ends. The couple can’t live together without mechanical support. Either the human partner has to live in scuba gear or the dolphin partner would have to live in an aquarium on land. Consummation of the relationship is possible (go ask the Internet about it, there are instructions and videos), it’s just the living arrangements that cause a problem.
How many human marriages fail because one or the other partner is not willing to go to the same lengths to maintain the relationship as some humans will go to protect non-human people like orang utans and dolphins? Do you see a friend proposing to marry a bad match and say, “hey, I don’t think this would be a good idea?” If you don’t stop a human marrying another human when the match is doomed to fail, what right do you have to suggest that a human person shouldn’t marry a non-human person? Do you see a relationship in a rough spot and put some effort in to help the couple rediscover their love for each other? Remind them of the good times they shared? Or do you just sit by and watch the disaster unfurl, wishing that someone would just do something?
If we are so careless about human-human relations, why do we care so much about human-nonhuman relations?
Cory’s concern is valid. Recognising non-traditional relationships will end up with human people marrying non-human people.
Because two men getting married is exactly the same thing as a woman having sexual relations with a dolphin.
Marriage is a form of ritual.
Sexual relations is a physical act.
I don’t see any problem with either, so long as the dolphin or woman is consenting.
😉
Might I suggest that if you want to try and rid us of that idiot Abbott you join up and sign this Petition :
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/to-the-australian-government-and-the-governor-general-we-reject-tony-abbott-and-the-lnp?
Cory Bernardi’s argument was not really the slippery slope argument. He implied a similarity between homosexual unions and bestial or polygamous unions, which he did not imply for heterosexual unions. This was done partly by Bernardi not applying the same logic to opposite sex marriage that he applies to same sex marriage and by presuming his conclusion to be true before he had in fact validated it. So, his argument goes:
Male marries female is acceptable – if it is allowed it will not lead to us having to allow a union which is polygamous or bestial.
Male marries male is unacceptable – if it is allowed it will lead us to to allow a union which is polygamous or bestial.
Female marries female is unacceptable – if it is allowed we will have to allow a union which is polygamous or bestial
Therefore, while he does not come out directly and say it, he implies that homosexual unions are similar to polygamy or bestiality, whereas heterosexual marriage is not similar.
This can be argued against by asking for him to justify his logic. Bernardi mentions the criteria for the new legislation is that two people who love each other should be able to get married. Why would not the allowance of a marriage between a two single, consenting adults of different gender be just as likely to lead to polygamy and bestiality? Since the criteria of the legislation is a union between two single, consenting adult humans (not multiple people or non-consenting animals and people), there is no more likelihood of bestiality following than there is from allowing two single, consenting adult humans of the opposite sex from marrying. Since Bernardi’s assumptions and logical reasoning are all up the creek, he would have a hard time distinguishing the difference without exposing the implication he made in his argument, which is an invalid assumption.
Loving your logic, VB.
What is it with the uber-right with sex anyway? Spend far too much time thinking about sex (as opposed to doing it?), leading them to all kinds of bizarre thoughts. If Cory Bernardi and his ilk are so perturbed by kinky sex, maybe they could start with the many variations on hetero-sex… before attempting to equate LGBTI people with deviant behaviour.
Exactly, diannaart. It was an attempt to denigrate and divide people.
And Victoria, your comment about Abbott’s weasel response is spot on. If Cory Bernardi had spoken out as forcefully in favour of the mining tax or the carbon price, the Prime Minister would not have dismissed his comments as those of just a backbencher whose views do not represent the position of the Government. The PM would have come out strongly opposing such statements and Cory might have found himself relegated to the crossbenches.
Pingback: An Open Letter to Cory Bernardi « The Australian Independent Media Network | Cranky Old Crow
I love this forum but gee I hate going around in circles,the last two posts,diannaart and VB summed it up perfect.And Dan you are 100% correct,Bernardi never said gay marriage WILL lead to bestiality,what he meant is that the latter will in time be socially accepted.
Apart for the fact that most reasonable thinking people accept the fact Bernardi is a loony,the issue of main importance here is the fact Abbotts refusal to distance himself from him.He has pretended to by having an aid release to the press a statement saying as much that Bernardi’s views are not always those held by the Gov.But I ask what are the views held held by him.
Look at what happened to Turnbull when they didn’t see eye to eye.
My very good friend Woger the dolphin 😆 agrees wholeflippery with you Dianaart 🙂
He`s been patrolling the beaches keeping the younger dolphins away from anyone wearing a chain with a man nailed to a cross on them 🙁 .
Woger is doing an “In Water Stranger Danger Operation” and says it`s very successful 😀 .
His modus operandi is to turn back the cross wearers 🙄 and return them to the beach from whence they came.
His other good friends the sharks 😀 are circling though because they just want to eat these deviates 😈
Any time Prime Minister Peta Credlin needs to cause distraction from something she really wants to be kept secret, she gives Corey Bernardi the wink to deliver yet another line, divinely scripted by the Cosmic Playwright.
Senator Bernardi is Tony Abbott’s trusty Dog Whistler in Chief. “Good boy Fido, now please stop humping my leg and get out there and pander to the God-fearing, non-billionaire sector of our base”.
Mr. Abbott, knowing he’d be deservedly and mercilessly pilloried for informing the public of his long-held fetish to copy and paste public policy directly from the book of creepy pronouncements authored by ancient fanboys of Big Brother Death Cult, gives Mr. Bernardi another gleefully-accepted hospital handpass, runs his full fifteen metres, kicks the ball out-on-the-full before colliding with the behind post, severely concussing himself – again.
And depressingly, instead of rebutting these ill-conceived comments with targeted, reasoned logic, The Offended And Outraged Community jump up and down like caged chimpanzees, hurling ad-hominem abuse like it’s their own faeces, deluded in the belief that it won’t make Toxic Tony’s Tea Party look like the good guys. Having seemingly predicted this kind of misguided reaction, Mr. Abbott robotically plays the People-Are-Entitled-To-Their-Own-Views-Not-Party-Policy-We’re-A-Broad-Church card – a carefully scripted PR equivalent of jamming an index finger in each ear, eyes squinted, singing “la-la-la” until every journalist in the nation has sleepwalked out of the room, or died trying.
Keep an eye out for second-term IPA/Catholic Church collaborated policy announcements in the form of biblical Bernardiisms, such as:
• Sacrifice one’s child/ren (postnatally, you idiot) to demonstrate a satisfactory level of god-love (Genesis 22:2). For to do any less would be an insult to our proud nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage. Eligible participants will earn a taxable income of less than $37,000 per annum and must be of an unmarried persuasion;
• The ownership of one person by another should be permitted in certain circumstances (Ephesians 6:5). To qualify as an Involuntarily Indentured Servant (as they will be officially titled – “slave” has negative connotations), successful participants in the programme will need to earn a taxable income of less than $37,000 per annum. Eligible Indenturing Servitude Officers (“slave owner” too has negative connotations) must earn a taxable income in excess of $100,000 per annum to receive said collateral benefit.
• Those with union affiliations who work on the Sabbath must be stoned to death (Exodus 31:14). Business of a politically conservative nature (i.e. god’s work) will always be exempt from public execution (and remain tax-deductible), provided the subject removes his blue tie first;
• Rape victims must marry their rapist/s (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). Of course rapist and victim must be of opposite gender, and in the event of gang rape, the victim may only marry one perpetrator;
• Gee, how amazeballs is that new peep’s Pope? He’s so rad in that he says and does absolutely nothing about amending decades of systematic, ecclesiastical cover-up of child rape – AND with a smile. Now that’s what I call same-old-same-old we can believe in.
• End Times are fast approaching, so acting on climate change is pointless, even if it was real – which it isn’t. Believing in an invisible, weightless man is one thing, but believing in an invisible, weightless gas is just silly (a first-term policy, I admit).
But yes, Senator Bernardi, I agree with you on one point – we do need a debate on when life begins, and if the state should be sanctioned to use first century ideology to distort facts. And as sure as there’s no Hell, the truth won’t be found in pre-scientific, superstitious texts – it will be found in world’s best practice, twenty-first century, evidence-based scientific research.
And finally Senator Bernardi, just as you rightfully object to be made to live your life under Sharia law, we vehemently oppose your proposal to make us live ours under Canon law. Capisce?
I have thought long and hard over Cory Bernadi’s heinous diatribe and Dan’s picking apart the nuances of what he has said (must have been a real torture for you Dan, considering it was Bernadi).
The argument that acceptance of one thing, eventually leads to something else considered really horrible, unpalatable or ridiculous is not an answer, in any definition of any form of certainty other than vaporous fear mongering. To cater to it is to fear fear itself, because we are not certain if any of the answers or possibilities are correct. That leads to stagnation and death anyway, so forget that evolutionary dead end.
Well, do we say that only People can get married. What is a person we could say? After all, if we can give personhood to a conceptual entity such as a Corporation (so why not a Dog/ Cat/ Your security Blanket?).
I could deem that it will lead to people trying to marry Corporations and will bring destruction of the Human Race because [insert any reason in here] as it doesn’t have a sex, cannot procreate babies and [insert any other reason in here]. So we already show we can and do provide personhood upon anything, real or conceptual. Any other dissenting view would have to accept that Corporations can’t be a person! That would send shivers down the spine of a lot of rich and powerful people around the World!
Believe me, I have heard some dumb reasons from those against Same Sex Marriage, that they would rail against if the same logic was utilised to stop them doing what they wanted and we know that is just selfishness or bigotry. In the Sixties is was skin colour and we now see how dumb that argument was.
The arguments are as dumb as Bernadi, Faith Based Beliefs and the illogical hatred of anything anyone fears, just because you don’t understand it.
In the end, it comes to love. Unconditional Love. Something Bernadi heaps conditions on, thus destroying the very thing he extolls he is defending.
And no, I am not for Bestiality, for the reason of Animal Welfare and their well being in protection from us, the most vicious creature on this Planet.
Well,,,, I was unaware that woman had no choice to sit on it whether it had a condom on it or not?
I’m not religious but there seems to be some pretty zealous anti whatever’s not sticking to discussion and getting pretty personal. Just saying…..
Pingback: It looks like we’re stuck with him | PNCAU
TechinBris
Good call – what is the Abbott
playschoolgovernment up to that it needed the distraction doggie out barking?Biggie
ROFL – would love to reply, but I might just scare the faint of heart…
;D
That`s OK Dianaart,I passed this message along to Woger and he seemed to understand completely.
He asked me to give you a message though,I can`t quite make sense of it but I`m sure you`ll know what he`s on about.
He said that Sponge Bob has your bikini bottom and that the nefarious Squidward had them after you lost them swimming with Woger.
I hope it makes sense to you,cheers.
I know Sponge Bob will keep my bikini bottoms safe until I return, as long that sneaky Squidward keeps his tentacles to himself.
Henry the Octopus here Dianaart,I warned you about Squidward,almost impossible to keep his tentacles at bay,but you know I`m not like that,just ask Woger.
It`s my turn for “In Water Stranger Danger Operation” watch as Woger is busy teaching someone else to swim,bye.
I don’t have a problem with abortion but are you seriously saying that because a woman cant ware a condom she shouldn’t take any responsibility. Yes Bernardi goes to far with some of his beliefs but please explain how saying people should try to live in a traditional family is a bad thing. Are you saying that everyone should inspire to live in a single parent family or a same sex family. Also wether you like it or not, by having a abortion you are ending a life, so surely you can understand that is a pretty emotional subject for some people, just because they believe you shouldn’t take a life doesn’t make them a nut. Also how many of you people jumping up and down about him being a nut because he is against abortion, same sex etc are so outspoken with muslims and there religion.
No body is saying living as a traditional family unit is a bad thing,if it is a health and happy unit especially if there are children involved it is beautiful,which is as I grew up,and how I have done my best to do the same with my family and set the same good example with my grandchildren.
But unlike people like yourself,Bernardi and all your ilk,I have taught my family tolerance and acceptance with respect for all religions,race and sexuality.
You see Andrew,of the three,religion is the only one you or anybody can choose,and if chosen for you when an infant one can change when older if desired to do so.Race and sexuality begin in the womb and can’t be changed.Up until recent times,mainly due to societies intolerance and ignorance many people tried to live the life expected from them,some fooled everyone but suffered in quiet misery,some came out in their later
years and found some time of happiness,but to many committed suicide due to the mental torture and could handle no more.Thank goodness those times are gone,and if not fully yet they will be soon.At least now we have laws to protect everyone.
You phrase the most stupid questions,who ever stated we must aspire for a single parent family,unfortunate things happen and people,for the sake of the children are better apart.Especially when drugs and or violence becomes the norm.
As for same sex family,well if two people of the same sex decided on a long term relationship and want to raise children,of course they should be able to,with the same rights and from them the same expectations
for the benefits of their children.
And no I have no problem or fear of Muslim people or Islam.
Andrew, life is built on death. Do we really have to play the blame game in everything? Life has many different circumstances and outcomes. Not everything is Black and White, but more shades of grey than you can poke a stick at.
Concentrate on your corner and most will concentrate on theirs.
I think most people who are reasonable adults are OK with people controlling their own destinies, whilst not impinging on others. Most of us pride ourselves in that and generally know when someone has crossed a “certain” line into inhumanity and that too, is one of those grey areas.
Unless you are willing to take responsibility for what someone else does want, then I suggest you mind your own backyard and let them deal with their own issues. If they ask you for advice, well go for it and let them choose if they follow your advice or not. It is called Liberty.
But always we seem to suffer those who impose their own moral fortitude (most of the time it is hypocrisy) on those who don’t see eye to eye with them. How rude and immoral that is!
BTW, this is not an attack, just a gentle reminder of respect for all, even if we do not see eye to eye.
TechinBris, “But always we seem to suffer those who impose their own moral fortitude (most of the time it is hypocrisy) on those who don’t see eye to eye with them. How rude and immoral that is!”
So because people disagree with Bernardi, he is trying to impose his view but when others have a view and want things to change they are not trying to impose their view on him or society? Everyone is shouting tolerance and respect of others views, except if in their opinion the person with the view or opinion is a “religious nutter”. When this label is applied then the persons point of view can automatically be discounted and not respected. I’m sorry but it sounds like hypocrisy right there. (As I have said before I’m not religious).
Daemon Blake, “Of course, you do realise that what he will be advocating next is ‘Corrective Rape’ as practiced in South Africa to ‘cure ‘ lesbians of homosexuality!”
Is that right? No we didn’t realise. Well then we really should be concerned!
I’m sorry, there is a real lack of respect and civilised discussion from a lot of people here.
<
@Balancenotposition
So you don't think that society moves on.
You think that medically woman should not have a say in what she does vis a vis reproduction ?
Is that what you are saying ?
Or are you saying that people should be tolerant of other people who have 19th century ideals.
Show the Taliban tolerance perhaps ….. while they shoot teenage girls in the head for wanting an education.
Or destroying centuries old carvings, stopping people from using phones and listening to music.
In short don't fight nutters like Bernadi just accept them and start heading back to the dark ages.
My personal opinion is that you should look a bit closer and your "balance" might start leaning towards those you appear to be critising.
Yes, many mothers do find they have greater emotional and behavior problems with their children, after separating from the natural parent. It is my belief, that the problems do not arise out of belonging to a single parent, but is luggage they bring from the time when mum and dad cared for them.
Yes, separating sadly never fixes the problems that caused the separation in the first place.
It is bad parents that are the problems, not the nature of the relationship.
The trouble is, many mothers, and some fathers wait too long before separating. The damage done in the meantime, is never overcome.
Violent and hateful marriages, or relationships result in a lifetime of harm.
Children lucky enough to have parents that love them, and put their welfare first, are not always a reality.
Mr. Bernadi would be better place, if he focused on domestic violence and abuse of children, within all relationships, instead of demanding we all revert to a golden age, that never existed.
John Fraser, no that is not what I’ am suggesting. Did I write that?
You wrote it to make people think that this is my view so that you could make yourself look the more balanced and civilised when you argue back against your own words.
The words have come from your mouth and on top of that they where never part of my discussion.
You back up my point entirely about the level of discussion on this page by many of the contributors.
Thank you.
John Fraser, you have, I’m afraid mistakenly concluded that I have a certain point of view that I do not.
You have not been arguing with me but your self and your assumptions, beliefs and conclusions.
The view that I have expressed and the points that I have made are simply about HOW so many views have been expressed and the poor styles of child like argument have been made. Emotion is good and needed but not when it dominates the real points of any discussion. (I know that it is an emotional topic but please, less emotion and more reality folks).
John, I hope you understand better where I have been coming from.
[audio src="https://www.dropbox.com/s/smi7jf8smcuzu8h/Corgi%20B%20Nasty.mp3" /]
https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/Share/Corgi%20B%20Nasty.mp3?w=AAAlObPXOjW73j85N7XqauJL28A1ziR5_Immp10Nekhriw
Balance, you are very busy telling us what you don’t believe. How about filling us in on what you do believe.
Balance, I hate to inform you, I am not into chasing my own tail as you are trying to tell me to do. Your point goes in circles. If it does not, then advise why it does not.
Hmmm …. Cory Bernardi seems to have more satirical Facebook pages than real ones …..
“Cory Bernardi — Gay Icon” has 2,791 “Likes” while “Senator Cory Bernardi – What an F’ing Wanker” has 67 “Likes” …… on the other hand “Cory Bernardi, Kent Town, Politician” only has 66 ……
He obviously isn’t doing something right …..