Luvvies angry new bill revokes licence to attack Christians

Olympic champion Ian Thorpe leads high-profile Australians blasting Scott Morrison for ‘dividing the community’ – saying he will ‘give people a licence to discriminate’.

I’ll tell you what’s not OK: calling these tick-a-box victims from central casting “high profile Australians.”

UPDATE: From 2017 …

Coalition MPs have attacked Benjamin Law, the author of the latest Quarterly Essay, after he defended the “good humour” of a controversial tweet in which he jokes about “hate f..king” the homophobia out of “anti-gay MPs” …

Speaking on ABC TV, Law said: “I am not going to retract anything I say. It is in good humour.”

This entry was posted in Freedom of speech, Hypocrisy of progressives. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Luvvies angry new bill revokes licence to attack Christians

  1. anonandon

    Thorpies a bit of a lost soul looking for some cause to latch onto.

  2. wal1957

    I can’t even attempt to watch this crap!

  3. 59096

    Probably to be expected. He did take a long time to admit to his sexuality and probably feels the religious community rejects him. Why did he hide his homosexuality for so long I wonder?

  4. the sting

    Thorpy’s issue is with God , not the PM .

  5. Bruce of Newcastle

    So protecting Christians from discrimination is divisive?
    What an obnoxious self-righteous bunch of bigots these qwerty activists have become.

  6. Terry

    WTF are these lot telling people what is and isn’t “okay” to say?

    Who is oppressing who exactly?

    We don’t need protection on religious grounds.

    Just enshrine our right to freedom of speech to prevent abuse from these thought Nazis.

  7. Cassie of Sydney

    Once upon a time Ian Thorpe was a great swimmer who made Australians proud….however that is a long time ago and he is now spruiking, screeching and begging for attention and relevance….Thorpe cuts a sad and pathetic figure.

    Benjamin Law has accomplished nothing for this country….he is a creep and an utter mediocrity who was vomited up…his whole unfunny and tedious shtick is the fact that he is Asian homosexual…..oh and remember this is the same [fellow] who happily announced on twitter how he would like to “raaaaaape” a conservative MP and suffered zero censure from the usual luvvies…..imagine if a conservative commentator had made a similar remark…even on twitter. The fact that this [fellow] and utter mediocrity named Benjamin Law is given any media time in this country says a lot about just how far “their ABC” has sunk and also just how much of our Australian media landscape is a haven of venal, supine, talentless and mediocre scum.

    [A few edits made – C.L.].

  8. Once again the vocal minority is given a platform by the MSM.

  9. Chris M

    It’s sad when people get butt-hurt. Not such a cheery bunch…

  10. Mother Lode

    Thorpies a bit of a lost soul looking for some cause to latch onto.

    Yeah, he has not managed to marshal the kudos from his Olympic career into a lucrative revenue stream.

    Probably the most natural opportunity would have been Thorpedo swimwear, but how many blokes want to go round in a gay man’s scungies?

    After gorging himself on ta payers money at the Institute of Sport, he had a brief but splendid career in competition and now needs to fasten himself to other government teats on panels, committees, boards etc.

  11. Mother Lode

    It’s sad when people get butt-hurt

    Was that intentional?

  12. Porter

    I recall a swimming meet years ago when Thorpe was on a relay team and after the swim the team lined up for a poolside interview. All the guys were very happy with their result but Thorpe was standing back, aloof and when it came to him to speak he offered some scripted platitudes, very false. I think that was around the time he was first signed up by sponsors for mega bucks. I thought to myself what an arrogant prick. It was too beneath him to be happy along with his team. Thorpe was a mere record-breaker. He was never a great sportsman.

  13. Porter

    These two hate the religious community so why should they care what the religious community thinks of them? Then never likely to want to join one or work for 1 and would hate to do so. They are unlikely ever to lead a religious life of any sort and even if they wanted ti there are gay friendly pseudo churches around that can pamper to whatever figment of God lies in their imagination.

  14. Tim Neilson

    We don’t need protection on religious grounds.

    Just enshrine our right to freedom of speech to prevent abuse from these thought Nazis.

    Exactly.

    The best way to protect religious freedom is to protect freedom.

    I’m very sceptical of this “oh look, the government is here to save you from religious discrimination” schtick.
    This will be administered by people like Triggs or Sook-Ponce-and-Smarm, and will end up being just another weapon for a certain sector of society not known for their respect for women, LGBTQI’s or descendants of Jacob.

  15. Tintarella di Luna

    Is tyere a Licence to Discriminate Shop where people will be able to get such s licence? Clearly Ian Thorpe doesn’t understand there are laws prohibiting discrimination against any person based on their sexuality, their sexual preferences, their race, their gender , their pronouns, their disability and their age though the Human resources of most corporates do it all the time – water-logged ears maybe

  16. Scott Osmond

    Cassie, thumbs up. Forget a commentator, imagine if I a nobody commenting on a blog said something like that about a Labor or Green female. Guarantee the plods would be around for a chat quick smart. I’d also be a prop for all the rpculture stuff as well. LBGTIQP privilege. As for Thorpe a great athlete who was also an attention whore now looking for some of that sweet attention. It was as if he was the first former sports person who’s time had come and hadn’t planned for life after sport.

  17. Davey Boy

    As mentioned by Cassie, Benjamin Law wants to hate f-ck those whose views he doesn’t like.

    Benjamin Law is also a kiddies reading ambassador. IIRC, Mark Scott (now secretary of the New South Wales Department of Education) made sure Benji Boy got a gig going into schools to promote this. And NSW Premier Bjerkoff’s SFLs are quite ok with this.

    “Benjamin Law
    For me, reading does two opposite but equally important things: it gives me a sense of companionship and self-identification – the sensation that someone else understands my interior world – and introduces me to people and worlds I’d never have encountered otherwise. Good books aren’t just an education, but a gymnasium for human empathy.”

  18. RobK

    The point these people miss is that those who believe certain things that they find offensive, won’t change their beliefs because a law says you can’t express it. They are not dealing with the issue of discrimination.
    Many forms of discrimination are useful. Can you discriminate a ripe apple from an unripe one, for example.
    Everyone does it all the time.
    The ad conflates several issues. Many types of discrimination are unlawful now.

  19. Bronson

    Define ‘high profile’ and who cares what they think/say? We’ve all got opinions some of us keep them to themselves least we be accused of being ‘bankers’.

  20. Cassie of Sydney

    “[A few edits made – C.L.].”

    I see that C.L….pourquoi? By being constantly timid…we have only emboldened these fascist creeps.

  21. Davey Boy

    Ian and Benji Boy – Freaks and weirdos of the Left, exhibit no. 3,266.

  22. Speedbox

    Mother Lode
    #3264121, posted on December 17, 2019 at 10:26 am

    +1

  23. TPL001

    I am glad we have the rule of law to protect us from those who seek to cause harm. But [j]ust enshrine our right to freedom of speech to prevent abuse from these thought Nazis. Agreed. And [o]nce again the vocal minority is given a platform by the MSM. Indeed!

    Unfortunately, what is not mentioned is how guilt drives some people. And how others are driven by sadism. And, further, how others are driven by masochism. Hence, there is “no rest for the wicked” [Isaiah 48:22 says, “There is no peace, saith the LORD, unto the wicked.” And Isaiah 57:20 says, “But the wicked are like the tossing sea, For it cannot be quiet, And its waters toss up refuse and mud.”]

    Everyone is free to choose, but there is still the offer of hope, even for these dudes, in the atoning and pardoning work of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

  24. Porter

    I noticed we now have to not accept, not tolerate, but celebrate “queer culture”. And as Oriel pointed in the Australian this week, queer culture is not gay culture it is the fringe lunatics, who even most gays and lesbians reject.

  25. C.L.

    I see that C.L….pourquoi? By being constantly timid…we have only emboldened these fascist creeps.

    We have defamation laws, Cassie.

  26. Porter

    “Benjamin Law
    For me, reading does two opposite but equally important things: it gives me a sense of companionship and self-identification – the sensation that someone else understands my interior world – and introduces me to people and worlds I’d never have encountered otherwise. Good books aren’t just an education, but a gymnasium for human empathy.”

    Translation: me, me, me , me, me, it’s all about me.

    I don’t think any parent would want their child to understand the interior world of an Asian homosexual who wants to “hate f***” other people.

  27. Cassie of Sydney

    C.L.
    #3264187, posted on December 17, 2019 at 11:03 am
    I see that C.L….pourquoi? By being constantly timid…we have only emboldened these fascist creeps.

    We have defamation laws, Cassie.

    I am aware of that C.L….however the word and particularly the context that the word was used is not defamatory.

  28. Up The Workers!

    “…Mark Scott (now secretary of the New South Wales Department of Education)…”

    Isn’t that the same job that was held down by a certain convicted former heroin-dealer and spouse of the Deputy Federal Leader of the A.L.P.?

    It is a pity that Ivan Milat dropped off his twig when he did, or he too could probably have held down the same job.

  29. Delta

    Since when does the State decide about religion? I thought there was supposed to be a separation between Church and State and for very good reasons. The idea of legislation to protect against or on religious grounds is dangerous. Who decides what constitutes a religion? Suppose I decide to establish the new All Enlightened Way, will I have to apply to the government for a licence or the ATO for an ABN? Will I need to establish a business complying with ASIC criteria and so on? This is absurd no matter what Ian Gay Thorpe or his luvvies say, about which I don’t give a stuff.

    As for people being offended by being told that they are not married in the sight of God, in the (real) old days here in Australia when there was the Roman Catholic / Protestant divide, I had that argument with some Catholic kids one day when they told me that my parents weren’t married in the sight of God! What a hoot! I told them to get stuffed and that was the end of that.

    We don’t need religious anti-vilification laws. We need less regulation and not more. As has been said here, we don’t need protection on religious grounds. Just enshrine our right to freedom of speech to prevent abuse from the thought Nazis.

  30. Porter

    Tim I agree. But we do not have a single politician who understands that or is willing to argue for that. Maybe Mark Latham but he’s one lonely senator in the New South Wales parliament. I also don’t think that the average punter understands that either. Most Australians think the government should be their nanny. We’ve also had two or three generations now raised on all this anti-discrimination rubbish.

  31. Roger

    Good books aren’t just an education, but a gymnasium for human empathy.

    And if you don’t agree with me I’ll hatefuck you.

  32. Scott Osmond

    Here is a question to all the weirdos. If there is nothing wrong with you and your life choices, why are you desperately requiring them to be celebrated? why the need for all criticism to be silenced? I have no problem with my interest in the female chest being criticised or that everyone join in my interest. That’s the difference between the normally adjusted human being and the mentally ill. Even if you silence everyone and have train reading hour the self-doubt and hatred in your subconscious won’t leave you alone.

  33. Dr Faustus

    The Grauniad provides a helpful list of the horrors we face when ScoMo unchains the religious zombies.

    My particular favourite:

    This is an exemption lobbied for by the Sydney Anglican church with reference to this example: Anglican Youthworks should be able to reject an application for the First Church of Satan to hold a black mass at one of its campsites.

    #satanhatesyoutoo

    Interestingly, the Grauniads’ examples of hateful prejudice come from Catholics, Joos, Catholics, Anglicans, and people whose unnamed religion forbids contraception.
    Buddhist’s get no mention.

  34. Professor Fred Lenin

    You think women can be bitchy? Dont get poofters wound up ,they could beat females any time, nastiest bastards around they are . And if you think acrimony is bad in many heterosex marriage break ups , just wait till two poofs break up from a “gay marriage” , get the ear muffs on you will need them .

  35. Dr Faustus

    Apologies for the butcher’s apostrophe.

  36. 59096

    So it’s OK to respect the rights of sexual deviants but not the rights of Christians?

  37. Cassie of Sydney

    “We need less regulation and not more. “

    Thanks Delta……liberty quote.

  38. Davey Boy

    I noticed we now have to not accept, not tolerate, but celebrate “queer culture”.

    In FreakyWeird World (aka Clown World), s odomy is Cool, and we’re all expected to celebrate it (when at work, going shopping, watching a movie, catching a bus, …), lest we be branded thisthat&theotherophobes.

  39. Kneel

    “We don’t need protection on religious grounds.

    Just enshrine our right to freedom of speech to prevent abuse from these thought Nazis.”

    Yes.
    We (everyone) needs to respect traditional Australian culture (no, I don’t mean Aboriginal) which says it is not only allowed, but expected that people humorously point out the perceived foibles of the other. With a sense of humor and the expectation of a similar return serve, we can all have a laugh and get on with life.
    This is what made Australia different in terms of multiculturalism – with that expectation that people would give you a hard time, with the knowledge that you can (and should) “give it back” just as hard, regardless of what makes you “different”, the imports can actually make a worthwhile contribution to Australian society, culture et al.
    All this “anti-discrimination” stuff like 18c rips away this natural, seemingly unique to Australia, defense against people feeling “left out”.

    Further more, it seems to me that all the people complaining about “discrimination” are actually proud of whatever it is that makes them “different” – “proudly Aboriginal”, “proudly gay” etc. Pretty hard for me to understand how an aspect of your person or personality of which you are proud can provoke any sort of negative reaction when it is pointed out by someone who is “outside” your group. If you are proud of being “black”, how does using “black” as a descriptor of you (as in “You black c*nt!”) make you feel bad? I mean, yeah, the whole example is offensive, I’ll give you that, as it would be if you dropped the “black”. Change “black” for “tall” or “clever” or something else that you are also proud of – would you be offended by the descriptor, or by that 3rd word?

  40. Beachcomber

    Delta at 11:13 am

    We don’t need religious anti-vilification laws. We need less regulation and not more.

    Indeed. This legislation, giving more discriminatory powers to the government and activist judges, will have all of the usual “unintended” consequences. Mozlems, lawyers and government bureaucrats will use it against Christians.
    If the S.F.L.s really wanted to prevent religious discrimination they would repeal 18C and other sections of the Racial Discrimination Act. But they don’t have approval from the ABC to do that.

  41. Bruce

    @ “Up the Workers”:

    “It is a pity that Ivan Milat dropped off his twig when he did, or he too could probably have held down the same job.”

    Maybe Martin Bryant could be the new poster-boy?

  42. The BigBlueCat

    “… protect you from saying offensive things …”

    WTF? How can (or should) any law protect you from that? These people are more than happy to imply (say) how bad people of faith can be (which I find offensive – where’s my protection???) … not realising that the best way to handle offensive speech is with reason and calmness, not with the stick of the law. The Religious Discrimination Bill (to my knowledge) protects those people of faith who are being discriminated against themselves by people like the LGBTIQ+ brigade, the fem-nazis, ANTIFA and others who would attack people only because of their religious beliefs and how those people wish to live out their lives.

    The people in this ad are ignorant and are seeking to control others on their terms. They need to toughen up.

  43. The BigBlueCat

    I should also add that Ian Thorpe, Benjamin Law, and the others in this ad are doing precisely what the Religious Discrimination Act proposes to do – stop these whiny little people from marginalising people of faith. Their only complaint is that they don’t like some things that are said to them.

    If we are to have freedom of speech, then that freedom should also include the ability to offend people – I get offended pretty much every day by what certain people say, but I’m not jumping up and down demanding a law to stop them from saying offensive things, or claiming a new law will somehow embolden people to say bad things. The reality is, people will say these things irrespective of the law. These numbskulls (in the ad) only seek a legal redress on speech they don’t like. Well, boo hoo!

    But these cry-babies are certainly jumping up and down because they hate religious-based speech (with the exception of those “people of faith” in the ad, who it seems are batting for the wrong side. Why should they care what people might say to them? Why should they care if someone says to them their HIV is a punishment from God? Or that being a Muslim woman means oppression? They don’t have to agree with them. And how many times does this happen anyway? I would agree that if it becomes a point of harassment then there should be a remedy, but they aren’t talking about that.

  44. Lee

    Benjamin Law trades on the fact he is (1) Asian, (2) homosexual, and (3) to the left of Stalin, to get away with the bile and slander he espouses.

    A conservative, such as Andrew Bolt, would never get away with what Law does.

  45. The BigBlueCat

    This should cause Benjamin Law to get outraged ….

  46. Squirrel

    Preaching to the Qwire – no votes in this.

  47. kaysee

    The BigBlueCat
    #3264606, posted on December 17, 2019 at 4:59 pm

    This should cause Benjamin Law to get outraged ….

    The scenarios in this video display the hypocrisy by the wokerati.

  48. Amadeus

    Dopy and Dopy always claiming discrimination and victimhood. Oxygen thieves both of them.
    I want to get in early and declare climate change as the underlying cause for such queer things occurring – first the volcano now this LGBTIXZWDAQ eruption.
    Saint Greta should start rowing out here to be interviewed by the ABC crystal palace to express her outrage.

  49. candy

    Maybe I am reading this wrong?
    But I feel concerned about employers being able to discriminate on religious grounds on who they employ.
    It is entirely likely that a person of a different faith or non-faith can do that particular job as well as a person of the same faith as the employer.

    This can’t be right to do this. It sounds backward.

  50. You think women can be bitchy? Dont get poofters wound up ,they could beat females any time, nastiest bastards around they are . And if you think acrimony is bad in many heterosex marriage break ups , just wait till two poofs break up from a “gay marriage” , get the ear muffs on you will need them .

    Poofs are feminine men, and as such they display the very worst of female behavioral characteristics.

    As for little Benny Law hate-fucking politicians, considering he’s such a weakling that the average 10 year old girl could spin him around on two fingers, I remain somewhat dubious as to his claims of physical male domination.

  51. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    As for little Benny Law hate-fucking politicians, considering he’s such a weakling that the average 10 year old girl could spin him around on two fingers, I remain somewhat dubious as to his claims of physical male domination.

    The politician little Benny was threatening to hate fuck was a former Captain, in the Special Air Service Regiment. Somewhere about the time little Benny was rolled down the street, with his head jammed up his arse, it may have crossed his mind that he wasn’t a real success at this lark.

  52. David Brewer

    I feel concerned about employers being able to discriminate on religious grounds on who they employ.
    It is entirely likely that a person of a different faith or non-faith can do that particular job as well as a person of the same faith as the employer.

    Yes, but if the employer is in the private sector, he has (or should have) a perfect right to employ whomever he likes, on whatever grounds he likes. If he does not like gays, or straights, or believers, or agnostics, or Greens, or Liberals, he can employ someone else. If that person is really not as good as the person he rejected, it’ll be his own lookout, his business will suffer.

    The Religious Discrimination bill actually does not go nearly far enough in protecting freedom of contract and freedom of association. Nor should saying unpleasant things to or about people be a crime. Not everything that is “not OK” by the luvvies and snowflakes should be prosecutable. If the behaviour does not rise to an established criminal standard of harassment, defamation etc. then it should NOT be a crime. Otherwise the law itself will become a tool for harassment and shutting down the rights of others.

  53. Knuckle Dragger

    Getting hate-fucked by Benny Law.

    With his tiny Asian dick. It’d almost wake you up.

  54. Beachcomber

    David Brewer at 9:11 pm

    ……. if the employer is in the private sector, he has (or should have) a perfect right to employ whomever he likes, on whatever grounds he likes.

    Yes. But anti-discrimination laws have become a major means of imposing totalitarian state control under the cover of benevolence. I mean, who could be opposed to all these laws protecting the “oppressed”? A government that actually believes in free enterprise and individual freedom would be repealing anti-discrimination legislation and not creating new laws.

  55. Enyaw

    All I can say is..what a bunch of misfits ..dimwits..fukcwits..and for the most part ..very odd looking creatures

  56. The BigBlueCat

    With his tiny Asian dick. It’d almost wake you up.

    That’s a bit racist, isn’t it?

  57. The BigBlueCat

    Equality Australia CEO Anna Brown said the bill would give way to radical beliefs being allowed and commonplace.

    What is commonplace, Anna, is radical, leftist. neo-Marxist “Frankfurt School” ideology masquerading as the will of the people. And Equality Australia has the gall to attack the Religious Discrimination bill as discriminatory (in the pejorative sense)? FMD!

  58. stackja

    It seems they can say what they want.
    Equality is not for all?

  59. rickw

    All we need is a First Amendment and a Second Amendment.

    Everything takes care of itself after that.

    This layering on of laws around competing “rights” is exactly the sort of idiocy you expect from Australia.

  60. classical_hero

    Gay rape is funny.

Comments are closed.