CB Poll: Should this controversial election spot from Bob Katter’s Australia Party be banned?
March 12 2012, 9:45 pm | | 13 Comments
Bob Katter’s Australia Party is using marriage as a wedge issue in the lead up to the Queensland state elections, releasing a video warning voters that the leader of the LNP, Campbell Newman, supports gay marriage.
Should this spot from Bob Katter’s Australia Party be banned?
13 Comments
No. You can’t go round banning ads. Next it’s burning books. The ad expresses an opinion – which may be short-sighted or outdated – but the man is entitled to his opinion. Sure, it’ll will galvanise people on both sides of the argument. But it’s not going to change anyone’s mind one way or the other.
Why is everybody giving this ad so much free publicity? Take the poll down, stop sending it on.
BD,
It’s really easy to dismiss this type of thing and argue that we shouldn’t give it the time of day, but if you disagree with the ideas it supports then you should say so. Ignoring this type of crap isn’t a solution. Negative ideas and attitudes like the ones this ad clearly condones fester in the broader population’s complacency. When people, like you BD, say; “What’s the big deal? I don’t care if someone is gay. They can get married if they want, whatever, why are we even talking about it?”
Nothing happens.
Then outspoken bigots have their voice heard with no context nor opposition.
Would it be banned or would we be up in arms if the ad were opposed to equal opportunities for women in the workplace or contesting Aboriginals’ rights to vote?
Good on you CB for at the very least asking the question.
How we respond is what matters.
Like it or not the original definition of marriage comes from the bible….
“A marriage is the union of a man and a woman”.
It have been around a long long time.
Of course gay people deserve all the same rights and responsibilities as straight people.
But they need to find another name for that union.
Then I think more people will be comfortable with it.
Cat amongst the pigeons,
Sorry, who are “they”?
Religion has nothing to do with it mate, it’s about respect and under the law of our nation what that union represents.
Do you think the “Church” hasn’t adapted the words of the bible over time to fit with the modern world? Or at very least fit with their own needs.
Don’t use the bible or the fact that “it’s been around for a long long time” as a smoke screen for your obvious latent biogtry. Women hadn’t been given the right to vote for a long long time either.
It’s not “they” man, it’s “we”.
I was not aware of English word definitions in the Bible. Are we quoting from the original scrolls of the apostolic writers? Or the King James version? Sorry Cat but your slip is showing….
@Cat amongst the pigeons
Aside from the fact that the concept and the terms of marriage predate Christianity by a ‘long long time’, and consequently the collection of stories called the bible as well (obviously there are a number of versions, but we’re pretty sure from your comments that yours is the King James), where do you get off telling people of any stripe what they can and cannot call their unions, and why on earth would any people, other than those making the choice to create said union, need to make more people ‘comfortable with it’.
Personally, we’re not comfortable with your mangling of history in your blog comment, but we will defend to the death your right to make a fool of yourself whenever you have the desire to practice your writing again, or at least your typing.
As far as Mr. Katter and his mob of neo-Neanderthals, which would actually be a far more accurate name for their party, they should have the right to do the same, so long as their free speech does not cross the line into hate speech, to which their ad campaign comes dangerously close.
Let ’em defame, we say. They succeed in exposing their ignorance and bigotry, bringing about the long overdue changes to the right to marry for all people about just that much quicker.
“A marriage is the union between a man and a woman”.
Find me the verse. It’s not there you knob jockey.
To all of the above….
I stand corrected.
Respect.
Such a shocker hey. But how on earth could you ban it? Who on earth would produce it or pay attention to it is another matter entirely. Pretty pathetic.
we in Australia view marriage as a sacred ceremony between a man and his wife, if a gay couple want to form a union and live together that’s fine, but they can’t get married, it’s really the terminology, call it a union, partnership, agreement, contract, understanding, cohabitation but not marriage.
No Brigand, it is you who views marriage as a sacred ceremony between a man & his wife. The problem is, you don’t have exclusive rights to either the word marriage or the concept of marriage. If a couple (gay or straight) get married, it has nothing to do with you.
Come on everyone has a right to have there opinion, it called freedom of speech, it seems to me freedom of speech in the modern austrslia equals hatred, bigots racists, if katter has his views accept it, you have your views an i except that. But you guys are missing the whole point, you freedom of speech, freedom of choice is at stake here, The alp and lnp are lairs , thieves and risong the cost of living for the own greed, selling all our farming land to china, india etc, i voted alp all my life not any more, katters tge way to go. To show alp and lnp enough with the nanny states. Where not crimes, read there policies it shocking, dont make a decision based on here say research, keep voting these parties in and you wont be worried about hetro or gay rights, because all you will be doing os finding out how to meet your bills and feed your family,