How “love” & “equality” became hate and inequality

There is not an unloving bone in Margaret Court’s body.

Remember when “love is love” was the mantra of the campaign to change the definition of marriage?

It’s spokespeople in the so-called “marriage equality” organisation said no one else’s freedoms would be affected.

When I begged to differ in numerous media interviews throughout the 2017 campaign it was asserted that I was just throwing out “red herrings” and “furphies” that had nothing to do with “marriage equality”.

These assertions were of course lies. The latest proof point is the continuing calls for Australia’s greatest tennis champion, Margaret Court, to be punished for not conforming to the new cultural norm.

And punish Margaret they must, in case any of us less famous people get any ideas and start speaking our minds.

Their chief weapon is to typecast those of us who disagree with redefining marriage as evil “haters”. Bad people.

Overnight Tennis Australia said they would “recognise but not celebrate” the 50th anniversary of her clean sweep of the four grand slam opens.

This is in stark contrast to the feting of Rod Laver who achieved the same feat in the men’s game in 1969.

He was flown out from America by TA for the Australian Open and given the red carpet treatment.

A lavish dinner coinciding with the US Open in New York was also thrown for him.

But Margaret? “Not celebrated”.

Where is the sisterhood when you need them? Are their principles of female empowerment dispensable if one of their holds the wrong views?

I’ve had the privilege of knowing Margaret over the years and visiting her thriving church in Perth.

It is a large congregation with a disproportionate number of young people.

There is not a hateful bone in Margaret’s body.

"I love them (homosexuals), I have them in the church here," she told Channel 7.

"I have nothing against homosexual people, but that is my beliefs on marriage."

Like me and almost five million other Australians, Margaret believes that marriage should be between one man and one woman. This is what the Christian Bible says and is what the West believed up until about five minutes ago.

Her views are hardly extreme. But what is outrageous to Tennis Australia and cultural elites is that Margaret dares to talk about them. In public.

It’s been almost two years since Australians voted to redefine marriage in law. They were told it was only about the love and equality of two people.

What they didn’t tell us was that it was really about hate and inequality towards anyone who held to the pre-2017 definition of marriage.

This hate and inequality towards dissenters is now weaponised through the force of anti-discrimination laws.

It is weaponised culturally providing a permission structure for the likes of Tennis Australia and Rugby Australia to make examples of people like Margaret and Israel Folau.

These are perilous times for those who don’t wish to toe the line. So much for “no consequences”.

Martina Navratilova, the American tennis great who is in a same-sex marriage, wants Margaret’s name scrubbed from the Margaret Court arena at Melbourne Park.

She tweeted disingenuously yesterday:

“Nobody is erasing Margaret Courts legacy (sic)

“Celebrating it is another thing altogether.

“I cannot celebrate someone who thinks I am less than. I cannot and will not.

“This is about human beings, not about political correctness.”

Where to start with this nonsense?

None of us who believe marriage is a man-woman project believes homosexuals and lesbians are lesser people.

Christians are forbidden to think of other humans in this way. But it’s been convenient to define the terms of the debate as hate versus love.

That there is widespread animus towards gay people has been the great lie of the LGBTIQA+ activists.

Millions have been confused into thinking that disagreement on an issue of public policy is bigotry and homophobia, an irrational fear of homosexuals.

This has been a powerful emotional stick which activists have used to beat people into supporting their policy objectives.

Intellectually it is lazy, and it shuts down legitimate discussion about the consequences of the LGBTIQA+ political agenda.

These consequences range from compulsory gender-fluid indoctrination of children at school through to limitations on freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

There was some good news this morning. Tennis Australia phoned Margaret and asked for a chat over the weekend at the Federation Cup in Perth.

Let’s hope common sense prevails.

Let’s hope we can begin to untangle our nation from this rainbow spider web which artificially pits people against each other.

 “I love my nation, I played for my nation, represented my nation,” Margaret told the Herald Sun today.

“It was a huge part of my life. Back in the amateur days you didn’t do it for money, you did it because you played for your nation.”

Until now, Australians have always been mature enough to agree to disagree civilly.

Political correctness and rainbow identity politics has poisoned that well and changed one of our best attributes as a people. They’ve caricatured people as “haters”.

So much for “no consequences”.