Prick Up Your Ears When You Hear ‘Divisive!’


The Equality Campaign has attacked a “divisive” advertisement that attempts to cast marriage equality supporters as intolerant by citing comments on social media labelling opponents “bigots.” 

The poor little dears don’t want to divide Australians but warned the no campaign’s tactics could harm the country…

Harm the country? .

So the repellent witch-hunt waged against honourable Australians who won’t knuckle under, like Margaret Court, is not harmful?

MARGARET COURT SAYS SHE WON’T BE ‘INTIMIDATED’ ON GAY MARRIAGE STANCE

Margaret Court gay marriage controversy

And the ‘gay’ threats and thuggery against Christians is not harmful?

========

Christians threatened by same-sex hate-preachers | Herald Sun

The pro-decency Coalition for Marriage apparently has an ad which offers screenshots of abuse on social media from people it suggests are marriage equality supporters including calling opponents “homophobic maggots,” “bigots” and expressing hope that “someone kicks your teeth in.”

That’s a neat Guardian trick that, people it suggests are marriage equality supporters,  as if it wasn’t gaystapo bullies engaged in intimidation!

Then we have a queer twit named Tim Wilson, one of Turnbull’s Liberal MPs…

Gambar terkait

….who takes terrible exception to the Coalition for Marriage’s ad, because to feature the abuse in an ad “seeks to inflame discussion.”

So the clown reckons gaystapo abuse should go unremarked, when we know that cowardly, vicious bullying is the hall-mark of the militant homo agenda?Incredibly, he claims the pro-decency  campaign is “trying to bait people into being ferocious in the debate, and that’s not what we should be doing.”

At least we get a bit of sense from another MP, Eric Abetz..

“Once again, this commentary is all one-way traffic, suggesting that the no campaign is inflaming a situation when it is exposing what is occurring and will occur in the event of the yes campaign being successful.”

Oh, so that mangy thug said so, did he, and that’s the end of it?

Get real, gaystapo bint.

But let’s get real about and get rid of, that ridiculous word DIVISIVE!

Here’s another, unrelated report.

Swiss voters rejected on Sunday a divisive pension reform plan that the government proposed to address the needs of an ageing population.

https://www.thelocal.ch/20170924/swiss-vote-against-plan-to-save-pensions

Fear not!

=

=

Although I write about a lot of events all over the world, my aim today is NOT to debate the rights and wrongs of how Switzerland treats its oldsters.

It’s that word ‘divisive!’

Here’s a few instances, just from a casual surf round Google, of its use and misuse.

The most obvious current example of the latter is the controversy raging about some scum in America.

==

Foto Cynthia Marie.

,

It Was Just Divisive.’ Tom Brady Speaks Out After Trump Slams NFL …

For months now we have seen one oaf after another squatting instead of standing proudly for the Star-Spangled Banner at American sports events.

There can be few forms of behaviour more divisive, reminiscent of the racist BLM, a gang motivated by sheer hate…

– Black Lives Matter co-founder tweets about killing “men and white folks”

….which seeks to elevate one race above others!

Yet klutzes like this Big-Mouth Brady and his running dogs 0n CNN etc. DARE call President Trump ‘divisive’ when he urges Americans to behave as good citizens always have done!

——–

Now an example of the word’s proper use.

SIS: Launderette’s ‘Muslim only’ policy divisive

A vicious sectarian bigot in Malaysia, backed by his malignant ‘mufti,’ thinks it’s AOK to turn customers away from his launderette if they don’t worship the way he does.

THAT is quintessentially ‘divisive,’ yes, and primitive!

(As you probably expect, I have more to say on this, and will publish on the issue in the next ten minutes!)

But many of the cases of misuse, indeed, abuse, of the word tend to crop up as complaints against democracy.

That Swiss pension issue had a lot of people taking one side or the other in the debate.

I hold no views, nor am I much interested, but when public opinion is divided, then the obvious, and honourable, way forward is debate and then vote.

That’s the opposite of being ‘divisive.’

Yet according to those dissatisfied with the outcome, or even with what they think may be the likely outcome, it’s democracy that’s divisive.

Chaos at new airport pushes Berlin into divisive vote

Government urges Sturgeon to drop ‘divisive‘ referendum plans

 Oh, and here’s a classic!

However, given the experience that I have I can tell you that referendums are, by nature, divisive…When Can I Vote ‘No’ To More Referendums?

I have never quite understood why democratic decision-making might be regarded as ‘divisive.’

Again, the whole point of democracy is that when opinions are divided, as on most issues, in most countries, they usually are…

.

…a free and fair vote is the proper way to settle the argument.

Then we accept that we lost the argument, and unite behind the people’s decision, which, by having participated in the debate and the democratic process, we are morally obliged to do.

In a free country,  it’s only divisive when the losers on the vote won’t accept the result.

Of course, in due course, ten years or so, then a debate can be revived, and a campaign for another vote undertaken.

Life will go on meantime…

=

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

…but please note, ten years or so is a rational gap, surely, NOT the four decades plus ( 1975 – 2016) it took to get a re-run for Brits on the EUSSR.