Australia’s “marriage equality” campaign triumphed in this month’s referendum under the slogan “Let’s Get It Done”. In other words, it’s inevitable, so why waste another five years arguing about it? Let’s get it done, and over, and move on to transgender bathrooms or whatever’s next.
In fact, social progress is less gay than bi: It swings both ways. After the vote, many of our Aussie readers wrote to draw my attention to the fact that the areas most fiercely opposed to the joys of same-sex marriage were not the dusty rural backwaters but the western half of Sydney. In Blaxland, for example, 73.9 per cent voted against “marriage equality”.
How could that be? In The Sydney Morning Herald, Western Sydney University professor Andy Marks decided to examine the question:
What makes their attitude so different to that of the rest of the nation? Census data goes some way to addressing that question.
Marriage rates in Blaxland are higher but so is the proportion of couples separated.
Okay. So a lot of marriage in the area. Anything else?
The proportion of the electorate’s residents enrolled in university or tertiary education is higher than the NSW and national average but the level of qualification attained lags, slightly.
Gotcha. Slightly reduced rate of university degrees. Fascinating. What else?
Linguistically, the difference is similarly pointed with 25.5 per cent of the electorate’s households speaking “English only” at home contrasting with NSW and Australian averages of over 68 per cent.
Interesting. Do all these married, moderately under-qualified non-anglophones have any other distinguishing characteristics? Say, the number of cars parked in the driveway?
Household income levels are low as are rates of home and motor vehicle ownership. Unemployment is well above state and national levels.
At which point Professor Marks gives up and says something about “an incredibly complex debate” before signing off and going back to his day job.
Can you spot the missing word, boys and girls? It begins with “Mus-” and ends with “-lim”. Officially, one in three residents of Blaxland are Muslim – which you might think is a more relevant statistic than, say, low rates of motor vehicle ownership. But no. The trick with “engaging in an incredibly complex debate” is to eschew the word “Muslim” in favor of words like “complicated”.
Until the Left’s disastrous installation of an unassimilable Moslem horde into Western nations whose standards they both despise collides with the Moslem hatred and intolerance of homosexuals…and the whole self-contradictory mess blows up in the Left’s face yet again, quite literally this time. It’s an ugly alliance of convenience that’s going to become mighty inconvenient before very much longer.
You’d think that people who piously profess their reverence for “sustainability” in other contexts would be a bit more cognizant of the minefield they’re so obliviously traipsing through here—of the inherent unsustainability of juxtaposing modern permissiveness with primordial savages irreversibly hostile to that permissiveness, and convinced of the righteousness of doing violence against it. “Coexist”? Not a chance in Hell; they’ll have no part of it, thanks, and will happily bring Hell itself to your very doorstep rather than submit to it.
The Moslem infiltration and ultimate conquest of the West, engineered and sustained by Leftist morons, is going to backfire horribly on all of us. It would be hilarious if it were just Leftist nitwits harmed by it, and no more than just. Unfortunately, we’ll all end up bleeding—again, quite literally—for their multiculti folly this time around.