Wednesday, May 01, 2013

VIDEO: Journalist and lesbian activist, Masha Gessen, openly acknowledges intent to destroy marriage through homosexualisation

Sometimes, we need a smoking gun photo to break through the spin-driven fog and highlight the stark truth (HT, The Blaze):

 We should pause and watch/listen to the curious YouTube Video presentation of a key clip from an audio tape of a recent Panel discussion on homosexualisation of marriage in Sydney Australia (it seems, from an ABC Australia media presentation . . . language warning!), as it reveals the sorts of radical agendas that (in at least some quarters) underlies the current activist push to pretend to a claim of a "right" to "marriage equality" and to thereby distort marriage under false colour of law:

The Blaze clips some key highlights (which I rearrange for flow):
The entire presentation is here, but the most curious portion starts about six minutes into the the audio . . . . 

Ms. Gessen’s comments on the subject seem to contradict the pro-gay-marriage party lines.
Gessen shared her views on the subject and very specifically stated;
  • “Gay marriage is a lie.”
  • “Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”
  • “It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)
As mentioned above, Gessen also talked about redefining the traditional family. This may have something to do with the fact that she has “three children with five parents”:
“I don’t see why they (her children) shouldn’t have five parents legally. I don’t see why we should choose two of those parents and make them a sanctioned couple.”
Ms Gessen is frank, and we must thank her for that. 

Now, we cannot say that we do not know or did not have access to knowing.

Which means, we have to think, soberly discuss then do something principled and effective about this.

This presentation also puts up front centre the concerns on damage to a truly foundational institution of all civilisations, that arguably is the platform on which social stability is built. It also raises troubling questions about the abuse of colours of law, once so-called "marriage equality" legislation is passed or is simply ruled from the activist judges' benches, and is then imposed on freedom of conscience, faith and moral principle.

(And, fever swamp sites and dark triad, nihilist Alinskyite activists,  when a serious issue is on the table with those sorts of potential consequences and principles at stake, to be concerned on a principled basis is not grounds for atmosphere-poisoning invidious comparison with Nazism.)

These are very dangerous trends indeed and I again draw the onlooker's attention to the main list of KF blog posts and resources on this topic:
One for sober thought and serious discussion then carefully considered action. END