Why is the Australian government debating whether to fund hate speech?

Why is the Australian government debating whether to fund hate speech? By Andrew Street in the Sydney Morning Herald (very PC). The PC are saying opposition to gay marriage is hate speech, so funding the “No” side of the upcoming plebiscite is to fund hate speech.

In 2013 the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Intersex Status) Bill 2013 was passed, meaning that it is illegal to discriminate “on the basis of sex, marital or relationship status, pregnancy or potential pregnancy, breastfeeding, family responsibilities, sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex status.”

This little problem, incidentally, is why there was a push to suspend our anti-discrimination laws for the duration of the plebiscite – an option which was immediately ruled out by Attorney-General George Brandis in February, who pointed out that “There are very obvious practical problems with that, among them… that most anti-discrimination laws in this country are laws of the states, not the Commonwealth.”

The fact that a No campaign would appear to be arguing for something which is prima facie illegal is just one more problem for those seeking to prevent same sex marriage being recognised in Australia, along with the enduring problem that there’s no sane reason to deny Australian citizens equal rights because of their sexuality, and the fact that those most strongly advocating the No case are not exactly the most charming, persuasive and charismatic people the country has to offer.

What tolerance and understanding on display there. The PC crew know the right answer, so everything else is hate speech — just shut up.

Incidentally, last night the Federal Government approved $7.5m to fund each of the sides of the plebiscite. Imagine funding both sides! PC outrage will ensue…