Mixing beer, religion and politics (may result in a hissy fit)

Last week a promotional video was released online by The Bible Society  featuring two Liberal Party MPs discussing gay marriage while drinking Coopers Light Ale. The video titled "Keeping it Light" sparked a backlash against Coopers, though the Bible Society has stated that the brewery had nothing to do with the content.

The first I heard of Coopersgate from everyone’s best mate Graham Richardson in The Australian. Richo reckons that the big Gay/Green hissy fit and threat of a boycott of Coopers beer was “blind insistence against free speech” and “cruel as it was anti-democratic.”

Cruel, my word – but was the Cooper family denied their right to free speech? No. Quite the opposite in fact. They were given a free public platform where they could have exercised the hell out of free speech. We would have hung on every word. They just decided that the profits from selling beer are more important than going to the mattresses over marriage equality. And good luck to them.

Anti-democratic? No way. Democracy is a system where citizens elect representatives to form a government. Not under attack here, Richo.

Over on page 12 the delectable Jennifer Oriel (my current conservative crush) jumped aboard the freedom train under a heading of Gay censors don't want us thinking for ourselves and talked about a “grim week for freedom of expression”.

She did go on, however, to nail the issue squirmingly to the wall,

“ In their campaign for gay marriage, some activists have developed a regrettably totalitarian strategy. It is to target dissenters, gay or straight, and silence them through persistent bullying. 

They dislike civility and public reason because it exposes their intemperance.

… the video celebrated public reason on the question of marriage, which is an issue the PC class wants to monopolise. It targets dissenters, regardless of whether they are gay, bisexual or straight. The aim is to shut down all debate to create absolute ideological conformity.”

I agree (and I love your hair). But until the activists actually succeed in their aims to shut down all debate - this story is about bigotry and bullying.

Bigotry (intolerance towards those holding different opinions) is lawful in Australia and does not necessarily affect freedom of speech. A bigot's mind is closed to the speech of others. In a totalitarian state a bigot might achieve a position of power and use the forces of the state to silence dissenters. But Australia is not such a place.

Bullying is something we forbid in schools, regulate in workplaces but encourage in politics. Bullies are often admired for their ability to get shit done. Kevin Rudd was a notorious bully who became Prime Minister (twice). Mark Latham, Peta Credlin and Tony Abbott - all highly successful bullies. Outside of the schoolyard and the workplace – you can lawfully bully the hell out of all and sundry so long as you cause no physical harm to your victims.

The gay activists were exercising their lawful freedoms of expression and action whether we like it or not. They can use such freedom to campaign for or against anything they please. And so can you, so can we.

Bullies always pick the softest target - so Coopers Brewery became the focus of the attack because Liberal MPs and religious organisations are too hard to get to. Coopers however is a public company that relies on retailers to sell their product to the public making them susceptible to a boycott.

However, freedom of speech triumphs in the end by giving these bigots plenty of rope with which to hang themselves. In this case - the activists' actions will harden the hearts of the conservatives they should be wooing. They will alienate gay allies such as Liberal MP Tim Wilson who appeared in the video as an advocate of marriage equality.

And they alienate me.

And that matters because I am for marriage equality too – but simply because I cannot insist on freedom for myself but not for others. That would make me a hypocrite and no-one would take me seriously. As a libertarian I have to champion marriage equality and I will – but the intolerant shrieking of pack of bigoted bullying bastards ain't making it any easier.

As a libertarian I am seriously attempting to frame important issues from a perspective that is not Left or Right, that eschews identity and instead looks for common ground between warring parties. That common ground is freedom. I seek to persuade you that the irresistible force of freedom just might be able to shift some seemingly immovable objects. I do this by writing my most persuasive arguments in this blog – not by pissing in your beer.

If the hearts and minds of conservative people and politicians must be won for gay marriage to pass – then so be it. Bullying and beer boycotts will not persuade them - it will push them further away.

Instead, try inviting them aboard the freedom train (I'm sitting next to Jennifer).

More on bigots (and your right to be a moron)

While checking facts for my previous post regarding our right to be bigots, I came across this truly terrifying statement, in the once great Sydney Morning Herald, by a Professor Andrew Lynch, a director at the Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law at the University of NSW.

“Brandis presents his case as one of inviolable principle, yet we need only reflect on the circumstances of the notorious Bolt case to appreciate why free speech might justifiably be ceded to other interests. The reality is that some voices are louder than others in our democracy.”

Bullshit.

It's not principle – it is the law that is inviolable and Brandis did not invent it. And did you really just state your opposition to free speech because you don't agree with Andrew Bolt? Doesn't that make you a bigot? And since I don't agree with you and and you write for the Herald while I'm just a lowly blogger your voice is louder than mine so I guess I should be able to shut you down? (you twit).

He went on to burble “Law is an instrument through which a community's values and rights may be given effect.”

Bullshit.

This is Australia and the only right we have is to do what is not prohibited by law. When you make a law you take away our rights. How can our rights be “given effect” by taking them away? (You twit).

As for community values – do you really believe Australia is a single communal entity sharing identical values? If so – you need to get out more.

OK so this guy is a lawyer and probably doesn't believe this bullshit either. His client, the left leaning SMH, is paying him to come up with a legal argument to make George Brandis and the government look like dicks. This is politics, not law.

And here lies the danger to our freedom, folks. Politicised media pandering to an audience on the Left or the Right to prop up their falling readership. Politicians and their lackeys who will shut down free speech to win a political argument. Who will make laws not for the people but to help themselves get re-elected. They will glibly tell you that they are protecting your rights while casually taking them away - forever and a day.

These people are the enemies of liberty – treat them as such.

And remember you are free.

You have the right to be a bigot (but for how long?)

Our Attorney-General George Brandis once famously stated that in Australia “you have the right to be a bigot”. This was unsurprisingly followed by a wave of hyperventilating and bed wetting from the many opponents of the government – mostly those to my left, Mr Speaker.

What was surprising was that no-one in the legal profession backed the poor man up. No lawyers, no judges, police prosecutors or academics wanted to be seen defending the not so popular Attorney General nor those god-awful bigots. And as George was responding to a question from an aboriginal MP regarding the Racial Discrimination Act – no one wanted to be caught in the headlights on the wrong side of that rabbit proof fence either.

Subsequently George missed the opportunity to educate the public in a simple but pretty damn important legal issue, and the definition of the word bigot - a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.

So I guess it's up to me – Mr Better late than Never.

In Australia we have no specific constitutional rights. Instead we have the British system known as the rule of law. Rights tell you what you can do, laws tell you what you can't.

You have only one thing that can be considered a right - the right to do whatever is not prohibited by law. As there is no law in Australia which makes it unlawful for you to be intolerant towards those holding different opinions – you have the right to be a bigot.

You also have the right to be a dickhead, a loudmouth, a bogan, a slut. You have the right to wear your undies on your head and dance like a duck. You have the right to be a humanist, a philanthropist, an Islamist or fascist. A heterophobe, a technophobe, a baritone or garden gnome.

You are free to be anything and do anything you want until some twit makes a law that prohibits it. You don't have to stand up for George or the government, you don't have to defend bigotry or any other common human behaviour, but if you understand where your freedom comes from you will know how to best defend it.

Remember you are free - and never mind the bollocks.