LGBT backlash shuts down an Australian bridal magazine

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remember your history. Sodomy laws jailed or fined plenty of gay people. That is within living memory and within the life time of many of us. These laws weren’t finally banned until 2003. Maybe these laws have come home to roost?

You’d also have to been oblivious if you think, especially the very conservative, Christians have been flexing considerable power within the halls of power. In my view these people have made an unholy alliance with a man questionable moral background simply because he paid lip service to their wants. This is a strong sign of waning power.
 
Last edited:
The article is polemic. But after joining CAF I did meet one LGBT advocate that changed my heart towards those persons plight.

I can’t see, as of now, a solution for these polemics. But I sure have a soft heart (and following St.Benedict’s words: “the only criteria is that of the heart”) for the persons who feel that hardship.
 
adgloriam said:
The article is polemic. But after joining CAF I did meet one LGBT advocate that changed my heart towards those persons plight.
Click to expand...
LGBT plight doesn’t justify closing down businesses that won’t serve their “weddings”. What do you think?
 
anon65111186 said:
LGBT plight doesn’t justify closing down businesses that won’t serve their “weddings”. What do you think?
Click to expand...
I’m sure @adgloriam would not justify what these advocates are doing, seeing that these advocates clearly have a hatred for Christian ideals and therefore won’t tolerate them despite their insistance for us tolerating their ideals.
 
Last edited:
PJH_74 said:
Remember your history. Sodomy laws jailed or fined plenty of gay people. That is within living memory and within the life time of many of us. These laws weren’t finally banned until 2003. Maybe these laws have come home to roost?
Click to expand...
How many is “plenty”? The two landmark Sodomy cases that made it to the Supreme Court- Hardrick and Lawrence, the police were called to the residencies for non-sodomy related events.
 
theCardinalbird said:
40.png
adgloriam:
I did meet one LGBT advocate that changed my heart towards those persons plight.
Click to expand...
As in what plight? The hardships of SSA?
Click to expand...
That too @theCardinalbird (but then I’d think of those with SSA), in this case I was actually thinking particularly of the “T” part. Why? Because their plight seems, in a way, perhaps even harder (and rarer) - for involving not only dilemma in attraction but more, dilemma of the body in itself.

Like I said, polemics in media are as old as media itself - and media will continue feeding of polemics (if there weren’t any polemic media would invent it). What is noteworthy is the special difficulty of the object of this polemic. Putting the polemic entirely aside, the object is entirely worthy of analyses. And perhaps an analyses of the object requires firstly to set aside polemics.
 
theCardinalbird said:
They play as victims (these activists), yet they oppress religious freedoms.
Click to expand...
If you focus really closely, you’ll see the pattern of a polemic is always the same. It follows a rigorous mathematic, as if a law of nature or physics.

First, people are shocked and surprised. (the polemic is mostly independent of its object). Lastly, they get ‘caught up’ in the polemic, by commenting the polemic and adding to the polemic.

Polemic is a vicious cycle, an infernal machine.
 
Last edited:
dddddd said:
What a shame that magazine can’t remain to depict couples who will regularly trample Humanae Vitae for decades.
Click to expand...
I never read White, the magazine in question. In what way was the periodical trampling Humanae Vitae.
 
@theCardinalbird but I don’t care about polemics. I care for that person I mentioned. I hope she’s doing alright.
 
Last edited:
anon65111186 said:
We didn’t all vote for Obama.
Click to expand...
I love how a news article about an Australian bridal magazine, has turned into all about American politics.

32000 copies is not that big a circulation, I would say, its decided to close its doors for financial reasons. And they are that a good portion of its advertisers have pulled out.
 
Last edited:
Roseeurekacross said:
I would say, its decided to close its doors for financial reasons
Click to expand...
Part of their official statement included:
The result has been that a number of advertisers withdrew their sponsorship out of fear of being judged, or in protest. We have had to recognise the reality that White Magazine is no longer economically viable.
Click to expand...
So it is sort of financial difficulty brought on by the targeting of, according to the couple, the magazine, the team, featured couples, and advertisers.
 
I’m struggling here to find relevance in your post to the original story. Care to enlighten us what Lawrence v. Texas (2003) and the election of President Donald Trump have to do with a boycott in Australia?
 
dddddd said:
I voted for Trump and I think we were had and he’s a fraud.
Click to expand...
Uuuhhhmmm…
What does Trump have to do with an Australian bridal magazine? Does he like totally own it or something? 🤔
 
PJH_74 said:
In my view these people have made an unholy alliance with a man questionable moral background simply because he paid lip service to their wants.
Click to expand...
The other option certainly wasn’t leaning to what they wanted.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top