Michael Cook has an article titled: New Australian book on marriage hits censorship roadblock, in the September 26, 2016 issue of MercatorNet. The very good question comes in the sub-title, namely:Why are gay marriage supporters afraid to debate?
I have another good question; it is,Why are the vast majority of the other Australian journalists not asking the same question?
It is often said that one should be cautious of asking a question to which one doesn’t already have the answer(s), so here are my answers to my question:
Enough from me - Michael Cook's article commences:
Can you believe that – not the publisher, but the printer, refusing to print the book?
One of today’s Australian headlines is “We can already see how a ‘debate’ about love will lead to violence and hate”. The article was written after a bomb threat to an LGBT FM station in Melbourne by a strong supporter of same-sex marriage and vehement opponent of a plebiscite.
However, there may a grain of truth in her prediction, judging from the way doctor, activist and author David van Gend has been treated.
Dr van Gend, a general practitioner from Toowoomba, is the author of the just-published book Stealing from a Child: the Injustice of 'Marriage Equality'. He makes a strong case for traditional marriage, attacks the “genderless agenda” and critiques the push for gay marriage. He describes it as "a manifesto in defense of society's inviolable foundation: Father, Mother, Child".
I read an advance copy. Van Gend has firm ideas, but expresses them respectfully and insults no one.
So he was quite surprised when the printer contacted the publisher, Connor Court Press, on the evening before the book was launched to announce that the company would not fill the order. "Due to the subject matter and content of your book, unfortunately I have been instructed by senior management not to proceed with printing this title," the publisher was told.
In the remainder of the article, Cook briefly outlines the various ways in which the homosexual lobby, forever bleating about intolerance to them, demonstrate the disgraceful intolerance of which they are capable in an intellectually lazy culture.
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »