June 16th 2018


  Buy Issue 3022
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY Reflections on the bicentenary of the birth of Karl Marx

EDITORIAL Significance of report into shooting down of MH17

CANBERRA OBSERVED Lee Rhiannon: too Bolshie or not Bolshie enough?

POLITICS Wading further through the Greens party bilge

ECONOMICS Vatican document nails some of the causes of the GFC

POLITICS Greens promise to keep Australia legally stoned and welfare dependent

ENVIRONMENT Scientist sacked for challenging claims of demise of Great Barrier Reef

REDEFINITION OF MARRIAGE Humpty Dumpty has his way with words

CHRISTIANITY AND SOCIETY Tradition, Christianity and the law in contemporary Australia

EDUCATION Ladybird, ladybird: adventures in literacy

OFFICE LAUNCH NCC Sydney: a new chapter in a continuing story

ASIAN AFFAIRS Indonesia takes religious syncretism to the nth degree

WA RALLY FOR LIFE 3300 crosses in Perth poignant reminders of abortions

HUMOUR News snippets

PHILOSOPHY Bendigo initiative

MUSIC Gain is loss: Where is there left to discover?

CINEMA 2001: A Space Odyssey: Unsurpassed 50 years on

BOOK REVIEW The house that could not stand

BOOK REVIEW Australia's first official war historian

LETTERS

EDITORIAL China's pivotal role in Trump-Kim summit

Books promotion page
FONT SIZE:

POLITICS
Wading further through the Greens party bilge


by Chris McCormack

News Weekly, June 16, 2018

The Greens party platform is replete with outlandish statements such as, “iconic ecosystems like the Great Australian Bight are under threat from exploration by oil and gas companies”.

They would “create a new Environment Act as the next generation of strong national environment laws, expanding federal protection and putting tough limits on development to protect nature”. This would threaten any development of vast swathes of Australia’s land and sea.

The Greens would increase the number of refugees from 13,750 to 50,000 per year. While Australia can certainly cope with more people, one caveat would be necessary to avoid social mayhem: that those who resettle in Australia do not predominantly settle in Sydney and Melbourne. In 2011, 85 per cent of migrants lived in a major urban area. A decentralist policy would need to be implemented to avoid congestion and an infrastructure playing catch-up, with the benefit of boosting regional and rural economies.

The Greens will “increase our overseas aid contributions to 0.7 per cent of GNI (Gross National Income) over the coming decade” with “a greater focus on strengthening health systems to address sexual and reproductive health” and “increase[d] transparency, accountability and effectiveness of gender equality in our aid program”.

Funding “sexual and reproductive health” is a euphemism for funding access to abortion on demand. However, this means that the “gender equality” the Greens purport to advocate is undermined by the fact that in many developing countries, “sexual and reproductive health” funding is used to carry out sex-selective abortions where girls are the prime targets because males are preferred for economic or social reasons.

Ignoring the immorality of directing “aid” to kill predominantly girls in developing countries, the Green’s policy overlooks the fact that the Government would have to borrow even more money to meet an increased aid budget.

The Greens also want exclusion zones around abortion practices: these would prohibit anyone opposed to abortion from the right to peaceful protest. The Greens also believe in the “right [to] legalised access to physician assisted euthanasia”.

While advocating for the killing of unborn babies, the Greens will concurrently “end the cruelty of live animal exports”. This would destroy the live animal export trade and farmers’ livelihoods. This is an ideological rather than a practical (that is, effective) approach to animal welfare.

According to the Greens, “sexual and gender diversity benefits our society”. They want “adequately funded children’s and young people’s services, particularly for addressing … sexual and reproductive health” (abortion and contraception) and “dedicated programs and services to address the needs of young people from diverse communities, including multicultural and LGBTIQ youth” (“Safe Schools” and similar sexually explicit and gender-questioning programs).

The Greens would funnel taxpayer money into publicly funded gender-transitioning surgery, citing a “right to bodily autonomy and physical integrity” for “gender diverse people”. They want “recognition of legal parentage for children with same-sex attracted and gender diverse parents”, potentially locking out biological parents from legal rights to their children; and “increased funding to establish and expand gender clinics at hospitals and health services”, which exist to send children down the path of life-long and irreversible chemical castration and bodily mutilation that comprises “gender transitioning”.

Furthermore, “sex or gender information in official records [would] only be recorded where necessary”, would include any self-identifying gender and could “not reveal a person’s past sex or gender identity”. A Greens government would appoint a “dedicated Commissioner for Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Intersex Rights” and “a federal Office for LGBTI People".

To ensure complete capitulation to the LGBT agenda, the Greens would remove “religious exemptions from anti-discrimination laws”. They support laws allowing male-born athletes to compete in female sports teams, which unfairly discriminates against females. And “a ban on reparative sexual orientation and gender identity conversion therapies” would punish those who want all options available to them in treating gender dysphoria and unwanted sexual attraction.

The Greens believe “imprisonment to be an absolute last resort for children and young people who have committed serious violent or dangerous offences”, which would no doubt embolden minors, safe in the knowledge that they would receive a slap on the wrist for such offences.

The Greens would entirely remove the capital gains tax (CGT) discount over a period of five years. It is unclear whether this would apply to all investments or only to investment properties. To be fair to existing investors who based their decision to invest on existing laws, it would need to apply only to investments made in the future, or risk destroying the long-term investments of many of Australians, 1.7 million of whom have investment properties, not to mention many others who banked on a 50 per cent CGT discount when choosing other forms of investments.

The Greens’ 2016 election platform states: “When wealth and power are concentrated in a few hands, democracy cannot flourish.” Yet, as if to illustrate their hypocrisy, they voted for the Government’s voting reform bill in 2016, which aimed to limit the ability of minor parties to get elected to the Senate by abolishing group voting tickets and doubling the price of candidacy from $1,000 to $2,000.

This encapsulates the Greens; their platform is full of insidious ideology masquerading as virtue, but when it comes to the crunch, they will ditch their “standing up for what matters” mantra to secure more power in their hands.




























The perfect gift for
the thinker in the family.
The Best of News Weekly: 2014-2016, 320pp, $35


Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

EDITORIAL China's pivotal role in Trump-Kim summit

COVER STORY Reflections on the bicentenary of the birth of Karl Marx

FOREIGN AFFAIRS Beijing goes 'boo', Qantas gets in a flap

EDITORIAL By-elections a trial run for next federal election

CANBERRA OBSERVED Lee Rhiannon: too Bolshie or not Bolshie enough?

EDITORIAL Significance of report into shooting down of MH17

POLITICS Wading further through the Greens party bilge



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2017
Last Modified:
April 4, 2018, 6:45 pm