In the homophobes’ continuing efforts to protect themselves from the horror of seeing gay people get married, they used to at least be able to pretend that they had popular support for their bigotry. There used to actually be some kind of debate between the principle of majority rules and protecting the basic human rights of minorities.
But even that has now been taken away from them:
In 31 of the 32 demographic cohorts measured, a majority of Australians support same sex marriage with only the over 50’s being the odd cohort out, where in that unique case the against held a plurality lead of 49 to 45.
I mean, we always knew that, barring a theocratic revolution, they were going to lose in the long-run, and that their efforts to keep this generation of gay people down were even pettier and more spiteful given that, deep down, they knew it. But who dared to predict that they’d lose popular support so quickly?
How are they going to justify governments denying gay people equal rights now? And how are our mainstream politicians going to justify not voting for the Greens’ Equal Marriage Bill?
UPDATE: Really, where does this leave the bigots? The pro-equality side has never relied on populism: we’ve simply argued the basic position that governments should not discriminate against people on the grounds of gender unless there’s a very, very good reason – and no such reason appears to have been found by the homophobes.
But they’ve relied on “we’re in the majority” quite heavily. With that gone, what are they left with? Their stupid “definition of marriage” argument, which would disappear the moment the change was legislated? Their frequently-contradicted every time a post-menopausal woman is married “marriage is only for couples who can procreate” line? Their scary if-taken-seriously “parliaments should enact the provisions of Leviticus” demand?
They’ve got nothing – except organised fundamentalists who are prepared to fight very, very dirty.
UPDATE #2: There will be a National Day Of Action on 1st August. Please do what you can. (Via Ben in the comments.)