Last night the two likely contenders for Premier of Western Australia answered questions on Judeo-Christian (Australian) values.
Some answers were objective and well reasoned, some answers were subjective and willfully ignorant and subsequently stupid.
Should we or shouldn’t we kill people is the basic question. Let’s not over complicate it. Are some lives worth less than others which we rightly hold sacred? This shouldn’t be complicated, but in a post-modern philosophy such as frequently guides the left, apparently all wisdom has a use by date.
Mr Barnett answered that he does not support euthanasia, although he has sympathy for people who have “painful and long deaths”. I’m not sure why the latter part needs clarifying, but it’s fair to assume regressives don’t automatically assume people right of them on the political spectrum presume basic human compassion in their ideological opponents.
“I think palliative care and relying on professional moral ethics and religious standards and ethics is the way to go.”
This is good because it’s objective. His position is based on measures beyond himself or someone else.
Mr McGowan preferred to call it a fancy name. You can always spot a lefty because they have trouble accepting reality, and instead need to repackage and misrepresent their agenda, recognising the inherent revulsion we naturally have to killing people. He argued that he supported “assisted dying” (euthanasia) because his of personal experience of the death of a relative.
This is bad because it’s subjective. Any decision clouded by emotions is obviously not clear thinking. It’s called situational ethics, and means you have no standards – you may find justification to do anything in the right circumstances.
This is stupid. Things that are morally wrong are always wrong, for example killing people in cold blood who pose no active threat to your safety.
Human life: good.
Killing people: bad.
And then there’s State-sponsored child abuse, by which I mean “Safe” Schools. You can’t ever write that without the quote marks around safe, because it’s a quote, not an accurate description of the content or purpose. It’s child abuse. Refer to my previous post.
One pastor asked the candidates for WA Premier, “Will your party commit to removing this highly controversial and sexualised program from all Western Australian schools?”
Mr McGowan regurgitated the propaganda about it being necessary to stop bullying against people suffering sexual and/or gender confusion. This is undoubtedly an increasing statistic with thanks to the “Safe” Schools curriculum subjecting very young children to outrageously inappropriate concepts and idiotic ideas.
Do we need a separate curriculum for fat kids, kids with glasses, and kids who get good grades without trying while sucking at sport? How much money does the taxpayer have to silo efforts to stop bullying? Most principals prefer existing, authentic anti bullying programs. So even if this weren’t Marxist gender theory propaganda posing as an anti bullying program, it’s an attempt to fix what ain’t broke.
Mr McGowan backed the program and said any high school that wants it should have it. Except that it starts from age 4, Mr McGowan. No, any school that wants to abuse children and usurp parental rights should NOT have that ability. They should be prosecuted for child grooming.
Thankfully, Mr Barnett gave West Australians an alternative, albeit a disappointingly uninformed opposition.
“From my knowledge of it —and I’ve never read the material but I’ve heard fellow members of Parliament describing it — to me it encourages experimentation, promiscuity, to very young children,” Mr Barnett said.
Ah, yeh. That and a heck of a lot more reckless sexuality that is the complete opposite of how any reasonable person should be raising their children. But that’s the point right there. Parents raise children, not governments. Get your evil ideology out of our schools and teach reading and writing – for once.
So call, email, or write a letter to every candidate in your electorate asking them as a concerned citizen if they support euthanasia and Safe Schools. More to the point, ask them if they will represent you in fighting those immediately and relentlessly and commit to voting against them at every opportunity if elected, as you consider these deal-breaker issues.
And then vote for the candidate who won’t agree to killing people and abusing children.