Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Prof Kuruvilla George quits. The PC bullies have won

Having observed the craven tactics of the bullying, politically correct Left for yonks now, I'm still astonished at their gall. I look at them and think: Hell, everyone knows how malicious and tiny-minded these people are. Doesn't the fact that the vast majority of people (even many who purport to share their views) despise them utterly bother them even a little bit. I mean, wouldn't they want to be respected -- liked, even -- and not just feared? 

But nup. Respect, affection don't matter at all -- or at least not enough. The reason they are so fond of instilling fear is because it works. It gets them what they want: power over others. And that's all they're after in the end.

Latest scalp: Professor Kuruvilla George. He's quit his position with the VHREOC, even though the Victorian Government said he had no case to answer:

Deputy Premier Peter Ryan says Professor George is not at fault and as far as the Government is concerned, the matter is closed.

"He's made his statements on a private basis, he's made them in that capacity," Mr Ryan said.

"He was not speaking on behalf of the Commission. It's a point of view that he has expressed privately." 

But of course the VHREOC don't respect privacy. That's anathema to their primitive, collectivist "thinking". They continued to kick up a stink and created such a hostile atmosphere that the highly qualified psychiatrist ended up resigning from the commission.

Human rights my arse! What about the basic human right to hold your own opinion?

Well, they've certainly got what they wanted: complete, obedient conformity from all members. Anyone still on the board who holds eeevil conservative views on marriage -- views that are not only held by the majority of Australians, but are still enshrined in law! -- will clearly be too frightened to express them to anyone but their closest friends.

Well done, Victorian thought police. You've carried out a very efficient purge. Joseph Stalin would be proud.


  1. "Well, they've certainly got what they wanted: complete, obedient conformity from all members."

    Complete, obedient conformity from everyone is their goal. The absolute crushing of any dissent at all.

  2. Another straw man. "Complete uniformity" is not quite the same thing has demonstrating a basic grasp of the meaning of the expressions "human rights" and "equal opportunity".

    He actually signed a document that warned/complained about "normalisation" of homosexual activity. Firstly, is anyone in the mainstream still seriously suggesting that homosexuality is a choice? If not, then how is it not "normal". I honestly didn't think any intelligent, informed person was still trying to beat that drum. Let alone a guy who works for an Equal Opportunity Commission. See the problem?

    That document also had a moan about it becoming more difficult to vilify gay couples. I mean, seriously. Do we need to go over what HR and EOC stand for again?

    And let's not even go into the fear about adoption agencies being pressured to accept gay couples. HR. EOC. Again.

  3. Years ago, in adelaide, a judge famously instructed a jury that it could sometimes be appropriate, in a marriage, to use "rougher than usual treatment" to encourage a woman to have sex.

    I wonder, had we had the internet, if people would have been leaping to his defence and complaining about "complete uniformity" or "just expression conservative views"?

  4. Obviously there's a missing "not" from that earlier post. Revise, revise, revise.

  5. Its not about blocking someone's right to free speech. As a private citizen, he can hold any view really. He just cannot be homophobic and a board member of an organisation whos mission is to overcome homophobic views. Would McDonalds have a Board member who had the private view that fast food companies should be stopped? If the McDonalds Board member wrote a letter as a private citizen to their council to urge them not to allow a new McDonalds store to be built, why would the company keep him as a board member? It doesn't matter if the view is private or public, you cannot be a member of the Human Right Commission and sign the letter he signed.

  6. Australia finds itself at a crossroads where it can do the easy and 'hip' thing to support the 'gay' agenda (as the mainstream media relentlessly does) and face moral collapse, or come to its senses before it's too late and turn back to God. And no, I'm not a 'religious' person.