Can't Think Outside The - Um - Box

Aussie Pol Wouldn’t Let His Own Gay Child Marry

Australian politician Kevin Rudd’s got a cold, cold heart. The Labour leader, who’s hoping to oust Prime Minister John Howard’s Liberal Party, says that though he’d accept a rhetorical gay child, he’d still keep gays from marrying.

When asked how he would feel if someone equated his views with racism, Rudd seemed unperturbed:

I accept that. You asked me a direct question, what do I believe in, what do I stand for, what’s my party’s policy, and I have to be up front with you and say that’s it, and there is a reason for it.

Rudd believes in, of course, the heteromonogamous marriage. Reason? Because that’s how it has been and that’s how it should be. “[My party’s view is between a man and woman and it’s just been our traditional, continuing view.”

Because change can only bring bad things, right?

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #election #gay stories and more


  • Rt. Rev. Dr. RES

    Australia and New Zealand – of all the “old dominions and commonwealths” must be the most conservative. European culture in Asia and all that, eh?

    The New World Order – government by corporation overriding the rights of individuals and creating fascist and often theocratic governance – has successfully destroyed the vestiges of bridled capitalism that socialism provided the people.

    Do not be surprised when the Bill Clintons and the Tony Blairs and the Rudds have betrayed their leftist parties and turned them into centrist pragmatic corporate compliant toadies for the regime.

  • Lance

    Mr Rudd may have his problems, but he’s leagues ahead of the competition. I regret that he can’t be more proactive in the area of gay rights, but there’s a lot of other stuff that needs to be fixed first and he’s the man to do it.

  • cjc

    Fortunately, Australians have a choice with a proportional representation system–voting for a party preference, then a district candidate. Luckily, there’s more than Labor and the Liberals (fellow Americans: these are the equivalent of Republicans, not “liberals” in our sense of the word) for them to choose.

Comments are closed.