Catholics and children no longer welcome in the Liberal Party

It is imperative Liberal Members of Parliament be solely focused on recovering and rebuilding Victoria. A continued lack of discipline and repeated actions detrimental to the party’s ability to stand up for the interests of Victorians has left no option but to consider Mr Finn’s eligibility to represent the Liberal Party.”

– Sectarian Matthew Guy is “absolutely sick” of Mr Finn

Hugh Riminton may be trolling but his curiosity is entirely justified.
This entry was posted in Left-wing extremism, State politics. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Catholics and children no longer welcome in the Liberal Party

  1. Cassie of Sydney says:

    When I read about Finn yesterday in The Australian, I was at first gobsmacked and then I shook myself and said, “Cassie, get a grip, why are you so surprised. This is the Liberal Party in 2022, a party totally lacking in any values and principles, a party that doesn’t know whether it’s Arthur or Martha, a party that bears no relation to the party founded by Robert Menzies.” Last week in NSW, a deputy premier, a disgusting piece of filth named Matt Kean, smeared voters like me as “far-right”, “Trumpists” and “Putin sympathisers” and my local federal member, a man who desperately needs my vote on Saturday, agreed with Kean. The Liberal Party doesn’t even try to hide its loathing for it base. There’s no way, no way in the world that the Labor Party would treat its base like that. Of course, inner city scum in Labor loathe the working class in electorates like Fowler and Hunter but at least they know how to keep shtum about their contempt. But not the Liberals, they’re just engaged in a free for all of hate and loathing for men and women like me….and yet…..and yet…..they still expect us to vote for them…………NO.

    As for Morrison, trolling or not, Rimington is right.

    And as for the thin-lipped failure and all round mediocrity Groundhog Guy, I suspect Victorians will show him, once again, just how “sick” they are of him come November. I believe Victorians deserve a change of government after Maniac Dan but I don’t believe that Victorians should reward Guy and the spineless Liberals. And if they do, just watch, it’ll be a repeat of the Liberal government that governed Victoria from 2010 to 2014 and a copy of the progressive Green Liberal South Australiann state government under Marshmallow, a government that was turfed in a landslide two months ago. Voters aren’t stupid.

  2. Old School Conservative says:

    Mr Guy, many Liberal voters are absolutely sick of you too.
    Even a doofus like yourself could come up with a compromise position on abortion like “safe, legal, rare, and in the first trimester only.”
    That would certainly stir debate!

  3. NoFixedAddress says:

    The Australian “Liberals” need “good” Catholics like the child hair sniffer in chief, Lesko Brandon, or the Pelosi speaker for the dead.

  4. False Equivalence says:

    Surely you know the problem when you start by framing this as religion. The electorate is not Catholic. It doesn’t want to have religious beliefs imposed by law. That’s whole point of separation of powers and Church v State. Seriously, do you want to have the beliefs of all religions legislated or just your own?

  5. Not Trampis says:

    I told you this would come.
    Being anti-abortion is not popular here or anywhere else.

    What about the ALP. That proud party that was started by here and in the UK by evangelical christians. I cannot believe there is no-one who is against abortion.
    Fisher would be crying in his grave.

  6. Fat Tony says:

    JWH said the Liberal Party was a “Broad Church” – he just didn’t add “of Satan”

  7. C.L. says:

    a party totally lacking in any values and principles, a party that doesn’t know whether it’s Arthur or Martha, a party that bears no relation to the party founded by Robert Menzies.”

    The Liberals have decided to duke it out with Labor to win the luvvie/elite/ABC/teal demographic. They have no further interest in normals. The party has no further purpose or reason to exist. I will be voting rebs and I don’t care if Labor Would Be Worse ™. It’s time for a burn-off.

  8. Hugh says:

    Cassie, unfortunately voters these days are stupid, I believe. They’ll vote out incompetents, but only to vote another lot in as replacements. Many of them have retained some basic instincts, for sure, but frequently that’s not enough. The vast majority of them watch/listen to the MSM for their news, and quite a few the ABC, for heaven’s sake. Cancer of the brain.

    I take regular church-going Catholics as my litmus test. Good, generous people, usually in their dotage these days. Turning up every Sunday Mass to hear a priest mouth platitudes … “social justice!” … “accompaniment!” … “synodality!” … “global warming!” … “take the jab!” and other Pope Francis bullsh*t, nothing to do with the traditional Catholic faith or spirituality, or against abortion, or even that a man is a man and a woman is a woman “Male and female He created them.” : If Father quoted that from Genesis 1, the octogenarians over their cuppa afterwards would be murmuring “I think Father was being a bit divisive there!”

    It’s all frogs and kettles, although I understand that metaphor has been undermined by empirical demonstration … no frog is that stupid. But we are.

    I don’t know what’s going on in other Christian denominations around here, but I suspect it’s the same, if not worse. Monty Python parodies these days are impossible.

    With that all happening, how do we expect them to vote intelligently? And they’re the cream of the crop!

    This is the way the West ends: not with a bang, but a whimper. Communist China will walk in/ is walking in, taking over pathetic, clueless, self-aborting Australia with a flick of its demonic tail. Serves us right. But I blame my auto-demolishing Catholic Church since Vatican 2 for much of the problem.

  9. C.L. says:

    I cannot believe there is no-one who is against abortion.
    Fisher would be crying in his grave.

    And Watson, Scullin, Chifley, Forde and Curtin…

  10. Fat Tony says:

    C.L. says:
    17 May, 2022 at 10:55 am
    I cannot believe there is no-one who is against abortion.
    Fisher would be crying in his grave.

    And Watson, Scullin, Chifley, Forde and Curtin…

    Not to mention the countless babies murdered in the womb…and not even afforded the luxury of a grave, just a commodity.

  11. Boambee John says:

    False Equivalence says:
    17 May, 2022 at 8:25 am
    Surely you know the problem when you start by framing this as religion. The electorate is not Catholic. It doesn’t want to have religious beliefs imposed by law.

    Living up to your name.

    At what time has the electorate been asked specifically to support anything but abortion that is “Safe, legal and rare”? When has the electorate been asked specifically whether it supports abortion to the point of birth?

    A society without a moral foundation will not endure. A moral foundation need not be specifically Christian, much less Catholic, but it must have a recognition that there are things, infanticide (give abortion at the time of birth its correct name), murder, theft, and similar, are completely unacceptable.

  12. Lee says:

    Last week in NSW, a deputy premier, a disgusting piece of filth named Matt Kean, smeared voters like me as “far-right”, “Trumpists” and “Putin sympathisers” and my local federal member, a man who desperately needs my vote on Saturday, agreed with Kean.

    I have asked this before; how does left wing scum like them get through pre-selection, let alone into the Liberal Party?
    I know of no one who likes Kean.
    With two now left wing major political parties this country is stuffed.

  13. jupes says:

    I have asked this before; how does left wing scum like them get through pre-selection, let alone into the Liberal Party?

    The answer is obvious. The Liberal Party is a far-left party.

  14. C.L. says:

    Can you imagine what they say about the base behind closed doors?
    Hear what they say out of doors.

  15. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: In my estimation the electorate is inclined to see your style of definition as religious. Some people, for example, think it immoral to impose their ethics on others. In addition, there is the fact that very many people think it is the right of women to make the decision.

  16. Lee says:

    Some people, for example, think it immoral to impose their ethics on others.

    The left does it all of the time.

  17. Boambee John says:

    Some people, for example, think it immoral to impose their ethics on others.

    False Equivalence, do you propose that we should allow everyone to do as they please? Make their own moral choices, regardless of the effects on others? If so (and I hope it is not), then you are supporting anarchy and the rule of the strong over the weak.

    Perhaps dare to consider that your estimation might not lead to a workable society.

  18. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: no, I do not. But I cannot see merit in making illegal things that people commonly choose to do and are legal in other jurisdictions. In this case, the decision is one women have to make.

  19. Boambee John says:

    False Equivalence

    Other jurisdictions have the death penalty. Should we, if people “commonly choose to do [so]”?

    If the decision is solely for women, why should men pay child support if the woman decides against an abortion?

  20. False Equivalence says:

    Well, I’d imagine they’d be responsible because they are the father? Or do you require abortion in all cases?
    And where are you actually going with this….?

  21. rosie says:

    Hugh you are attending mass in the wrong parishes.
    My parish at home and my daughter’s in Queensland have good conservative priests and an abundance of young families.
    Cannot be the only ones.

  22. rosie says:

    Matthew Guy.
    Leading the Victorian liberal party to oblivion.

  23. Not Trampis says:

    If you are anti-abortion as I am there are two problems.
    firstly many who are anti-abortion make fools of themselves when they say no abortion even if rape or incest is involved or you have to make a choice of which life survives your wife or your unborn child. That decision is always going to be your wife.

    the second problem is the practicality . If you make abortion illegal then people with means simply go to another state. Those who do not have means go to backyard abortionists.
    The only way to reduce abortion is make people aware of what they are doing and thus change their behaviour. no change in behaviour means little change in women having abortions.

  24. Boambee John says:

    False Equivalence says:
    17 May, 2022 at 6:29 pm
    Well, I’d imagine they’d be responsible because they are the father? Or do you require abortion in all cases?
    And where are you actually going with this….?

    Still living up to your name.

    Where I am going in this is simple. If the father has no say in the abortion decision, why should he pay child support if the mother (the one you say should make the decision) decides to keep the child?

  25. Boambee John says:

    Non Mentis

    You might be horrified to know that I agree with your whole comment.

    Now, when will you start the campaign below? Surley an esteemed academic lile you would make a great campaigner?

    The only way to reduce abortion is make people aware of what they are doing and thus change their behaviour. no change in behaviour means little change in women having abortions.

  26. twostix says:

    That decision is always going to be your wife.

    Parents sacrifice themselves so their child can live all the time dummy.

    What a sick society that even that is now twisted.

  27. twostix says:

    You’re in a car wreck, you can either save your wife or children in the back.

    Mentally deranged modernists…”well, I can just make another bunch of them if I save the baby factory in the front! Sorry children, I’ve known her longer – the wife it is!”

  28. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: so you require abortion?

  29. Boambee John says:

    False Equivalence

    Your reading comprehension level is worse than that of Non Mentis.

  30. Not Trampis says:

    your wife is part of you. It is why you become one.

    you child will never be that.
    moreover in this example the baby is killing the mother

  31. Paul says:

    Not a word of support or criticism either way from the bishops.

    Can we get Pontius Pilate on the line for a comment ?

  32. Hugh says:

    Thanks, Rosie and I’m of course glad to hear this.

    I’ve seen some good parishes, but through funerals, etc, have been exposed to a heap of disasters in Canberra, Melbourne and from reports throughout the land, as well as overseas via the internet and my experience in the UK a few years back. I think they’re the norm, and the broad demographics speak for themselves.

    I’ve been going to the Latin Mass for the past 30 years and would never ever go back, even though I know and am friendly with some very devout, holy and hardworking priests in the New Rite. I was forced by circumstance to go to a regular Mass in Innisfail a few years ago. The priest was actually very good – gave a great sermon (ie not about social justice or inclusivity, but about the gospel of the day, with great traditional informative exegesis), but the music was just total trash, there were no servers, priest doing everything himself perforce in an awkward manner, demographic say late 60s average (lovely people), nothing dignified about the liturgy (except the priest’s own strong piety), casual chatting going on at full volume in church before and after the mass (because they were oldies, probably quite deaf, so half shouting to each other … “G’day Madge … bit of rain down your way yesterday?”, etc) P.S. I certainly don’t blame the congregants for this … they were jawboned into it, mostly against their fundamental instincts I bet, by idiot clerics back in the ’70s and ’80s (“Our church is a community! So make yourselves at home! Feel free to chat!”)

    It was all so sad. But the norm, as far as I can gather from many sources, is much, much worse. I’m stunned that people persist at turning up week to week.

    I agree with you re. the Vic Libs & Matthew Guy. God bless.

  33. Entropy says:

    Not Trampis says:
    18 May, 2022 at 1:57 pm
    your wife is part of you. It is why you become one.

    you child will never be that.
    moreover in this example the baby is killing the mother

    WTFFF!!!!

  34. Ed Case says:

    I will be voting rebs and I don’t care if Labor Would Be Worse ™. It’s time for a burn-off.

    Labor would be worse.
    They’re discussing the need for PostBirth abortion now.
    All Guy is saying is to Finbarr Saunders is:
    Don’t doom us to another 4 years of Andrews by jumping on your HobbyHorse and giving it a thrashing in an election year.

  35. False Equivalence says:

    Bombee: when it comes to comprehension you might consider what this conveys:

    If the father has no say in the abortion decision, why should he pay child support if the mother (the one you say should make the decision) decides to keep the child?

    In your world fathers decide whether children are born, but don’t take responsibility if the mother fails to abort?

  36. Boambee John says:

    False Equivalence

    More poor comprehension.

    I did not claim that I want it that way, I simply pointed out that if fathers are to be excluded from the decision to abort (because that is the mother’s decision), then they should be excluded from responsibility for the child if the mother (who you think has sole responsibility for the decision to keep or abort) decides to keep the child.

    They want to be sole decision maker, they become solely responsible both ways.

    If you are too stupid to comprehend that, perhaps do not reply, as you will only be confirming your utter stupidity.

  37. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: or is it Ad Hominem?

    So you say that men can retrospectively unfather a child without abortion? Or that fathers can require abortion but are not fathers if abortion is not the mother’s option?

    Do women have these options?

  38. Buccaneer says:

    I believe it’s what happened to Malcolm Turnbull.

  39. Not Trampis says:

    I see some people do not understand what marriage is.

  40. Boambee John says:

    Falsies

    Give it up. You are tying yourself in semantic knots in order to avoid my point, which you seem to be too stupid to understand.

  41. False Equivalence says:

    No, Boambee. It’s your hypocrisy that is at issue. You can – as you suggest – choose to be responsible (or not). Women cannot choose, they must take responsibility for their pregnancy which ever course they take. You’re just too selfish to admit it.

  42. Boambee John says:

    Falsies

    Women cannot choose, they must take responsibility for their pregnancy which ever course they take.

    They could, of course, take responsibility for their own contraception. Or just say “No”.

    You can – as you suggest – choose to be responsible (or not).

    The man cannot take responsibility in relation to an abortion. As you keep repeating, it is the woman’s right to choose, completely excluding the man. That is the hypocrisy I was attempting to highlight, but you are either too stupid, or too committed to the abortion “narrative” to accept the point. Probably the latter.

  43. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: Not at all. I simply don’t accept that religion should be legislated. In this case in my view women have the right to decide. But I do not think a decision to give birth can ever allow a father to avoid responsibility for that birth. Clear enough for you?

  44. Boambee John says:

    Falsies

    Clear enough, and hypocritical.

  45. False Equivalence says:

    Boambee: only if your logic is shaped like a pretzel

  46. Boambee John says:

    Falsies

    Perhaps your logic is the pretzel? Dare to consider the possibility.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.