David Campbell MP ~ Stepping Out
In an age where transgender, same sex and polyamourous relationships are rapidly becoming the norm, rather than the exception, one wonders why the advent of a parliamentarian being filmed stepping out of a gay night club would cause such a grand scale commotion as it has.
One must ask why in this day and age, it is a forgone conclusion that a gentleman has homosexual tendencies simply because he opts to patronise a gay night club. One is entitled, after all, to take leisure as and where one pleases. Gay night clubs aren’t exclusively built for the sole patronage of homosexuals, but rather as a place where those who enjoy the companionship of their own gender, should they opt to, can do so without judgement from those who aren‘t comfortable with such. One needn’t be gay in order to patronise a gay bar or night club; many heterosexuals patronise such, preferring, not necessarily the sexual tendencies of those patrons who are gay, but opting for the far more laid back companionship or company of a more open-minded people set.
In a country where personal liberty, freedom of speech and tolerance to alternative lifestyle and are proclaimed to be at the fore of the Australian ethos, it is somewhat surprising to find that David Campbell’s choice of night spot relaxation should cause the furore it has.
Patronising or leaving a night club of homosexual orientation does not make one homosexual. If anything at all it marks one as accepting of those who opt for alternate lifestyle and sexuality and one must ask how this could possibly be perceived as a bad thing. It is pure speculation and an extremely bigoted mindset on the part of all who state or insinuate that David Campbell has immersed himself in homosexual activity of any kind simply because he patronised a gay bar. The fact that he may, or may not have done so, is of little consequence. Favouring ones own gender sexually is not an incriminating offence; indeed, it is not an offence at all. Australia is a free country and all it’s citizens, even parliamentarians, are entitled to take relaxation in any way they please and do so. The private activities of an individual are and should remain precisely that; private.
David Campbell has harmed none. His reputation has been tarnished by an over-zealous photographic journalist keen to make a career for himself. One must ask oneself, who is the one of questionable character here? Indeed, in the event that David Campbell does have sexual leanings towards those of his own gender and if indeed he has or intends to partake of such, that is a matter which can only rightly and fairly be worked out between himself and his wife. No-one else is or can in any way be affected by such. He is the same man he was the day before yesterday, with the same capabilities and abilities to do the same job he always has. If anything he has illustrated a tier of his own decency, by doing what he perceived to be the correct thing in handing in his resignation without being asked. The laughable thing about this, however, is that he could not rightly be discriminated against for his private leanings and asked to hand in his resignation, if he had not already done so. That would be abject sexual discrimination, if indeed the perceived allegatory insinuations about his sexual character are correct. Certainly patronising a gay night club, or harbouring sexual leanings towards one’s own gender is not cause for dismissal or resignation in any level of business or Government.
Indeed, the Australian Government recognises same sex relationships on a monetary level, in so far as those who are involved in same sex relationships must declare such in any application for Government benefits and such benefits are affected accordingly by the relationship; so too then, in making a legal recognition and by extension acceptance of same sex partnerships on this level, surely it is beholden upon the Government to be equally understanding and accepting of same sex activities outside of any financial agenda.
If this persecuting situation continues in the manner it is and is not dealt with succinctly and fairly by David Campbell‘s own party, the potential this event holds for future politicians to be hung on any petard of any journalist’s choosing with the click of a camera and a chain of Chinese whispers which need not be proved to have the desired effect on public perception, is a somewhat unsobering thought. The issue here is not whether David Campbell is gay, bi-sexual, bi-curious or simply prefers the companionship of his own gender, but rather, that he is being unfairly crucified when indeed he is the same man that he always was. The difference now is, the entire country has been given a birds-eye view into his private life, a place where every man should have sanction. It is so very easy to stand in judgement of another’s personal choices while the finger is being pointed at them, yet if the finger were to turn upon any one of us and reveal the personal secrets we each hold, how many of us could and would stand and face the same level of persecution we would receive from any who would stand in judgement and crucifixion of those choices we have made?
If the use of a Government vehicle is of such important issue, ask the man for reimbursement of fuel costs. Meanwhile, do let’s get back to focusing on the important issues!
All content (c.) 2010
nice blog , do you see this is the future?
good motives , do you see this is the future?
Hi there, thankyou. Like to answer you – just to clarify your query – about which aspect of the article are you asking ‘do I see this is the future?’ Cheers, Tahala. 🙂
Thankyou kindly 🙂
Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you penning this
write-up plus the rest of the website is very good.