Homosexual thuggery again
How's that for equal rights? Woman doctor who appeared in 'no' ad for gay marriage vote subjected to a campaign to have her STRIPPED of her medical licence
Gay marriage supporters want a doctor who appeared in an ad for the no campaign stripped of her medical licence.
A petition calling on the Australian Medical Association to 'review the registration' of Pansy Lai gathered more than 6,000 signatures in just two days.
The Chinese-born paediatrician was one of three mothers who spoke against legalising same-sex marriage in the upcoming postal vote.
The Sydney doctor claimed in the Coalition for Marriage ad that classes about gay relationships were compulsory in countries where same-sex marriage was legal.
She was speaking of the controversial Safe Schools program, of which she is a vocal opponent since speaking out last year.
The petition, on a site run by left-wing activist group GetUp!, claimed Dr Lai 'willfully spread misinformation and non-scientific evidence in order to promote the discrimination of LGBTIQ people in Australia'.
The outright attack on Dr Lai's livelihood raised concerns among other no vote supporters that other doctors could be targeted if they voiced their beliefs.
The petition alleged she broke her Hippocratic Oath and Declaration of Geneva by speaking out against gay marriage and campaigning for the no vote.
It accused her of violating a clause vowing to not allow a patient's sexual orientation, among other attributes, to affect her medical duty.
'It is clear that Dr Pansy Lai has misused her privileged position as a medical practitioner in the harmful and hateful 'no' campaign,' it said.
She 'directly caused harm' to the LGBTIQ community by appearing in the ad, the petition claimed, and accused her of not supporting her young patients.
Dr Lai did not identify herself as a doctor in the Coalition for Marriage ad, or give her name, and was only identified by the media after the video aired.
The petition said young people who identify as LGBTIQ were 10 times more likely to die by suicide, and had an 80 per cent chance of being bullied at school.
It said Dr Lai, as a paediatrician, had professional obligation to support young people who identify as LGBTIQ and appearing in the ad ran counter to this.
The petition on the GetUp!-hosted site CommunityRun was started by Melbourne IT professional and self-identified 'anarcho-socialist' Lev Lafayette.
The 49-year-old on Sunday shared a photo of himself on Facebook with Parliament House in the background.
The caption read: 'Don't tell anyone but there's an anarchist in the Federal parliament house!'
Many comments left by those who signed the petition slammed Dr Lai, who is not an AMA member, for appearing in the ad and agreed she should be deregistered.
'Homophobia and bigotry have no place in our society, and especially not with a medical professional who is working with vulnerable young people,' one wrote.
'It is overly obvious that this DOCTOR is Biased against LGBT persons In her Bias .. She clearly would be discriminant towards any patients who identify as LGBT or are having difficulty with their sexual orientation apart from Heterosexual,' another wrote.
'Her participation in this campaign is a betrayal of her oath & the young people she is supposed to help,' a third insisted.
Other signatories slammed her alleged support for gay conversion therapies, claims Dr Lai denied last week.
Monica Doumit, spokeswoman for Coalition for Marriage, said: 'In seeking to ruin the career of a doctor who dares disagree with its agenda, the same-sex marriage lobby has shown, yet again, that it has no interest in freedom of speech. '
'The petition against Dr Lai is a threat not only to her, but to any others who might try to voice their opinion. The message is loud and clear: agree on same-sex marriage or else.
'We know that if the law on marriage changes, these activists will feel more empowered to target those who dare disagree.
'We've already seen Canadian lawyers denied professional registration because of their views on marriage, and a UK student kicked out of university because his belief that marriage is between a man and a woman was deemed incompatible with undertaking a social work degree.
'The only way to protect freedom of speech is to vote "no".'
SOURCE
They don't want much
Sounds like they want to make childcare totally unaffordable. It's bad enough already
Parents left in the lurch as thousands of childcare workers STRIKE in a bid to get their pay increased by 35 per cent
Parents will be left in the lurch next week when thousands of childcare workers walk off the job in strike.
Parents will be forced to arrange alternate care for their kids or leave work in order to pick their children up when childcare workers go on strike at 3.20pm on Thursday.
Childcare union United Voice hoped the industrial action would force the government to consider a 35 per cent increase for workers.
The union said the government needed to support the industry by increasing subsidies to parents.
About 10,000 families will be affected by the strike action on Thursday.
The union said childcare worker pay rates were not in line with the increased training and qualification requirements of the job.
A Bachelor of Early Childhood Education takes four years and costs an average of $30,000.
An average childcare worker's annual salary sits between $37,000 and $55,000.
Randwick Occasional Care for Kids director Sandra Bell told The Daily Telegraph she was embarrassed to pay her staff the award wage.
'Educating kids for eight hours a day as well as tending to their eating, sleeping and nappy needs is very demanding work and $21 an hour is ridiculous,' she said.
While Ms Bell claimed the pay was too low, she said she could not increase it because parents were already pushed to their limits.
'We've already got some parents who cut back one day a week because they can't afford it,' Ms Bell said.
Parents receive an annual rebate of $7,613 per child.
Costs of childcare have risen at five times the rate of inflation over the course of a year, according to a national study by Goodstart this year.
The cost of childcare has become too expensive for the average family, with 82 per cent of parents surveyed saying they would work more if childcare costs were lower.
More than 60 per cent of parents surveyed said childcare was too expensive for their family to afford.
The majority of people sending their daughter or son to childcare was between $90 and $119 a day.
'It is disappointing, yet unsurprising that the union is seeking to inconvenience working Australians through industrial action,' he told The Daily Telegraph.
'The people who will be hurt most by this action are working women who simply cannot afford the extra pressure and inconvenience that the union is trying to inflict on them.'
The spokesman said childcare worker salary was in the hands of the national workplace relations tribunal, childcare centres and not the government.
Childcare union United Voice assistant national secretary Helen Gibbons said the government was shifting the blame.
'The government could solve this tomorrow if they wanted to,' she told the publication.
United Voice union assistant national secretary Helen Gibbons said the sectors' low wages stemmed from the profession being seen as women's work, and that they did for the love of it alone.
'Prime minister, love does not pay the bills, it does not pay your mortgage or your energy bills,' she said.
She said an application for a 35 per cent increase was with the Fair Work Commission.
Ms Gibbons said about 180 workers left the industry each week as they could no longer afford to work in the profession.
It's the sector's second walk-off this year, after action in March failed to influence the federal budget. 'Educators are not going to give up,' Ms Gibbons said.
SOURCE
Sometimes you can't win
Bowing down to political correctness backfired
SHOPPERS are outraged over a Woolworths mud cake that hit shelves on Father’s Day with icing that read “Special Person’s Day”.
The photograph of the cake was uploaded to the Woolworths Facebook page by a Queensland father on Sunday. It was quickly reshared by dozens of others who called the supermarket giant out on failing to recognise Aussie dads.
One man commented: “This is a disgrace and total disrespect to all fathers in Australia today ... How dare you Woolworths?”
Another wrote: “Please keep Father’s Day to celebrate Dads, and don’t disappoint Australia with your political “special person” cakes.”
One woman said the cake was a “slap in the face to all the wonderful dads”. “If you want to support a “Special Persons Day”, do it on any other day! So disappointed that you would make this divisive political statement,” she added.
However, others said they disagreed with the backlash against “Special Person’s Day”, saying not all Australians had fathers in their lives.
“There may be other people in their life that may have to take that role on. I truly celebrate that you have created a cake saying “Special person’s Day” because for every family that does not have a mother or father around and someone else to fill that massive role, they are 100% a very special person. Well done Woolies!” A woman wrote.
Another congratulated Woolworths on “taking into consideration other people’s circumstances”.
“My son doesn’t have his father around a very sad day for him in fact but you turned it into a positive by providing a cake acknowledging a special person so he gave that to his uncle to say thank you for being a special part of his life, all round a happy day instead of a sad one,” the woman said.
A Woolworths spokesman responded to customers over Facebook, saying the contentious photograph had been cropped out not to show other cakes that contained “Happy Father’s Day” messages.
“We’re currently looking into this display with our store teams. We want to reassure you that we’re helping all customers across Australia celebrate Father’s Day as seen from our store displays, products and recipe ideas. Cropped out of this image are a range of decorative cakes that have different messages on them, including ‘Dad’ and ‘Happy Father’s Day’. Thanks again for sharing.”
SOURCE
Landmark enterprise agreement decision gives universities power over teaching unions
Aspiring students, many with their mums and dads in tow, had travelled from as far away as Dubbo to the University of Sydney Open Day to make some big decisions about the future.
But when they arrived last weekend, they found that many of the lecturers they were relying on for advice had abandoned information booths to join picket lines in protest against the latest university pay offer.
The withdrawal of labour on the biggest day of the university calendar, which attracts more than 30,000 visitors, was part of the traditional argy-bargy of enterprise bargaining.
But the tone of that bargaining shifted dramatically across universities around the country this week after Murdoch University in West Australia gave up on routine industrial tactics of negotiation and bargaining. It took the "nuclear" option.
It applied for – and won – the right to terminate the university's enterprise agreement with staff. It was a landmark decision for a public institution, and the Fair Work Commission's judgement has shocked university staff around the country. It is also expected to fuel greater militancy on the part of unions and employers.
Until now, the hardline industrial tactic had been reserved as a last resort within the private sector by businesses including transport company Aurizon, power company AGL and mining companies Peabody Energy and Griffin Coal.
The WA decision has strengthened the bargaining power of university management overnight, something federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham was quick to promote.
He is urging university leaders to follow Murdoch University's example to modernise work practices and save money while his government cuts their teaching budgets by 4.9 per cent in 2018 and 2019.
The WA decision has opened the way for up to 30 universities across the country to remove union control on management decisions, fixed-term contracts and staff discipline rules.
Birmingham thinks there is scope to lower rates of funding growth for universities based on their ability to absorb costs through more modern and efficient staffing structures. But while he is pushing for open slather, Labor wants new laws to restrict employers from terminating enterprise agreements so easily.
If an enterprise agreement is terminated, workers fall back onto award wages which are often much lower and conditions, won over many years of collective bargaining, can be lost. And Labor and the unions are worried about an increasing number of enterprise agreements which have been terminated in the last two years.
"It can put employees and unions in the position of having to start again and mount arguments for previously hard-fought improvements to their pay and conditions," Labor's workplace spokesman Brendan O'Connor says.
SOURCE
Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here