Alex Antic (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In 1977 a group of French leftist intellectuals signed a petition for children to be able to legally give sexual consent. Now, there are some sections of society that have wanted to lower the age of consent for decades, seeking to characterise it as legitimate sexual orientation. Today, these same people argue for the use of the term 'minor-attracted person' to replace the term 'paedophile'. Why? Because the term 'paedophile', they say, carries with it too much stigma.

We cannot allow this movement to gather steam. We have to close the loop on this now, and on those who seek to normalise this behaviour. But unfortunately the filthy underbelly of leftist academia has other ideas, with one academic from Columbia University writing:

If paedophiles are no longer forced to live underground and to be secretive about their relationships, but instead their desires are recognized as legitimate, and they are guided towards a responsible expression of their desires, we might prevent some cases of genuine sexual abuse.

This recognition is cloaked under the pretence of preventing abuse. But anyone with common sense knows that the real-world impact of recognising these desires as legitimate will actually be the opposite. It's a Trojan Horse. Many dismiss the concept of the slippery slope, yet it gets proven true time and time again. We've seen it with euthanasia, COVID restrictions, climate alarmism and so on. The pattern's predictable. People like me express concern and get ridiculed—and a short period of time later, those predictions come true.

A recent SBS article described a drag-queen story-time event in Sydney that was protested. Counter-protesters chanted, 'Love is love.' Now, what does 'love is love' have to do with grown men dressed in women's clothes reading to children? Why the focus on a children's event? Can anyone explain that? Can anyone explain why a Mardi Gras mural in Sydney featured a man in a BDSM outfit wearing a teddy bear mask? How about the Balenciaga photographs featuring children with stuffed animals in bondage? Rest assured, something is deeply wrong with our culture. In the United States, babies and toddlers are being exposed to grown men dancing in G-strings in stripshow-style performances, and it won't be long before that behaviour makes it to our shores and we will be told it's 'just a colourful bit of fun for the kids'.

I expect that sooner or later we'll be having discussions in this place and in state parliaments all around the country about lowering the age of consent, and those who oppose it will be called all sorts of colourful names—'prudes', 'bigots', 'reactionaries'. We'll be mocked for being discriminatory to minor-attracted persons and not sensitive to their feelings. Then, again, we'll be saying, 'I told you so,' while the Left celebrates their so-called progress.

We live in a society that's attacking the innocence of children and the sanctity of the family, which is the foundation of our society. Without strong families with a loving mother and father, society falls apart. Today children are bombarded with sexual concepts from all sides, and parents are often ill-equipped to deal with it. Our children deserve to be protected. Yet the political class and the passive apologists of this nation are failing them. Australia be warned: you are witnessing the precursor attacks designed to lower the age of consent and normalise the sexualisation of children. I, for one, will fight it with every fibre of my body, and I suspect that millions of Australians feel the same away. To those who are listening out there, I say: rejecting this behaviour is the right thing to do. It doesn't make you a transphobe; it doesn't make you a homophobe. If men want to dress in women's clothing, that's their business. But stop trying to sexualise the children. Leave the kids alone.