As was to be expected, Viktor Orbán’s decision to subject Hungary’s new Law on the protection of minors, which has drawn the ire of the international Sodomy-and Pedophilia-Lobby (LGBTP) and their helpers in media and politics, to a referendum is again provoking angry reactions.
Orbán knows that with such a referendum he will totally destroy the LGBTP-lobby’s most cherished narrative, namely that this law is a measure that is forced upon the unwilling people by an “illiberal, right-wing dictator”. Nothing could stray farther from the truth: Orbán has enacted that law precisely because he knows that people are worried by the aggressive LGBTP-agenda in Western EU Member States, which they don’t want for their own country.If the referendum is really going to be held, it is likely that well above 95% of participants will vote in favour of the law, which prohibits propaganda for sodomy and gender reassignment to be directed at minors. Indeed, there is every reason to believe that in most other countries, including in the West, the outcome would be exactly the same. Outside the EU´s political and media elite, parents may generally be expected not to want their children be subject to LGBTP propaganda.
Of course, the outcome of a referendum will always depend on how the question is framed. If the question were “Are you in favour of discriminating people with same-sex attractions”, an overwhelming majority would say No. But if the questions is whether people want their children to be the easy target of recruitment for sodomites and pedophiles, the answer would not be different in the Netherlands or Luxembourg than it will foreseeably be in Hungary.
This is the wording of the questions that allegedly will be asked:
1. Do you support that children shall encounter sexual educational content that shows different sexual orientations without parental consent?
2. Do you support that sex changing procedures shall be promoted to children?
3. Do you support that such procedures shall be made available for children?
4. Do you support that media programmes which influence children’s development shall be aired without restrictions?
5. Do you support that media progammes which portray sex change shall be available for children?
Is the “framing” of such questions manipulative? Perhaps. In this case, however, it is the absolutely right answer to the manipulative framing of the issue that has been put forward, with a consistent and deliberate lack of sound analysis, by the LGBTP-lobby, the Western mass media, and the European Commission: that the law is “anti-LGBT”, that it “restricts access to correct information”, that it “forbids people to lurv whoever they want”, that it “discriminates people”, and all the usual b…s…t. If LGBTP-activists and their allies are allowed to frame certain issues, so must be their opponents.
Technically, the referendum appears to be rather someting like an opinion poll, given that if the wording is as announced, it would have neither the effect of letting a draft law enter into force, nor of abrogating an existing law. It is just an invitation to people to express their views.
While the angry reactions of pro-sodomy-and-pedophilia politicians who have been caught with their own trick generally come as no surprise, the prize for the most rabidly stupid reaction undoubtedly must go to Luxembourg’s foreign minister Jean Asselborn: he wants a referendum to be held throughout the EU on whether Hungary should continue being an EU Member State. This is just immensely stupid for two reasons: first, because even if a majority of EU citizens wanted Hungary to leave the EU, the EU Treaties simply do not provide for any procedure through which Hungary could be forced to do so. While the Hungarian referendum is about a law that can, inprinciple, be enacted or abrogated, Asselborn’s referendum would in any case have no impact at all. Second, if we start organising opinion polls on Hungary, why don’t we hold a general survey on which is the least popular Member State in the EU? It is unlikely that that would be Hungary. Quite on the contrary, it is not improbable that Luxembourg would win the contest. Luxembourg is a typical free-rider: a small and rather insignificant country that, thanks to grotesque over-representation in all EU institutions, wields a disproportionately big influence, a country that contributes little and profits a lot (their relative wealth would be unattainable, were it not for their ability to access the EU interior market and at the same time maintain advantageous tax regimes), a small country that for whatever reason thinks it is entitled to lecture much bigger and more important ones on what is “European” and what isn’t.
We are looking forward to both referendums.