Sep 11, 2017

Secret documents reveal the No campaign’s strategy to manipulate you

Step 1: talk about freedom. Step 2: talk about the children. Step 3: mention the 260 genders that will result from a Yes vote.

Charlie Lewis — Journalist

Charlie Lewis


Same Sex Marriage Australian Christian Lobby

 We've been told many times that the marriage equality plebiscite isn't actually actually about same-sex marriage at all. Instead, what it's "really" about is political correctness, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gender fluidity, boys in dresses and potential marriage to national monuments. This is not accidental. As a Crikey spy has found out, it's the No campaign's central strategy.

Our tipster got curious after seeing a link to the website of No campaigners Coalition for Marriage on Senator Eric Abetz's Twitter feed and decided to get inside information by volunteering to help. She was subject to a group induction/interview over Skype, and took some screen shots of the material they were sent. 

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

49 thoughts on “Secret documents reveal the No campaign’s strategy to manipulate you

  1. Draco Houston

    What a bad argument. I’m pretty sure the general public know full well how marriage works, seeing as they’re probably married themselves. They probably have enough sense to understand that lifting a prohibition is the exact opposite of having the government tell people how to live. If the yes campaign can stop screeching about the evil public debating SSM and present the various good arguments in favour of lifting the prohibition, we’ll get this done.

  2. electme

    “Give it to them a brochure”?!
    That sounds so…biblical…

    1. BalexB

      I’m a bit rusty on the Bible, but didn’t Moses gave a brochure to the Israelites?

      1. AR

        A travel brochure possibly, promising a land of milk & honey, ordained for them if they just smote the inhabitants sufficiently often.

        1. Inner Space

          “ordained for them if they just smote the inhabitants sufficiently often.”
          Yes, but the motive and reason? Let me help you.
          The people who were occupying the land during the Nation of Israel’s absence were not human. The Moabites, Jebusites, Hittites etc were descendants of the Nephilim, mutants who were half human and half angel. They were giants. There is historic extra biblical account of these people occupying half of the European continent let alone the land of Israel. Also, The Book of Enoch is replete with information on the havoc they caused to the whole planet and God gave the 12 tribes of Israel commission to wipe them out. Things are never what they seem, as you know.

          1. leon knight

            Now isn’t that fascinating, who needs history when you can just make stuff up…..

        2. Peter Hamish

          Att: Leon [email protected] 12, 2017 at 3:26 pm
          Have you learnt to count pass zero yet? How about the “group think”? Have you matured enough yet not to worry if you might lose a single follower because of the truth?…gotta get those ” likes” eh, or the sky might fall. Chicken Little?…or just a Little Chicken? Nah! you’ll just continue compromising your life away because that’s what immature and insecure people do. Compromise!!! Anyway, lets be “Blair” about it all…ahhhh that’s a typo. I meant Fair about it all. Bwahahahahaha…Bwabwahahahahahhahahaha. Oh stop it, please stop it..my sides are aching. Bwahahahahaha. Roflol Bwahaha…it’s a gotcha of all gotchas. Bwahahaha.

        3. Peter Hamish

          Actually, I do apologize leon. That was a bit too close to the bone….the “chicken” bone that is. Bwahahahahahaha.Rofl LoL..Bwahahahahaha.

  3. Hunt Ian

    Once again, all I can feel is worry about the company that “No” campaigners keep. Are they so stupid or ideologically blinkered that they will not feel embarrassed trotting out this “No” campaign tripe?

    Point 1. I have talked about freedom most of my life. I have learned that no freedoms are absolute, unless we say confine them to freedoms to do the right thing. Freedom of speech is not absolute but freedom to say the right thing is. Freedom to slander or denigrate people, such as when Nazi’s engage in hate speech to say that Jews, say, are vermin, is not right and we should not have that freedom.
    People have the right to say all sorts of things I think are wrong, provided that they are not harming others with what they say. A religious person who wants to say that gay couples should be stoned to death should not be perfectly free to say it.

    People should be free to do what their religion says is right, provided this does no harm to others. At the extreme, stoning gay couples to death should be stopped if we can. Equally, we should stop people from discriminating against them or persecuting them in other less lethal ways than by stoning them to death.

    By now, some “No” campaign door knocker will hopefully have given up. But if he/she knows I am over 55 , he/she might persist with point 2. What about the children, he or she might might ask me. I will tell him or her that parents who love their children and care for them get all that they need, so long as no-one is trying to harm them because their parents are gay or lesbian, or whatever. Are those children “stolen”? Well no. like many other children their biological parents have freely decided not to parent them as they grow up. It is hard to imagine gay or Lesbian parents taking care of children who have been really stolen, as kids who had babies were sometimes forced toggle them up by religious or their own parents pressure, or aboriginal mothers had their children taken from them by their “protectors’ so they could be raised to be hewers of wood or bearers of water because their supposedly inferior blood did not fit them for any higher purpose in life.

    No doubt the “No” campaigner will not get as far as trying to tell me about the absurd idea of “260 genders that will result from same sex marriage.” They will know I am not as stupid or blinkered as the many “No” campaigners they mix with, who are incapable from recognising that the claim that 260 genes will follow same sex marriage is so ridiculous that it should not be uttered in company. Unless they really do think the average Australian over 55 is so stupid that they might vote “No” when they put their “arguments” forward?

    1. Hunt Ian

      Word correction typos: replace “genders” with “genes”; “from” with “of”; “toggle” with “to give”

      1. Hunt Ian

        Good grief : replace “genes” with “genders”: hazardous business this

        1. Electric Lardyland

          I really doubt if most door knockers will get far enough to give up, since it’s very doubtful that the person writing that script has ever actually been canvassing. Therefore, I feel entirely confident, that when some twat knocks on the door and pronounces, “I’m here to tell you that it’s okay to say no”, then most Australians will think, ‘well, okay, I’ll say no to you’ and promptly shut the door.

          1. Marion Wilson

            A friend of mind regarded this as an opportunity to invite the door-knocker in and keep them talking by asking questions to demonstrate great interest and determination to be fully informed on every minute detail until the whole afternoon was wasted and it was too late in the day for the door-knocker to knock on more doors. He got a lot of laughs telling some of the stuff he was told.

    2. Northy

      Well said Ian, apart from the typos 😉

  4. Nudiefish

    The yes campaign will win by a modest amount and that is enough. If you are so addled that a grandmother showing up at your door and convincing you about some bullshit concerning 260 genders and that you should vote no – then you shouldn’t even be walking the streets let alone voting.

    1. Woopwoop

      Are you saying grandmothers are less credible than say young men?

  5. leon knight

    If there is one person you can absolutely trust to lie and obfuscate, Shelton is your man…that nose looks like an alcoholic to me…

    1. lykurgus

      They say that when you’re 50, you’ll have the face you deserve. I always thought it was the ugly soul oozing through the pores…

    2. waiting dog

      I’ve just had another look – you’re right it does

  6. MJM

    Being 76 I can only wonder why I did not marry a national monument, felt I lacked free speech and was neither gender fluid nor politically incorrect before June 2004.

  7. Jordan Sydney

    I really wish they would knock on my door. I am an over 55 year old woman and would tell them quite clearly how disgraceful they are and there would be A LOT of swearing involved. Please, please knock on my door!

  8. klewso

    “Vote No to Marrying Trojan Horses!”

    1. AR

      “Beware of geeks bearing crib sheets”.

  9. Dog's Breakfast

    So laughable, and so sinister. Perhaps I could put a star of David on my door so that they know I’ll be voting yes.

    So disingenuous too, no way can you reasonably argue that it is good policy to deny another person a right you enjoy, so they make up non-arguments, fear campaigns.

    John Howard was quoted as saying something along the lines of “it’s ok to give other people rights, but you have to think about what rights you are denying for others in giving that right”. (Sorry if incorrect Mr Howard, it was such a stupid argument I lost track of it)

    Seemed to me to be an argument that it is ok to give someone else rights, but not if it impinged on my right to stop giving them equal rights.

    That’s the best I could make of it anyway. Sheesh!

  10. lykurgus

    Did they focus-group this script, to get insight into how hu-mans talk?
    And was said focus group made up of hu-man subjects?

    If you get a neighbourly visit from these pod-people, try MY script…

    1)Freedom:- Ask them what they want to say, that they think they can’t say (insist on verbatim); and to quote the legislative device that stops them. Keep demanding the answer.
    Until they either piss off, or move to point 2.

    2)Children:- Ask them why they hate your son – specifically, why do they hate him so much, they’ll force him to divorce his husband.
    Because of their unconfessed fear that gay is contagious, they’ll make their excuses and leave.
    If they think you’re bluffing, insist on talking about your gay son and his gay husband having gay sex – that’ll do it.

    3)260 genders:- I can’t keep them on my doorstep that long. I don’t even get to use the phrase “hot greasy man-sex” to their face.

    The second retort doesn’t work so well with the “daughters wife” variant. The ACL don’t believe in lesbians; they think lesbianism only exists to arouse normal heterosexual desires, and the ACL aren’t interested in discussing those either.

    1. lykurgus

      Just to be clear, neither my son nor his husband exist

      1. AR

        “Come back with your shield or on it.”

        1. lykurgus

          Great… now I’m picturing men in leather g-strings.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details