Kirby Attacked For 'Praising Perverts'

Local News, By hazyinseptember, 20th May, 2009

Retired High Court judge, Michael Kirby, has come under attack from the Christian right after praising controversial sex guru, Alfred Kinsey, for doing ‘bold work.’

In a speech last week to graduating students of Indiana University, Michael Kirby said that in the 1950s he learned that his sexuality was supposed to be a ‘deadly secret’ and a cause for shame.

“Yet far away in Bloomington, DR Kinsey was teaching that I was not alone, that this was just a variant of nature,” Michael Kirby said. “It was like so many other variants – nothing for pride, nothing for shame either – just a fact, a part of nature’s truth, revealed by science.”

Alfred Kinsey, proclaimed the Grandfather of sexual studies, came under attack when he published his 1948 report, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. He invented the scale measuring sexuality which swung from a zero rating (exclusively heterosexual) through three (equally heterosexual and homosexual) to six (exclusively homosexual).

Alfred Kinsey collected large amounts of statistics on sexuality, interviewing pedophiles, rapists and prostitutes, along with everyday men and women. Kinsey also collected some very controversial statistics on child sexuality.

Christian websites have attacked Michael Kirby’s praise of Kinseys, claiming it ‘praise of perverts’. Christian Today Australia writer, Bill Muehlenberg, wrote a scathing article.

“Many of our opinion makers, judges, movers and shakers, and intellectualoids tend to promote ideas, values and worldviews which are not only contrary to the sensible majority, but are often perverse, irrational and ungodly.”

Judith Reisman of American website Renewamerica.us also jumped on the bandwagon, describing Michael Kirby’s notions of sexuality as “false” and stated that he would “help breed a sexually radical judiciary”.

Your Thoughts

eurolad

said ages ago

Public statements do not create change I know that the judiciary in Australia is pretty much useless considering that -people are not allowed to sue who they want to sue for whatever reason they wish -people cannot take the government to court over human right issues as we do not have a bill of rights -people cannot initiate referendums I wonder why a person in Australia would even want to be a judge given that they can't do a damn things to change the status quo

rudeboy86

said ages ago

-people are not allowed to sue who they want to sue for whatever reason they wish This I can assure you is a crock of shit! People sue for the most ridiculous reasons now in this country...we are becoming more and more like the US in the way that we are seeing the rise of litigation culture...want to get some cash? Sue the bastards! It is fucking pathetic in many cases. If you want to see the amount of technicalities that places workers in the Human Services at risk of being sued and fired you would think twice about your statement. For example if I am a worker in a residential care unit and I tap one of the "clients" (wards of the state) on the shoulder or place my hand on their back to comfort them I can be sued for battery. If I swing a scarf in the air and the client feels threatened by it then I can be done for assault. If a client goes nuts and pulls a knife on me and I disarm them and bruise or injure them in the process I can be done for assault and battery even though I was defending myself. If a student is crying or is depressed and require attention from a teacher, a hug or any physical contact of a similar manner can be used against the teacher in court as evidence to prove the student was being touched up. Clients and students in some cases will find ways to get money/compo from suing teachers, case workers and youth workers...etc These are a few examples in the field of working with kids and young people. Ever realised that the OH&S laws of NSW allow prosecution of employers for failing to meet standards or in cases of death and injury? You can sue for most things in this country. -people cannot take the government to court over human right issues as we do not have a bill of rights Victoria does have "The Charter" and from memory, you can contest vilification cases in court in NSW (whereas you cannot in Victoria). There is a bit of a push at the moment across the country for a bill of rights on a federal level. Lets make sure it has a snowball effect. I wonder why a person in Australia would even want to be a judge given that they can't do a damn things to change the status quo Changing or challenging the status quo is something that the people are to do...considering that Australia technically is a Liberal Democracy the importance of people power should be self evident. It is lazy fucks or scared people who don't want to protest or lobby the government for change. If you feel so strongly about it then get out there and start campaigning, agitate and organise. There are groups out there willing to participate it is a matter of organising...or you can sit on your arse and take pot shots online, which merely creates a lot of piss and wind, making your anger useless and not constructive.

coast_boy

said ages ago

How is he a hero? He was a freaking judge for more than 20 years and he never did anything to advance gay rights! Up yours! Im sure your heroes are much more highly regarded in society than Kirby! He is my hero for many reasons, the biggest one being that it is great to see an openly gay man in such a high position of authority and respect, especially in the legal community! Obviously you know nothing about the him, perhaps you should do a bit of research before making such silly comments...

datkindagal

said ages ago

mwa ha ha http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/5725/jbhihv.jpg

Grumpy

said ages ago

Kirby had a lot of influence in getting the changes through in recognising equal rights to gay's in federal laws. He didn't retire until this was through so he could pass on his pension to his lover upon his death.

Poetic Amy

said ages ago

I think the Christian lot need to find an hobby. They must have too much time on their hands.

ammonite

said ages ago

Rod: Daddy, what are you doing? Ned Flanders: Imploring people I never met to pressure government with better things to do to punish a man who meant no harm for something nobody even saw, that's what I'm doing! Todd: Daddy, we think you need a new mommy.

HonestMike

said ages ago

I had a learning curve about prominent "gays" when I wrote to the SMH when Justice Kirby 'came out" many years ago. They wished to publish my letter but wanted to edit it, and I finally relented. At the time numerous groups and individuals were calling for the prosecution of Kirby for supposedly breaking the sexual laws by his Who's Who disclosure but in my letter of support for Justice Kirbly I pointed out that he had merely described his life 'partner' as a man. The letter's editor insisted this must have meant they 'had sex' which I said, claimed no such thing and as a married gay man who hadn't ever had sex with my wife, although we remained close friends and partners, the word 'lover' or 'partner' could not be deemed to mean anything other than what the person saying it meant it to mean !. I was correct in a legal sense but it did show how the current views at the time (early 90's ) still meant perceived educated newspapers like the Fairfax chain still wished to twist a tale into what they wished it to be. I think it's probably got worse.

Poetic Amy

said ages ago

:) Lol

Poetic Amy

said ages ago

:) There is some truth in that image.... LOL

There are 7 more comments

View them all

To post a comment, you need to be a SameSame Member

Log-in now or signup for a new account