Freedom of speech, unless you oppose SSM

PANSY Lai thought she’d left authoritarism behind, but her involvement with the No campaign showed it's alive and well in her new home, writes Miranda Devine.

Pansy Lai has been targeted by activists after appearing in an anti-same-sex marriage ad. (Pic: Britta Campion/The Australian)

WHO is Dr Pansy Lai, the courageous GP-turned-family values campaigner?

One thing to know is that she is allergic to authoritarianism, because of the experience of her teenage years, when she was uprooted from her birthplace of Hong Kong by parents worried about the handover to Communist China.

“People were very fearful about the Chinese takeover… so we migrated to Australia. This is such a blessed country, where we do have the freedom to express ourselves”.

Or so we thought.

After she appeared in a TV ad last week urging Australians to vote “no” to same sex marriage, Dr Lai was subjected to threats at her north shore surgery and a Get Up! sponsored petition demanded she be deregistered as a doctor.

GetUp!has since denied involvement, although it owns the website on which the petition appeared, and removed it after adverse publicity.

But the message was heard. Freedom of speech does not apply to those who oppose same-sex marriage.

Pansy Lai said the Chinese community have been alarmed at her treatment after her appearance in an ad opposing same-sex marriage. (Pic: Britta Campion/The Australian)

Many in the Chinese community have told Lai they are “very alarmed that people want to threaten my livelihood,” she said yesterday.

“They are fearful of what it means if the law changes. Will the same happen to them? Will they be laid off from their government jobs for voicing [that the] traditional family gives the best outcome for children?

“It is worrying to think if I hold traditional values I should be punished”.

There are frightening echoes of the regime her parents fled.

“People from the Chinese community who have a first-degree relative with lives impacted by a regime that controls freedom of speech… see shadows of past regimes when the state imposes values different from their family values.”

Even if the High Court were to strike down the postal plebiscite, she says the public must have a say on whether to change the definition of marriage.

“People have strong feelings. They do feel intimidated, and not free to express their views.

“It is more important than ever that people have a vote on this issue because changing the marriage act affects everyone. What are the consequences of this change.”

The portents are not good.