As some proponents of same-sex marriage continue their scheming toward removing all opposition to their ideological agenda, rather than conducting and welcoming honest investigation and debate into their proposal to dismantle the beneficial, tried and tested foundations of our good society, it would be wise for the noble defenders of traditional marriage and family to be on guard against the traps being laid to remove them.
One side of this debate are prepared to use all sorts of tactics to remove each and every obstacle in their path, one by one. Politicians, media people, business people, religious people, anyone who oppose their worldview. No prisoners are taken. The other side would never even consider using such tactics and in many cases are completely naïve to the traps being laid and into which some are falling.
Some proponents of this worldview have been set up in positions of strategic influence in various areas due to tactics normally considered the domain of pirates, criminal gangs and mafia. Influence over opponents is established by deceit, leveraged and used with ruthless precision to achieve their political aim of normalizing homosexual sexual behavior and lifestyle.
It is the homosexual community who are proposing this radical redefinition of the foundational institution of marriage. Therefore it should be incumbent on that community to legitimately justify the reasons why our society should agree to such a change. But rather than do this in a rational and civilized fashion the tendency of the proponents is to silence all opponents, bully, intimidate, threaten, black-list and spread a climate of fear.
If this is the modus operandi before a plebiscite, what will they do if they win the plebiscite? Most totalitarian worldviews abolish true freedom of debate, discussion and investigation as a basic tenet of trying to establish their ideology.
Just as Islam allows no opposition, so too does the homosexual community. They use every totalitarian tactic in the book and increasingly seek to use the law, such as anti-discrimination laws, to silence what should be considered a basic freedom in any free society, freedom of speech, religious belief and conscientious objection to things people reasonably find morally objectionable.
If our society give in to a group of people who do this, do you think they will stop at marriage? Why? They have never stopped half-way before, so why would this movement be any different?
“Islam needs to delegitimise the urge to ‘behead all those who insult the Prophet’ but only Muslims can do this,” Tony Abbott said recently. And in the same vein, so too do homosexuals when someone objects to their ideology, or if someone raises reasonable objections to using Australian law to promote in our society, and to Australia's children, homosexual sexual behaviour.
Rather than trying to throw all opponents into prison why don't they make valid arguments in favour of why we should embrace this change?
For instance: What are the benefits to our society of normalizing and promoting homosexual sex?
Are they afraid their case for sodomite "marriage" is unable to stand up to honest scrutiny?
ACL in Canberra are doing a great job defending marriage, family and children. If you are so inclined please feel free to support them:
$200,000 in total is needed to raise awareness about how legalising gay marriage would impact children and our freedom.
So please give now to help ACL present a strong case for marriage and equip churches with grassroots actions before the election.
Thank you for helping to uphold a voice for marriage – and for values – at this critical time!
Family breakups affect girls' health more than boys' health according to a new study.
"A family breakup can have a negative long-term effect on smoking, depression, and overall health of children, with girls' health more sensitive to home structure according to a new US study from the University of Illinois.
For the study the researchers looked at data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (ADD Health), which consists of data collected from 90,000 adolescents in four waves over 13 years.
Criteria for selection included being from a single-mother home, but excluded individuals whose fathers had died.
From the original 1996 data collection, 4,757 of the individuals' data was taken into account in 2009, when the children were now aged 27 to 32, enabling the researchers to look at any health effects on the children well into adulthood, unlike previous studies which had only looked at a single point, or a shorter period in time.
In addition to the data collected on the children, the children's mothers were also asked to provide information on their marital break-up and their three most recent relationships.
After analyzing the data the researchers found that girls were more likely to be depressed and report worse health than boys, with age also an important factor in the possible negative effects of a family breakup.
The team found that "if the biological father was never present, smoking, physical, and mental health are all worse," commented Andrea Beller, one of the authors of the study, "And if they leave when girls are in very early childhood (0 to 5 years old), we find a significant association with worse physical health, regardless of the presence of other males," she added.
The team also found that ages 6 to 10 are a particularly vulnerable time for girls, with the absence of a father between these times having a long-term negative affect on smoking behavior, overall health, and depression, which continued well into adulthood.
Smoking was included alongside depression and overall health as previous research has shown that children from single-parent homes are more likely to engage in risky behaviors such as smoking.
After finding that a complete absence of a biological father has a negative effect for such behaviors, as well as on physical and mental health, the researchers suggest that going forward it could be beneficial to not only acknowledge that family background could be a potential risk factor in smoking, but also that stopping smoking may be harder for those whose father was absent during childhood.
A Swedish study published earlier this year found that the children of separated parents experience more psychosomatic health problems than children living with both parents. The researcher looked at 147,839 children in the sixth and ninth grade and found that although children that lived equally between both parents homes did report better health than those who lived mostly or only with one parent, a family break-up was shown to have a negative effect on children in both living situations.
A 2007 Canadian study which looked at data from the 1999 Social and Health Survey of Children and Adolescents in Quebec, Montreal, Canada, found that children who had experienced a family breakup had an increased risk of substance abuse and alcohol abuse, and were more likely to suffer behavioral and emotional disorders."
Never Trust the Activists – Nor “Exemptions”.
By Bill Muehlenberg
All over the West draconian laws are being put into effect granting special rights to tiny minority groups such as the homosexual militants. The various activist groups will lie to your face, insisting that all these special rights will not impact on anyone else.
They will claim that no one will be adversely affected if things like homosexual marriage are enacted. They say it is just fear-mongering to suggest that the freedoms of others will be put at risk. Well, as I have documented time and time again, this is pure baloney.
Everyone is impacted by things like homosexual marriage. Almost always these new laws take away basic rights of ordinary citizens. Faith-based groups especially end up being heavily discriminated against, with various freedoms whittled away.
Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of conscience are all being hammered as the activist groups push through restrictive legislation. Calling it equal opportunity legislation, or anti-discrimination law changes nothing.
At the end of the day it is often biblical Christianity that is being targeted. Indeed, in so many of these secular left laws there are discussions about whether religious groups should be granted “exemptions”. Most often the radicals want no exemptions whatsoever, but allowances may be made to simply get a bill voted through.
We see a perfect example of this occurring in Victoria with a homosexual adoption bill just being passed. As one report puts it:
Legislation to allow same-sex couples to adopt has passed the Victorian Parliament, after the Government decided to accept amendments made in the Upper House. The bill originally did not allow religious organisations to refuse an adoption to gay couples, but the Upper House amended the bill last month to give religious exemptions.
The Government had been considering whether to reject the amendment and withdraw the bill all together. Earlier this year, Victorian Equality Minister Martin Foley labelled the suggestion to allow faith-based exemptions to same-sex adoptions “rubbish”. But the Government accepted the changes, in order to enact the bill.
Sadly we once again have some Christians and Christian groups patting themselves on the back, claiming they got some religious exemptions in. This is nothing to be proud about. Indeed, it is simply a case of not clearly thinking through what all this means.
The truth is, there are all sorts of problems with these exemptions. For one, they are usually far too restrictive. While they may sound good in theory, usually they only apply to a select few individuals, such as paid professional clergy. A myriad of other religious folks who should also be exempt usually are not, be they Sunday School teachers, church staff, religious school personnel, workers in parachurch groups, and so on.
There are numerous Christian workers who will never qualify for these “exemptions”. So they really are useless from day one. But even more worrying is this simple truth: whenever a government has a right to grant religious bodies exemptions, it of course has the same right to snatch them away.
This is tyranny at work. The government should not be in the business of “granting exemptions” to religious groups in the first place. If a law is that bad that it will harm the majority (and the majority is still by and large religious) then it is not a law worth pursuing in the first place.
Once a government tells religious groups what it will allow them, it can just as easily tell them what it won’t allow them. And we find this happening far too often. Some lousy bill is debated, a few lame exemptions are allowed, clueless Christians think it is all peachy and go back to sleep, and the next thing you know, the exemptions are watered down further or simply taken away.
There are cases of this occurring regularly around the West. I document nearly 200 such cases of Christians losing their freedoms when pro-homosexual legislation goes through in my recent book, Strained Relations. Plenty more cases can be mentioned. Here are two more very recent ones.
Earlier this year homosexual marriage was legalised in Ireland. The same assurances were given that no one would be impacted by this, and religious bodies would all be just fine. Yeah right, it did not take long at all to show what lies those were. Consider this rather expected news:
The Irish Parliament has passed a bill forcing publicly-funded Catholic institutions, including schools, to employ open homosexuals. The bill, which extends the ban on discrimination in the “equality law” to religiously-based institutions, affects the 90 percent of the country’s schools that belong to the Catholic Church. While homosexual groups and media pundits hail the new law, defenders of the Catholic schools and teachings say the law is unconstitutional.
“This bill is the key piece of the legislative map that will allow LGBT people to be themselves, get married, and have a family without a threat to their job if they work in a religious-run institution,” said Sandra Irwin-Gowran, director of education policy with the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network.
Until last week, Section 37 of the Employment Equality Act exempted religious employers from the general ban on discrimination based on sexual behaviour, when the behaviour conflicted with the school’s religious “ethos.” It affected homosexuals, divorcees, co-habiters, etc.
The Iona Institute, a non-profit organization set up to defend the Catholic faith, believes that the exemption is supported by Section 44.2.1 of the Irish Constitution which states that “Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.”
In a brief to the government, the Institute noted that the exemption had been “upheld by the Supreme Court in Re the Employment Equality Bill 1996 on the grounds that it strikes a proper balance between the right of free profession and practice of religion on one hand and the right to equality before the law and the right to earn one’s livelihood on the other.”
Freedom smeedom. Once homosexual activists get the heavy hand of the law on their side, religious and other groups always suffer. “Equal rights” in this case simply means special rights for some, while the rights of the majority are stripped away.
And consider England, which has had legalised homosexual marriage since 2013. I have documented scores of cases of anti-Christian bigotry and persecution since this law went through, and another shocker has just been reported. As one media outlet says:
Police are investigating an allegation of hate crime against world heavyweight boxing champion Tyson Fury. Greater Manchester Police received a call earlier after comments made about homosexuality on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme. “We take every allegation of hate crime extremely seriously and we will be attending the victim’s address to take a statement,” a GMP spokeswoman said.
Yep, here we go again: simply voice in public an opinion that differs in the slightest from the reigning gaystapo orthodoxy, and you will be investigated for a “hate crime”. We find this Orwellian clampdown on freedoms all over the Western world. Simply pass some pro-homosexual law, and every other person in the land who dares to differ may be guilty of “hate speech”.
Welcome to the Brave New World of homosexual totalitarianism. While too many Christians have not defended this brother in Christ, we did have one brave non-believer stating the obvious. Once again, Brendan O’Neill cuts to the quick on this madness:
If you were in any doubt that Britain is skating perilously close to tyrannical territory, get this: the boxer Tyson Fury is being investigated by police over his comments on homosexuality. Fury, a Manchester-based boxer who became the heavyweight champion of the world at the end of last month, is a born-again Christian. He thinks homosexuality is sinful. In a recent newspaper interview he compared it to paedophilia. And now, after receiving a complaint from a member of the public at 10.30 this morning, Greater Manchester Police will put him under the spotlight to determine if his words constituted a hate crime.
To put this another way: in 2015, in a nation that claims to be liberal and democratic, a nation which just last week launched missiles attacks on ISIS to demonstrate its love for liberty against ISIS’s desire to traduce our enlightened values, a man is being investigated by the authorities over his beliefs; his convictions; his deeply held faith. The police are opening a file on Fury, not over any physical act he carried out, not for robbery or assault or affray, but because he thought and said something that many people disagree with.
British politicians wring their hands over Saudi Arabia’s arrest of blasphemous bloggers or ISIS’s severe punishment of those who doubt the Prophet. Yet at the same time they give the nod as police investigate a man who dares to hold to Biblical scripture on homosexuality. In fact, they wrote the very hate-speech laws that allow those judged to be overly Godly, too Biblically literal, to be investigated for ‘hate crimes’. Is this not religious persecution, too? The potential punishment of someone for believing in God in a particular way? Sure, Fury won’t be flogged or even jailed, but the principle is the same here as it is in Saudi Arabia: officialdom presumes it has the tyrannical authority to question and punish individuals for what is inside their minds and hearts.
Yep, this is the new nightmare of homosexual “tolerance” in action. This tolerance is all one-way traffic: you must tolerate, endorse, approve of and promote the homosexual agenda, or the heavy hand of the law will come crashing down on you. No dissent will be tolerated.
Yep, this is the utopia of homosexual fascism. And it gets worse every passing day. So next time you hear the activists telling you a new pro-homosexual law will not affect you, don’t believe a word of it. And the next time you hear politicians talking about “exemptions” for religious groups, head for the hills.
Freedom and democracy in the West are quickly dying out – all thanks to the pink tolerance brigade.
Victoria could soon outlaw LGBTI discrimination in religious schools.
"Victoria could be the first Australian state to outlaw religious schools sacking gay and lesbian teachers or expelling LGBTI students, under proposed amendments to the state’s Equal Opportunities Act.
Greens Equality Spokesman Sam Hibbins is drafting a private member’s bill making it illegal for religious bodies and religious schools to discriminate against LGBTI students or teachers based on their sexuality or gender identity (as well as their marital or parental status) by removing the schools’ right to claim religious exemptions under the 2010 Act.
“We’ve got a particular focus on schools because that’s where I think it will have the biggest impact,” Mr Hibbins said.
“Essentially religious bodies that run religious schools have a duty of care to their staff and students [and] by discriminating against them based on their sexual orientation and gender status they would be breaching that duty of care,” he said."
(However Mr. Hibbins neglected to mention the duty of care that responsible adults, teachers, schools and politicians have to protect children from sexual immorality, homosexual pedophiles and other sexual deviants who threaten to abuse Australia's children more openly if same-sex marriage in normalized.
Normalizing homosexual sex acts and promoting these to our nations children is child abuse. It will inevitably lead to a rise in mental health issues, physical health issues and youth suicide. Responsible adults are supposed to protect children. It seems now that children need to be protected by some adults who seek to promote their way of life which is unhealthy, unnatural and dangerous for our nations children.)
"Discriminatory practices can include making it difficult for transgender students to transition. For example, by refusing to accept a student is transgender because it’s not backed up by a birth certificate, by strictly enforcing the school uniform or by banning transgender students from using particular toilets.
“If you put yourself in the shoes of students who are coming to terms with their sexuality or gender identity that can often be a challenging time for that student. There’s a lot of fear of rejection from their peers and rejection or exclusion from their families or they won’t be supported by the school,” Mr Hibbins said."
(Hibbins would rather teach children that it is ok to perform homosexual sex acts with each other and to allow adults homosexuals to do these things to them.)
“Somehow the school is giving an indication that being LGBTI is somehow wrong … the school has a duty of care to these students to support and protect them.”
(A good education always includes both sides of an argument and a dutiful school should not be silenced, by anti-discrimination laws, and prevented from teaching that it is actually more than somehow wrong for a boy to allow another boy or a pedophile adult homosexual to do the sex acts they are encouraging to each other.)
Mr Hibbins said there was a strong link between levels of discrimination and bullying at school and poor mental health, as well as well-documented relatively high suicide rates of LGBTI youth.
(No mention was made however by Mr Hibbins about the blatant bullying, intimidation, deception and discrimination orchestrated by the homosexual lobby against all opponents.
Also absent from his comments were the truth that youth trying these sexual acts will feel a sense of deep shame because it is unnatural. It is not what their bodily parts were designed for and therefore using them in such abnormal ways will naturally lead to shame, depression, regret, drug abuse and unfortunately suicide for some.)
He said it was also unacceptable to force teachers to be clandestine about their private lives. “This is sending a message to people: don’t ask, don’t tell and staff needing to hide their sexuality.”
But the Greens Bill has attracted heated opposition from some religious organisations.
Steven O’Doherty from Christian Schools Australia (CSA) called the Bill “a continuation of their [The Greens] long-standing attack on the right of parents to choose a religious education for their children”.
“Faith-based schools must have the ability to choose staff whose life choices are in keeping with the teachings of the faith,” Mr O’Doherty said.
“Faith is not only taught, it must be modelled. While we have not seen the Greens’ specific amendments, based on reports they would denude faith-based schools of the ability to choose staff whose lives are exemplars of the school’s values, beliefs and moral teachings. Reasonable Australians understand this makes a mockery of the idea of religious freedom,” he said.
Mr O’Doherty said the current exemption achieved the right balance of rights and freedoms in education.
“It allows schools to make reasonable and sensible decisions in keeping with the tenets of their faith. CSA does not support any changes to the current arrangements, whether by the Greens or Labor.
“Christian schools are supportive environments that take most seriously their pastoral care of all students, including those identifying as LGBTI.”
Asked if he would seek to expel LGBTI students Mr O’Doherty said: “CSA does not seek the right for schools to expel students for reason of their sexual preference or other gender-related issues. The expulsion of any student – any student – relates to their actions towards others as a contributing and supportive member of the school community. It only becomes an issue if their behaviour places them outside the school’s policies.”
Meanwhile, NSW Labor Leader Luke Foley wants to revert to the “inherent requirement test” which was introduced in 2010 (and rolled back in 2011), where schools were asked to justify each why they should be exempt from anti-discrimination laws on a case-by-case basis.
Labor believes this approach balances the importance of granting schools independence and religious freedom with having to provide a higher level of evidence as to why they should be allowed to discriminate.
It’s a concession that Mr Hibbins feels does not go far enough to improving the lives of LGBTI teachers or students.
He is now calling on the Labor Party and the Independent Education Union, which represents independent and religious schools, to get behind his bill and he will write to each of the state’s religious and independent schools asking whether they feel they need the religious exemptions provided under the current Equal Opportunities Act.
Mr Hibbins said he was hopeful Labor would get behind his Bill, particularly because the party have publicly declared that “equality is non-negotiable”.
In recent days many Americans have reveled in the hypocrisy of a number of well-known people revealed as subscribers to the Ashley Madison pro-adultery website. But there is a far more important revelation from the hackings: the alarming number who signed up for the site — 33 million people. That startling statistic reminds us that no one is immune from sexual temptation. It also shows how far modern society has drifted from the idea that marriage is a permanent and exclusive union.
Some people may be inclined to blame the breakdown of marriage on gays and lesbians, but as the Ashley Madison hack should make clear, heterosexuals are to blame for the breakdown of marriage.
Long before there was a debate about same-sex anything, far too many heterosexuals bought into a bad liberal ideology about sexuality that came out of the sexual revolution. It was heterosexuals in the 60s and 70s who began to live as if marriage should last only as long as the romantic feelings last: replacing “as long as we both shall live” with “as long as we both shall love.” If what makes a marriage is merely consenting adult romance, then there is no reason why marriage has to be permanent or limited to two persons, much less sexually exclusive.
As a result, cohabitation, no-fault divorce, extramarital sex, non-marital childbearing, pornography, and the hook-up culture became normalized and each contributed to the breakdown of the marriage culture. Same-sex marriage didn’t cause any of these problems. Ashley Madison didn’t cause these problems. They are, rather, their logical conclusion. The problem is that these conclusions follow a train of logic that begins from utterly false premises.
And it is from these “love = love” false premises that Justice Kennedy based his Supreme Court opinion redefining marriage throughout our nation. After all, the legal redefinition of marriage could take place only after 50 years of a cultural redefinition — with all of the broken hearts and broken homes that it has left in its wake.
But it is a mistake to think that the redefinition of marriage will make matters better — it will only make them worse. That’s because redefining marriage into a genderless, romantic institution doubles down on a mistaken vision of human sexuality that says consenting adults should do whatever consenting adults want to do. That love equals love, of whatever variety — gender or number of partners or length of time — we prefer. Indeed, leading LGBT activists have even suggested that extra-marital sex should be normalized, and that gay marriage could teach heterosexuals the virtue of such arrangements.
Andrew Sullivan, for example, argues that the “openness” of same-sex unions could enhance the bonds of husbands and wives: “among gay male relationships, the openness of the contract makes it more likely to survive than many heterosexual bonds. … [T]here is more likely to be greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman. … [It] could undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.”
The gay activist Dan Savage agrees. A 2011 New York Times Magazine profile of Savage, headlined “Married, with Infidelities,” introduced Americans to the term “monogamish” — relationships in which partners allow sexual infidelity provided they are honest about it. The article explains: “Savage says a more flexible attitude within marriage may be just what the straight community needs.” After all, sexual exclusivity “gives people unrealistic expectations of themselves and their partners.”
So if you object to Ashley Madison because of the secrecy and deception, an adultery website such as OpenMinded.com, that facilitates honest so-called “ethical cheating,” may be for you.
This makes a certain sort of sense once you get rid of the idea that marriage is about uniting a man and a woman as husband and wife, in a permanent exclusive bond, to then be mother and father to any children their union may produce. If marriage is just about consenting adult romance, it’s hard to argue against OpenMinded.com and monogamish options.
Changing our legal — and thus further changing our cultural — understanding of marriage will impact society as a whole. As our law teaches a falsehood about marriage, it will be even harder for people to live out the truth of marriage.
And so, as people internalize this new vision of marriage, marriage will be less and less a stabilizing force. The history of the last 50 years of cultural redefinition demonstrates exactly this. The legal redefinition will simply lock it in, increase the damage, and make recovery even more difficult.
But if fewer people live out the norms of exclusivity and permanence in marriage, then fewer people will reap the benefits of the institution of marriage — not only spouses, but also children. Preserving the man-woman definition of marriage is the only way to preserve the benefits of marriage as an exclusive and permanent institution. How can the law teach that fathers are essential, for instance, when it has officially made them optional?
The Ashley Madison scandal should be cause for all of us to reconsider the importance of marriage. And while gays and lesbians certainly aren’t to blame for the collapse of our marriage culture, redefining marriage is both a symptom and, most likely, a cause of future deterioration.
Ryan T. Anderson is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and author of the just-released book, Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom, from which this essay is adapted.
Open homosexual elected in by-election – and vows to PUSH for homosexual ‘marriage’
"In the lead-up to the Sydney by-election, to fill the North Sydney electorate position vacated by Joe Hockey, there were virtually no mainstream media reports that the Liberal candidate Trent Zimmerman is openly homosexual.
The homosexual media did, with one homosexual paper, Out in Perth, asking if he would be the first open homosexual for the Coalition (or any party) in the House of Representatives. Up to now open homosexuals have only been in the Senate. He is a former vice-president of the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Business Association, and was on the local Council. He is the acting President of the NSW Liberal Party and a former staffer of Joe Hockey.
With the election of Trent Zimmerman, the media were openly reporting on his homosexuality – and Trent was saying he would be a strong advocate FOR homosexual ‘marriage’ – in fact, he supports a VOTE in the parliament. As for a plebiscite, he said, “I think the trick with the plebiscite will be to have a respectful debate.’’
Article: Liberal candidate Trent Zimmerman wins by-election in North Sydney seat vacated by Joe Hockey, ABC, 6/12/2015."
"Newly crowned world heavyweight champion Tyson Fury will not face police action over comments he made about homosexuality, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) have said.Fury, 27, has attracted controversy after likening homosexuality to paedophilia, with more than 133,000 people signing a petition calling for his removal from the shortlist for the BBC Sports Personality of the Year (SPOTY) award.
A member of the public had reported Fury to the police on Tuesday for allegedly committing a "hate crime".
"The circumstances in which these comments were made suggest that no criminal offence has taken place and this matter will not be investigated any further," a GMP spokesman said.
In a recent interview with the Mail on Sunday newspaper, Fury, who is a born-again Christian, said three things needed to be accomplished "before the devil comes home".
"One of them is homosexuality being legal in countries, one of them is abortion and the other is paedophilia," he said.
Manchester-born Fury, who is of traveller heritage and styles himself as the 'Gypsy King', has denied being homophobic or sexist and says that his views merely reflect what is written in the Bible.
He produced one of sport's biggest shocks last month when he beat long-standing world champion Wladimir Klitschko, but he cannot escape controversy even within his own sport: he has already lost one of the three world titles he won because he agreed to a rematch against Klitschko, to which he was contractually bound, rather than fighting the International Boxing Federation's mandatory challenger.
When asked on Wednesday about the controversy over his comments, he responded to every question with a religious phrase.
"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved," he repeatedly told a BBC reporter.
"Jesus loves me and he loves you too ... and he loves everybody in the world," he added, smiling, as he leant out of the window of a van.
"All you've got to do is repent of your sins and you'll be forgiven."
Asked if he thought he could win the SPOTY award, his answer was: "John 3:16, for God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son. Whoever believes in him shall have eternal life and shall not perish. The only way is through Jesus into heaven, that's all I can say."
Another nominee for the SPOTY award, Greg Rutherford, said on Wednesday he had spoken to the BBC about sharing a stage with someone whose views were "so strongly against my own" but rejected reports that he was pulling out of the ceremony on December 20.
"I have been in discussions with the BBC regarding my involvement with SPOTY after hearing what I believe to be very outdated and derogatory comments from a fellow SPOTY nominee," he said in a statement to the BBC."
Ireland – Parliament BANS ‘religious discrimination’ against LGBTI
Just months after Ireland legalised homosexual ‘marriage’, the Irish parliament has passed an amendment to the Employment Equality Act – to REMOVE exemptions which had previously allowed religious institutions to choose to NOT employ homosexuals.
This applies to schools and to other ‘religious institutions’. Lifesite notes that 90% of Ireland’s schools are run by the Catholic Church, and that this will force them to employ open homosexuals!
The church-affiliated schools are funded by the government.
“The Iona Institute, a non-profit organization set up to defend the Catholic faith” says the ban is unconstitutional, and ‘believes that the exemption is supported by Section 44.2.1 of the Irish Constitution which states that “Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.” ’
This is exactly the sort of legislation that the Victorian government has promised to re-introduce (they passed it prior to losing the 2010 election but the Coalition re-instated the right for religious groups to discriminate with regard to sexuality and marital status).
Of course this is the MAIN GAME – it isn’t just all about homosexuals getting the right to ‘marry’.
Homosexuals want FULL acceptance – and want laws to BAN anyone criticising their behaviour and to STOP any form of ‘discrimination’ against them.
Article: New Irish law forces Catholic schools to employ open homosexuals, Lifesite, 9/12/2015.
Article: Irish parliament bans religious discrimination against LGBTI people, Gay News Network, 4/12/2015.
As the following news article shows, when the juggernaut has a victory with marriage it does not stop. It won in Ireland in May 2015. Now, just 6 months later Christian schools are now being forced to employ homosexual teachers even though the Christian Bible says the sex acts of practicing homosexuals is abhorrent and clearly stands in opposition to the Christian teaching and ethos of these Christian schools.
Teachers "teach." What are two "married" homosexual men or women who are teachers going to teach children by promoting and celebrating what they do to each other? They are going to teach children that it is now normal, good, healthy and to be encouraged, to perform sex acts which God says should be avoided on moral, physical, mental and spiritual grounds. A sex act which is still unnatural, no matter what Irish law says. A sex act which will lead young people to shame, depression, drug use, suicide.
There is nothing "gay" about that. That is child abuse. Why is our society being forced to pretend this is a good thing? Why are we so blind? Why is no one speaking up?
So just what did Tyson Fury say to warrant the tsunami of hatred, abuse and a UK police investigation? Why did 100,000 people sign a petition against this man? Here it is:
Boxer Tyson Fury was accused of being 'offensive and deranged' last night after he made vile comments equating homosexuality and abortion with paedophilia.
'There are only three things that need to be accomplished before the devil comes home,' he said.
'One of them is homosexuality being legal in countries, one of them is abortion and the other is paedophilia. Who would have thought in the 50s and 60s that those first two would be legalized?
'When I say paedophiles could be made legal, it sounds crazy. But if I had said to you about the first two being made legal in the 50s, I would have been looked upon as a crazy man.
'People can say, 'You are against abortions, you are against paedophilia, you are against homosexuality', but my faith and my culture is based on the Bible.'
'The Bible was written a long time ago and if I follow that and it tells me it's wrong, then it's wrong for me,' he added.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3308688/British-boxing-star-Tyson-Fury-s-vile-homophobic-slur.html#ixzz3tm4Uqzi2
The Tyson Fury story continues to reveal what our society will become like if same-sex marriage is legalized in Australia. We will no longer be free to speak freely what we believe. Literature such as the Bible will have to be banned, as will churches, and individuals will have to be prosecuted if they say anything bad about homosexuality.
The speed with which this is happening is frightening.
As the article below from the ABC shows, the police in the UK are investigating Fury's comments, equating homosexuality as being on a par with the murder of babies and the homosexual sexual abuse of children. He was basically just saying that: who would have believed just a few years ago that abortion and homosexuality would now be legal (homosexual "marriage" is now legal in his native Ireland) and suggesting that pedophilia will be the next thing to be normalized in our misguided society.
"Police investigate 'homophobic' Fury comments"
"British police are investigating newly crowned world heavyweight champion Tyson Fury over comments he made about homosexuality, a spokeswoman from Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said on Wednesday (AEDT).
Fury, 27, has attracted controversy after likening homosexuality to paedophilia, with over 105,000 people signing a petition calling for his removal from the shortlist for the BBC Sports Personality of the Year award.
A GMP spokeswoman said that a member of the public had reported a "hate crime" on Wednesday after watching a BBC television programme in which Fury's remarks were discussed.
She said the force was taking the matter "very seriously" and would be attending the complainant's address to speak to him in person before deciding whether to question Fury.
Fury has also been accused of sexism, having notably stated that a woman's place was "in the kitchen and on her back". The complaint only concerns his remarks about homosexuality."
By Lyle Shelton, ACL.
"Christian schools stripped of religious freedom following Irish redefinition of marriage.
It is good that Australia is finally starting to discuss the consequences of changing the definition of marriage in law.
As I said in my blog last week, we have been told for years that same-sex marriage does not affect other Australians’ rights.
This is of course false and we already have Australian examples of same-sex expressionism clashing with freedom of speech, conscience and religion.
But the overseas experience becomes more serious by the day. If anyone thought same-sex marriage would not take away other peoples’ rights, they should look at what comes next.
In May, Ireland voted in a referendum to redefine marriage.
The Irish Parliament last week stripped long-standing religious freedom protections from Irish anti-discrimination law.
These protections, or exemptions as they are known, have always allowed religious schools to positively discriminate in order to maintain their ethos.
It is no surprise that religions have a moral code which means they will not affirm certain conduct. In a free and diverse society this is recognised, respected and accommodated.
Religious schools, hospitals and charities rely on protections in law so that the freedom to associate around and operate institutions from deeply held beliefs can be accommodated.
It is a live and let live approach which has worked for decades.
But not content with their referendum win, the Irish same-sex political lobby wants more and cannot tolerate anything short of universal genuflection to their worldview.
They want it to be a crime for Christian schools or hospitals to live out their beliefs about marriage and to uphold them.
Religious freedom in Australia is protected with similar exemptions and exceptions to those abolished in Ireland last week.
In Victoria, the Andrews Government is already working on amendments to its Equal Opportunity laws which will achieve a similar outcome to that of Ireland.
Any Christian school or organisation seeking to uphold the truth about marriage through recruiting staff who share their ethos will be under enormous pressure to compromise over the next few years.
Defeating the idea of changing the definition of marriage at the Turnbull Government’s promised plebiscite on same-sex marriage is our best chance to protect basic freedoms."
If someone disagrees with anything the pro-homosexual mainstream media believes then that person is viciously descended on by the full force of the media machine and called names such as "bigot."
The use of that word is becoming too common though so they have started to expand their vocabulary. The latest word they use in conjunction with "bigot" for anyone who doesn't believe what they believe (i.e. in nothing) are now said be have been "radicalized."
The term is no longer reserved for Muslim youth who kill people who do not believe what the Muslim believes, it is now used deceptively (as usual) by the homosexual juggernaut to lambast mostly Christians who speak out against homosexuality.
The Christian on the other hand, especially the "radicalized" ones continue to follow Jesus radical instructions to "love your enemy;" "do good to all people," "treat others as you would want them to treat you," and other such disgraceful things.
This leads them to doing such anti-social things like building schools and hospitals for the poor around the world, leading young people away from drugs, helping them to behave in ways which benefit society rather than cause chaos, division, increased public health costs etc. etc.
As the homosexual juggernaut rolls on, dismantling foundations of society, calling bad good, confusing children, promoting homosexual sex acts as being good and normal, and intimidating politicians, corporates and everyday Australians into silence and submission, one thing will remain:
The media and homosexual lobbyist will be held responsible for the massive increase in youth suicide in our society when the young people they are trying to convert to homosexuality try these unnatural sex acts and then in despair and shame commit suicide.
First will come the massive rise in drug abuse as they try to deal with what they have been hoodwinked into trying, then will come the rise in youth suicide when they cannot handle it anymore.
Normalizing dangerous behavior does not help anyone, it will just lead to more human suffering and devastation. What is normal about a man doing that to another man? A rectum is quite obviously designed for storing human waste prior to excretion out of the anus.
People have a conscience whether they admit it or not, and when we do something wrong our conscience starts to work and we feel bad. That is the purpose of the conscience to guide us away from things that will harm us.
Trying to normalize bad things, and pretending there is no right or wrong or truth, so our consciences do not make us feel so rotten cannot fully work. Keeping away from the wrong behavior is the only way to fully appease one's conscience.
The proponents of normalizing homosexuality are so deceptive that they have the nerve to blame their opponents for youth suicide. Your conscience will tell you this is not correct. Listen to it and act against this threat to marriage, family and society.
The truth is that encouraging a young man to do the sex acts of homosexuals and to immerse themselves in the drug fueled lifestyle of the homosexual community is clearly unhealthy for young people, mentally, emotionally and physically. It will only lead to drug abuse, depression and suicide.
Enough is enough. Please act. If homosexuality is promoted as good and normal by changing the marriage law things will go from bad to a national crisis in a generation. Please speak up now.
Totalitarian or free. Which world would you rather live in?
As we continue to observe the truth about the homosexual juggernaut undermining our good society, let’s look at one current example to reveal the danger ahead from this intolerant totalitarian ideology demolishing all opposition around the West, and compare it with what we have enjoyed over the last couple of centuries.
Tyson Fury. The new boxing heavyweight champion of the world. He doesn’t agree with the juggernaut and is brave enough to speak out and say homosexuality is bad, as is abortion and paedophilia.
So the people of the juggernaut respond as per their usual modus operandi and they unleash a tsunami of abuse, hatred and intimidation to remove this loud opponent of their worldview. 1
Fury is labelled as a bigot and they say he is “radicalized” for not believing what the media believe. They make him out to be a fool, simple, backward. They make complaints saying he has committed a "hate crime" and the police offer to look into it. This all just for saying what the Bible says, that homosexuality is bad.
“Fury had, as he tends to, begun discussing Armageddon and the end of the world, offering up the opinion that the legalising of abortion, paedophilia and homosexuality...would signify a kind of Old Testament-derived reckoning.” 2
So what! Let him speak. Isn't that what it means to live in a free society? But they do not want true freedom. They want to rule unopposed with the power to silence ALL opposition. That is the opposite of freedom and every time these regimes have reared their ugly heads people have always suffered.
Now, there is a petition being promoted by the juggernaut media demanding that Fury not receive the BBC sport award for his sporting accomplishments because he believes something different from the media juggernaut people. They control the media after all so as you would expect there are a lot of unthinking people signing up to it.
Now just picture a world where this is the norm, i.e. where people must all believe in the same thing or else! Isn’t that totalitarianism? Wasn’t that what the Fascists in Germany and the Communists in Russia, Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea imposed on their populations?
Imagine a Christian starting a petition demanding that a sports award not be given to someone because they are not a Christian! Whining about the sportsman being an atheist, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a homosexual! Its ridiculous to demand that a worthy sportsman not receive an award because he doesn't believe in the homosexual doctrines.
The good old “free West” as we used to have, was free because people were free to have their own beliefs without being forced to abandon them. Not any longer.
Thankfully Fury says he is not even interested in the award anyway. Hopefully Fury is strong enough not to be intimidated and bullied by this powerful force of enslavement and he can fight and win. He is after all the current world champion fighter! Has Hydra picked the wrong target this time?
As our culture continues to abandon truth and common sense in the name of some sort of false "freedom" and "equality" we can only expect more headlines like this:
"Stereosonic music festival: 20 overdose in Brisbane despite extra security after deaths in Sydney and Adelaide"
What if two same-sex paedophiles adopted children, as Daniel Andrews has just enabled by law in Victoria, Australia?
What if two same-sex paedophiles "married" each other and became "cottage parents" at boarding schools, orphanages, children's homes, or other such places?
Please read the following article and picture the horrors which will emerge from Royal Commissions into child abuse in the generations to come if you do not speak up now and defend traditional marriage and family.
Child adopted by alleged paedophile tells harrowing tale of abuse at Retta Dixon
Many children of the Stolen Generations were taken to Darwin's Retta Dixon home from the 1940s until it closed.
"All I remember was him being on top of me saying 'don't tell anybody, this is our secret', and all I wanted to do was scream, but nobody could hear me."
John Gordon is haunted by the sexual assaults and beatings he says he suffered as a child at the Retta Dixon Home, a Commonwealth-funded, religious institution in Darwin.
This is the first time he has spoken about the abuse he said was committed by the man he came to regard as his father.
The Northern Territory hearings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse heard harrowing allegations against that man, Donald Henderson.
Mr Henderson and his wife lived at the Retta Dixon home from 1964 until 1975, working as "cottage parents" whose job was to raise the Aboriginal children who were brought there by the Commonwealth.
Mr Gordon had lived at the home since he was taken from his family as a baby.
He said when he was 10 years old, the Hendersons decided to adopt him.
It was most likely an informal adoption as John has no paperwork.
"All I remember is when I was 10 years old I was one of the special ones, I was chosen," he said.
Mr Gordon said his adoptive father would beat and molest him.
"I still have dreams about it. The last time I had dreams like that I woke up the whole house screaming," he said.
"I sometimes feel like it's my fault, I don't know why.
"Did we do something to turn the old b------ on? What's his fetish? What did we do to deserve it? We must have done something to deserve it, done something wrong, otherwise it wouldn't happen."
Mr Gordon was going to give evidence at the royal commission but he had a heart attack as the hearings were about to begin.
Continue reading article.
By Lyle Shelton (ACL)
1st Dec 2015
Finally, the media is reporting the consequences of same-sex marriage.
Last weekend’s reporting of the freedom-sapping effects of same-sex marriage legislation is a potential game-changer in the long-running debate.
After years of the gay lobby saying there were no consequences to changing the definition of marriage, suddenly mainstream media is waking up to the fact that this is not true.
Concerns that ACL and others have raised for years about the impacts on freedom of speech and religion are now being taken seriously by serious journalists.
The action against Hobart Archbishop Julian Porteous and the entire Australian Catholic Bishop’s Conference in the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission has woken journalists at News Corp with a jolt.
The action is by Greens political candidate and transgender activist, Martine Delaney, who has claimed offence under the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Act over a Catholic booklet entitled “Don’t Mess with Marriage”.
The booklet contains all of the key arguments our side of the debate would want to use in the up-coming people’s vote or plebiscite on marriage.
Perhaps this is why the Greens want to use the big stick of the law to maintain their advantage in what has been to date a propaganda war.
I was pleased to be interviewed last week by The Australian’s legal affairs reporter, Nicola Berkovic. She quoted me accurately and also my friend Dr David van Gend of the Australian Marriage Forum. Her piece, Tongue-tied by the thought police is well worth reading and worth the price to get through The Australian’s paywall.
And in a second piece published on the same day, The Australian’s Editor at Large, Paul Kelly, wrote a powerful column exposing the anti-religious freedom agenda of the same-sex political activists. Kelly is one of Australia’s most respected political journalists.
The Australian followed up with an editorial on Monday entitled Ramifications beyond gay marriage (also behind the paywall – maybe you should subscribe to the Aus).
Sadly the Fairfax Media’s The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald have reported nothing of the action against the bishops.
I sat next to a senior Fairfax journalist at a Christmas lunch last week at Parliament House. He had not heard of the Porteous case but said journalists should be the first to defend free speech. Hear, hear!
Of course, our freedoms are not the primary reason for supporting marriage the way it is.
A change perpetrates a terrible injustice on children who will be deliberately denied their mother or father.
No one denies that two men can love a baby and be good parents. But it is not right to take a baby from her or his mother to satisfy the “equality” demands of two men.
The same goes for two women using anonymous sperm donation to deprive a child of her or his father.
It is good that the media are reporting same-sex marriage’s threats to basic civil liberties.
It now needs to investigate the flow-on effects of “marriage equality” – namely the ethics of taking children from their parents through assisted reproductive technology to satisfy the demands of unrelated adults.
Liberal senator Cory Bernardi has crossed the floor for a second time in a fortnight and fired a warning shot to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to better consult the party room, after a midnight deal was struck with the Greens to overturn Liberal policy on private companies disclosing their tax affairs.
The Liberals opposed the former Gillard government's policy of forcing private companies and entities that turn over $100 million or more a year to disclose their tax affairs, saying it would lead to simplistic naming and shaming of companies and individuals over the value of their tax bills.
The Coalition repealed the measure when it won office in 2013.
Treasurer Scott Morrison said the Coalition had secured the best outcome possible. But on Wednesday night, Treasurer Scott Morrison agreed with the Greens to reintroduce the policy with a higher threshold of $200 million in exchange for their support of the broader multinational tax avoidance bill.
The legislation was passed on Thursday after Senator Bernardi crossed the floor,
complaining that the major U-turn in government policy had not been put to cabinet or the party room.
"That policy decision has never been revisited in the party room. It has never been discussed at any level that I am aware of, and I first became aware of it this morning when I asked what the price of the deal was with the Greens party for the passage of this amendment," he said.
"To have sprung this on us at the last minute, I think is not in the best interest of my party and the procedures and policies we work with."
Failing to consult was cited as one of the main reasons for Mr Turnbull losing the leadership in 2009 when the Coalition split on the issue of carbon trading.
On Friday, Senator Bernardi, a critic of Mr Turnbull, told Fairfax Media he was "disappointed" with the lack of proper process.
"The party room was promised that proper process would be followed in regard to policy initiatives.
That promise now rings hollow and I hope it's not an indication of what we can expect in the future," he said.
Bleijie bows to homosexual intimidation. Another weak political leader. Where are all the men?
29 November 2015
"The capitulation of former Queensland Attorney General Jarrod Bleijie on the meaning of marriage will come as a big disappointment for people who voted for him, according to Australian Christian Lobby Queensland director Wendy Francis.
“Throughout his career, Mr Bleijie has actively sought the votes of people who believe in the right of children to wherever possible be raised by their parents.
“To now take a position on marriage that mandates a family structure denying this basic right to children is a blow to his social justice credentials and a breach of trust to voters.”
Ms Francis said Mr Bleijie had played into the hands of those described by Paul Kelly in the Weekend Australian yesterday as seeking to “drive religion into the shadows”.
“At a time when the public are very cynical about politicians, it is disappointing to see a politician jettisoning his principles so cheaply.”
Monday, 30 November 2015 4:25
by Greg Donnelly
Suffer the Little Children
Many people over recent times, both in private and in public, have expressed a growing concern at what is called the sexualisation of children and young people. Indeed, much has been written about it not just by social commentators, but increasingly by child development specialists and adolescent psychologists and psychiatrists. The growing level of young men and boys, some even in primary school receiving counselling or in some cases medical attention for overt acts of sexual behaviour including addiction, for example, attraction to pornography should be seen for what it is. It is not as some would argue a natural and normal progression to a more balanced and enlightened attitude to all matters sexual and gender. Rather, we are seeing serious behavioural issues that should be examined and discussed unencumbered by ideologies that do not just request, but demand compliance.
For some time now I have had significant reservations about an initiative being rolled out Australia-wide in public schools called the Safe Schools Coalition Australia program. The ideas, or should I say the ideologies behind the program, are not new. While those who developed and are driving it claim that they had a “lightbulb moment” regarding the concept, in truth it was lifted directly from similar programs that have been running in public schools in the US for decades. It is worth returning to both the form and content of the program on another occasion. What I wish to comment on is the highly sexualised material that our school children are being directed to through the program.
The program’s mode of delivery is via state and territory based partnership organisations. By visiting the program website and clicking on “Our Supporters” followed by “contact us” you will find the full list of state and territory partners. It is worth a visit. You may be surprised. I know I was.
In the ACT, Sexual Health and Family Planning ACT have the contract to deliver the program. Having clicked into the website I, like I expect many inquisitive kids, started to review the content. How about “Dealing with uncomfortable sexual fantasies”? I make no further comment other than to say I do not know where the psychosexual nuances of rape fantasies are accommodated in the Australian curriculum. Moving on, I thought I would try “Questicon gets “Sexed up””. Kids in the ACT certainly know about Questicon. Having been to Questicon myself with the family a few times I knew it was a child friendly place. Well, not perhaps this time!
The article shows Erin Smith, the person who delivers the program in the ACT, smiling broadly as she makes and then displays on a plate edible vulva sweet treats. I won’t repeat it, you did read it correctly the first time. The article explained that the so-called XXX Adults Only Science Night Explosion produced over 1000 what are described colourfully as “sweet sticky treats”. Sprinkles, coconut and icing sugar apparently are key ingredients. Now I do not consider myself a prude, but my instincts tell me there is something very wrong when our schools kids are being encouraged, indeed directed, to click into websites like this.
In case I had inadvertently accidentally found the exception and not the rule, I thought I would click into a couple of other partner sites. In NSW the state partner is Family Planning NSW. If you, as kids no doubt will, go to the website you will find exactly what you would expect. Without any particular reason I thought that I would have a look at the Frequently Asked Questions part of the website. Interesting indeed. The Question and Answer on oral sex and STIs was striking. Question: Recently it was my boyfriend’s birthday and for an extra special birthday pressie I gave him a blowjob. Is it possible that I could have caught some sort of STD or disease? Please help me. I am really worried. Answer: Oral sex is very safe in regards to the risk of pregnancy…. .
In NSW there are public primary schools that have been recruited into the program. Surely the following question must be asked. If the NSW Education and Communities Minister, Adrian Piccoli knows about these matters, and he has had them drawn to his attention, how can he just sit on his hands and do nothing?
Coming originally from the state where you get to see the sun set over the ocean, I thought I would check out the arrangements in WA. In that state the WA Aids Council was awarded the partner contract. It appears that two people have been appointed to roll it out across the state. I am sure that there will be a range of views about the appropriateness or otherwise of encouraging or directing children onto the WA Aids Council website to scroll and click around for information. However, I am quite sure that our kids do not need their teachers facilitating them to visit a website that explains the finer points of cruising and other activities.
As bad as this may all seem, what is unforgivable, in my view, is that this is being done without the consent of the vast majority of parents who send their children to public schools. The program website proudly boasts that over 460 schools have already joined. What I would like to know is of the over 460 principals who have signed their schools up to the program on the membership form downloadable on the website, how many fully informed parents about what their children would now be exposed to and taught?
Parents are the primary educators of their children. They have an absolute right to know what their children are being taught in schools. It is about time they were told why their children are being placed in harms way by their principals, teachers and those appointed on contracts to introduce and propagate this material.
The Foundation for Young Australians, as national convenor of the program, should also be served with a please explain notice. The federal along with state and territory Education Ministers also have some serious explaining to do. And in doing this explaining let us not try and wrap all of this up in the guise of some sort of anti-bullying initiative. Bullying of any kind in our schools be they public, Catholic or Independent is unacceptable and there should be robust policies and procedures in place to deal with it. Indeed that is presently the case. If those policies and procedures require examination and possible refinement then good, let’s get on and do it. But in doing this, let us protect all children.
Greg Donnelly is a Labor member of the NSW Legislative Council.
This article originally appear on Online Opinion
Please email Greg Donnelly an t hank him for being a strong leader and ask him to keep going and do more to protect our children from the homosexual onslaught engulfing our families and society.
There is a new article posted on the True Marriage Equality site, an excerpt of which follows:
A Secular Case For Defending Marriage and Children
By Cronshaw Jones
Allowing the law to normalize, promote, and protect against criticism, homosexual behavior and all the consequences of such a lifestyle, will damage our nation’s children and lead to a massive increase in child abuse (emotional, mental and physical), drug abuse and youth suicide. Adults have a duty of care to protect children, not harm them.
There is enough for children to worry about as they grow up, they should not need to have to deal with such things as a man "marrying" another man and pretending that doing such sexual acts to each other is good and normal.
Australia’s children are having divisive arguments about homosexual “marriage” in school playgrounds. They should not need to even have to think about a man putting his penis in another man’s anus (designed to excrete human waste), let alone have to take sides as if sodomy is some sort of human rights or civil rights issue, instead of an act which has among other things caused the worldwide spread of the AIDS virus and left millions of children orphans.
Please do not pander to a minority of selfish adults seeking to normalize their own unnatural lifestyle. Please be a responsible adult and leave marriage alone, if only for children's sake.
This is not an issue of civil rights. The issue of redefining marriage to pretend that a man can “marry” another man and then do the sexual things they do to each other as “husband” and “wife” is a long way from being a civil rights or human rights issue.
It is in fact nothing of the sort. It is an issue Australians are being bullied into accepting by a vocal minority of intimidators who have managed to silence the media and politicians on this issue. In fact I suggest that any attempt to normalize this sexual activity is in reality a child protection issue.
Please think of the message being taught to the children of Australian by our leaders pretending such an issue is akin to freeing slaves or fighting apartheid. Children will be intimidated into thinking sodomy is okay because it is being elevated to such heights and fought for as if it was the most noble cause in the world.
By even discussing this positively in parliament politicians are saying that it is okay for men to do this sort of sexual act (sodomy) to each other, and therefore why not children to each other and adults to children.
Children need protection by politicians and our community leaders.
Governments should protect children not create an environment which encourages boys to do this sort of sexual act to each other and to make it easier for pedophiles to do it to boys.
Think of what happened in Ballarat, where so many boys committed suicide because of the homosexual abuse perpetrated on them by homosexuals. The recent Royal Commission into child sexual abuse should remind you that children need protection from sexual deviancy. If homosexual sex acts are normalized by changing the legal definition of marriage, homosexual offenders will no longer need to infiltrate and hide inside an institutional structure such as the Catholic Church, they will be let loose, free to practice their depravity wherever they like, boarding schools, schools, day care centres…
Have you considered that normalizing this will lead to a rise in child sexual abuse by adults to children and by children to other children? We should as a society be aiming to abolish child abuse not promote it with our laws.
To read the full article please CLICK HERE.
Targeting Children, Part 1: How the gay movement intends to capture the next generation
Targeting Children, Part 2: How the homosexual movement uses public schools as instruments of change
Targeting Children, Part 3: Activists encouraging experimentation
Targeting Children, Part 4: Access to children: homosexuality and molestation
There is “a time to be silent, and a time to speak”. (Ecclesiastes 3:7). Now is the time to speak, so please speak up and defend children, truth and freedom. Craig Manners
“What the world needs most is a voice that courageously speaks the truth, not when the world is right, but a voice that speaks the truth when the world is wrong.” Fulton Sheen
True marriage offers true equality for children. Every child comes from and needs BOTH a Mum and a Dad. Every human being has dignity and deserves respect. All sorts of relationships can be respected at law without having to change marriage laws. In fact that has been the case legally for many years. The simple fact remains though that not every relationship is marriage.