subscribe btndonate btn

Home
Thursday, 31 August 2017 18:36

The Marriage Plebiscite – A Pastor’s Resource

Written by

Brian Houston set an example to follow for many church leaders recently when he issued a media release outlining his teaching on Biblical marriage and encouragement for Christians to vote against its redefinition. He reiterated the literal interpretation of the Apostle Paul’s position on homosexuality, and called for respect from both sides for the other, clarifying that disagreement based in faith convictions is not bigotry. He encouraged Christians to participate in the voluntary vote, and to refuse to be the silent majority, in effect surrendering to aggressive voices seeking to dominate the future of our society. Christians are already being discomforted by cultural Marxism‘s advance in Australia. Just ask Tasmanian Archbishop Julian Porteous how free he feels to teach on marriage after being punished by the process of an anti-discrimination complaint against him for doing so. Ask Bernard Gaynor how free he feels to privately blog about the injustice and offense of Christian vilification and public indecency at the Homosexual Mardis Gras after the court ruled his employer could unjustly fire him for disagreeing with their workplace anti discrimination policies.

Australia is a multi-faith society. The 2016 Census shows that, while the mix of beliefs has changed over the years, Australia remains a pretty religious place. In the last census, nearly 70% of Australians self-identified as religious. The number of Australians who have self-identified as Christian in the census has fallen from 88.2% in 1966 to 52.1% in 2016. The number of Australians identifying as being of another religion has grown from 0.8% to 8.2%, with Islam (2.6%), Buddhism (2.4%) and Hinduism (1.9%) being the largest non-Christian faiths. The number who self-identified in the category of “no religion” has grown from 0.8% to 30.1%. This category includes having secular beliefs, other spiritual beliefs or having no religion. This makes it hard to be sure what these Australians believe.

Let me open with a few home truths: -Those demanding the complete redefinition – and thus destruction – of marriage do NOT want a debate on the matter. -They want it rammed through without the agreement of the public. -They do not have facts and evidence on their side, which is why they despise debate. -They therefore do not seek to win the debate – they seek to shut down the debate. -If they must engage in debate, the best they can come up with is ad hominem attacks, mud-slinging, name-calling, hate and hysteria. All this is easily enough documented. As to the other side preventing genuine debate from taking place, and shutting down the ‘No’ voice on homosexual marriage, consider a few recent articles.

Wednesday, 23 August 2017 19:01

Abortion and Forgiveness

Written by

Written from a Catholic perspective, Les Jones looks at some ministries of varying denominations that exist to help mothers and fathers in the wake of an abortion.

One of the reasons people have for not speaking about abortions is the fear of offending women who have had an abortion.

If we stress that God, the Church and ourselves offer forgiveness and help to such women, we can reduce the chance of such offence.

Monday, 21 August 2017 21:27

Assisted Suicide and 'Bracket Creep'

Written by

[This is the second article on assisted suicide in the series by Peter McCullagh. Click here to read the previous article, Good Suicide Vs Bad Suicide:]

Q.  What do the terms ‘climate change’ and ‘slippery slope’ (in relation to assisted suicide) have in common?

Α.  Both are regularly dismissed as fictitious in ‘one liners’.  In both instances, the terms predict adverse consequences.  In both instances, those predictions are based on preceding events, and their value will be dependent on the accuracy of description and analysis of those events.  Should the evidentiary value of relevant preceding event be poor, then the credibility of the predictions, be they concerned with climate or assisted suicide will be proportionally diminished.  ‘One line’ dismissals, particularly in relation to assisted suicide, have invariably denied the existence of the preceding events on which predictions of a ‘slippery slope’ are based.  Nevertheless, detailed examination of those events has invariably been absent.

Tuesday, 15 August 2017 07:43

As for Me and My House

Written by

Julie Robinson, wife of Queensland MP Mark Robinson, wrote this excellent social media post about the end goal of Marxism - the destruction of the family. Julie has kindly allowed me to reproduce her article here. 

As For Me and My House.

  What we're facing here is nothing new. Marxism has always taught that the nuclear family - father, mother and children must be eradicated. It is, according to Marx and Engels both a result of capitalism, and designed to perpetuate it. Wealth passed down through family lines only ensures class divisions continue. Patriarchy (and marriage) maintain oppression of women and children as they have less control over resources and are therefore less powerful. In a truly Marxist society, Family must go - or at least family as defined as father, mother and their children. To destroy family, one must first undermine or weaken that unique and powerful bond between husband and wife, and put a wedge between children and parents. State encouragement of sexual experimentation is designed to bring an end to monogamy - all in the name of freedom and equality.

Saturday, 12 August 2017 20:17

What's in a Name? The Children by Choice Conference

Written by

What do abortionists talk about when they get together? Well, judging by the lengths some abortion providers go to - they don't want the public to know about it. But the 2017 Children by Choice conference was recently held in Brisbane, and we can get some idea of what goes on behind the scenes by looking at their conference schedule and speaker list. Children by Choice is a Queensland abortion business that is notorious for offering finance to disadvantaged mothers so that they won't miss out on the essential 'reproductive care' enjoyed by their wealthier counterparts. So, if you can't afford a baby and can't afford to have it killed, Children by Choice will loan you the money for an abortion. [It's not known if they also loan money to women who want to keep their babies. Presumably not.]