Displaying items by tag: censorship

We are facing a six-headed monster of tyranny.  Freedom is on the line, as Western, so-called democratic governments have trashed our basic human rights.  How much do we know, or care?

Another peaceful pro-life march, and another handful of demonised haters.

 The 45th G7 summit was held last week in Biarritz, France and covered the kind of social-engineering agenda that has come to be expected from similar globalist conferences: climate strategy, radical feminism and extreme abortion policies.

News broke this week about Google expanding its censorship of conservative and pro-life websites. Whistleblower Zachary Vorhies divulged information detailing widespread censorship by Google of numerous blacklisted sites, including LifeNews.com, Newsbusters, Gateway Pundit, Glenn Beck and the Media Research Center. The crackdowns on our free speech have become even more numerous and more noticeable, even to smaller independent sites.

Two British scientists have charged the UK government with censorship for omitting information that cast a negative light on government programs related to “unwanted pregnancies.”

A popular wedding magazine called “White” has announced today that it is closing down. The reason? The Christian publishers had been asked to carry articles featuring same sex weddings, and had politely declined to do so. The backlash on social media led to a number of advertisers withdrawing their custom, and some customers refusing to buy the magazine any more. In this post I want to comment on the legal issues around this incident, and another episode highlighted in the press today. A report in The Australian today notes the close of White magazine, and also the other episode involving someone in the “wedding industry”:

The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) yesterday dropped its disgraceful investigation into social media activity of Toowoomba based GP, Dr David van Gend. Dr van Gend posted on Facebook that,

“the Board got back to me today and (of course) threw out that worthless complaint unconditionally. Not with the profuse apology that good manners would have expected after this vexatious waste of a fellow citizen’s time… Thanks to massive pushback from many doctors and thousands of citizens, I doubt the Board will be expanding their censorship powers in the new Doctors’ Code of Conduct. And that is a small but necessary win.”