Displaying items by tag: graham preston

Yes, free speech is dead in this country, killed by its very guardians, the High Court of Australia, and “liberal” civil libertarians.

Here in Australia, was it that day in October 2008 when the Victorian parliament made abortion on demand legal up until 24 weeks of pregnancy? [Note: with signatures from two doctors, abortion is available to 40 weeks - Ed]. Or was it some years before that when the parliament of the Australian Capital Territory made abortion on demand legal right up until birth? I would suggest that it was on neither of those dates, but some time much earlier still. 

In an important decision on free speech issues, the High Court of Australia, in its decision in Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery [2019] HCA 11 (10 April 2019), has upheld the validity of laws in Victoria and Tasmania prohibiting communication about abortion within 150m of an abortion clinic. The decision may have serious implications for free speech about other issues on which religious believers have deep-seated convictions contrary to the general orthodoxy of modern Australian society.

Queensland

Exclusion-zones went into force yesterday in Queensland, along with the state's new act that moved abortion into the health code. Queensland is the fourth Australian state to enact the zones - this includes New South Wales, where abortion is still technically illegal; both territories also have the so-called 'Safe-Access' zones. Pro-lifers who wish to pray outside abortion mills and offer help to the women entering them will now have to stand 150m away from the entrance or risk huge fines and potential incarceration.

My constitutional challenge to Victoria's abortuary exclusion-zones was heard in the Australian High Court from October 9-11, 2018. Graham Preston's challenge to Tasmanian exclusion-zones was heard alongside mine. Please click here to learn more about exclusion-zones. Please click here to follow the progress of this case of the High Court of Australia website.  

John Young has summarised the submission made by my legal team to the High Court of Australia, which we propose will show that abortion-facility exclusion zones are unconstitutional. The entire document is 24 pages long and can be read here on the High Court website, along with submissions from the Attorneys-General of the states and territories, and the Commonwealth Attorney-General - all of whom oppose us. American readers may be interested to note that SCOTUS and the Massachusetts bubble-zone case are mentioned in our submission on page 12. Careful readers will see that, on the day of my arrest, twenty police officers were briefed regarding my life advocacy within the exclusion zone. Twenty.

 In the wake of the passing of another  'Safe-Access' zones bill,  a NSW MP has sanctioned the idea that violence against life advocates is acceptable. Emma Husar, Labor's member for Lindsay, made the comment in a thread on her public Facebook page.

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.]

Today I received a letter from an inmate of a Queensland jail. I have never met this man in person but it is probably the fourth or fifth time that he, Michael, has written to me during the last eight years that he has been in prison. Michael first initiated contact when he read a newspaper article about me being in prison. (I was “inside” for engaging in non-violent sit-ins in front of the doors of abortion clinics.) Although each of us ended up in jail by way of very different routes we do share a common concern – we both believe that the deliberate taking of the life of a child in the womb is terribly wrong. Unlike many, probably the large majority of pro-lifers, Michael does not profess to hold any Christian or religious beliefs - not that he is antagonistic to those who do oppose abortion based on Christian convictions. Rather, in his own words, he is motivated to oppose abortion because, “my memory of the time before my birth is something very, very strong and I recognise it has happened for a reason,” and, “It is not due to ‘conviction’ that I oppose abortion-on-demand, it is love.”

Another week, another encroachment on our freedoms - that's how it feels in Australia these days. The latest outrage is that there appears to be some doubt as to whether or not a plebiscite to decide the marriage issue will be supported in the Senate, or if we citizens will be deemed too ignorant to vote on it, and be made to leave the decision to our parliamentarians. 'Marriage Equality' Ammunition I was fortunate to be able to see Brendan O'Neill speak in Melbourne last week. For those of you who haven't heard of Brendan, he is an online journalist with Spiked Online, and an atheist libertarian. Brendan gave his Christian audience some fresh insights into the marriage debate and proved, yet again, that this isn't a religious issue, but a natural law (and common-sense) one. Brendan has been ostracised and publicly vilified for his stance on marriage, simply because he doesn't agree with the fashionable ideology of marriage redefinition.