Helping Christians to make a difference
Dealing with current Issues
Helping Christian families to make a difference
10 Nov 2015
We recently sent out an article where Senator Eric Abetz had commented on the media’s negative treatment of conservatives.
We have known Senator Abetz for a long time and he was the speaker at our first Dinner (click here to read his speech). We met up with Eric when we were visiting Hobart recently and he told us he would have an article in The Spectator… so here it is… Eric explains more about how conservatives are treated differently by the media.
Eric Abetz - 31 October 2015
A friend recently introduced me to the concept of negative sentiment over-ride. It means that the observer (usually the spouse) perceives everything through a lens of negative pre-disposition. The opposite, positive sentiment over-ride, is what we engage in when we first start dating: everything has a positive explanation and foibles are overlooked. (My wife still suffers from this!)
So, as I reflected on the media’s treatment of those of us that are pigeon-holed into the conservative loft, I became convinced that negative sentiment over-ride was a very apt description; no matter what conservatives do or say it must have a negative genesis – borne out of their dark heart. ‘Stopping the boats’ can never be portrayed as a policy designed to save lives, put criminals out of business, and have an intake of refugees based on need. Rather, it is portrayed as wanting to make the lives of some poor wretched souls even more wretched. After all, this is the only reason conservatives get up of a morning. Similarly, balancing the budget isn’t about protecting future generations from a burden of debt, passing on a nation that is better off than when we inherited her, or curtailing our generation’s irresponsible selfishness to maintain our lifestyle. No, it is about putting the economy before people, dollars before welfare.
Having called this bias out for what it is and the unprofessional approach by the Canberra media pack, courtesy of the Australia’s front page on the 19th October, Paul Murray Live on the same evening and the ABC’s AM program I was warned that payback and retribution would be swift.
And so it was.
During an ‘interview’ (using the term extremely loosely) where the interviewer had clearly one purpose in mind – shout me down, interrupt and abuse – I used a particular word. A word used to describe a group of people by one of that group’s greatest ever leaders, Martin Luther King. A word in the title of many charitable and self-advancement organisations including those helping young members into a tertiary education and a ‘progressive, innovative and 21st century’ organisation promoting the interests of the female business and professional women of this particular sector of the American community. A word used to describe Obama’s special type of ‘magic’ by the Los Angeles Times as it was championing his cause for the Presidency. A word authorised by the Obama administration for use in the last US Census with which people could self-identify. A word used to describe a genre of spiritual music.
In case you haven’t guessed it, the word describes a particular section of the American community and begins with the letter ‘n’ and ends with the letter ‘o’.
In using this apparently ‘offensive’, ‘inappropriate’ and ‘racist slur’ I was allegedly denigrating the very man I was praising and quoting – the Hon Clarence Thomas’ (Justice of the US Supreme Court) judgement against changing the definition of marriage.
Nobody has yet been able to explain to me why I would wish to racially denigrate a person whose aid I was calling upon in a radio interview. But such was the outrage that even the overpaid and quite clearly underworked Race Discrimination Commissioner found it necessary to weigh in. Fairfax and the ABC celebrated and punished me with broadcasting the considered views of the Senate’s Einstein double Senator Lambie after which they enlisted the hapless Bill Shorten. (You know, the same Bill Shorten who, as a Minister, told Annie the pie shop owner to ‘get effed’ for not having any hot pies.)
Their joint intellectual and moral authority served as a double whipping with a limp lettuce leaf from which I am slowly recovering. In stark contrast, the public reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. If per chance a lefty luvvie is reading this, by accident or, because of deep seated recidivism for which they are seeking therapy, or engaging in an exercise of ‘know thy enemy’, might I suggest you don’t look at the Sydney Morning Herald’s own use of the word – they’ve used it a number of times, including this year. You might have to dump the SMH or excuse Abetz. Now there’s a dilemma for you!
The negative overdrive was countered by a well spring of public support which has left me thankful for the whole exercise.
9 Nov 2015
We normally DON’T recommend that you watch Q & A!
However, tonight’s program, at 9.35 pm on ABC, will feature euthanasia and palliative care.
Since parliaments around the country periodically debate the issue, and Victoria is currently waiting for a report from an Inquiry by the Legislative Council into ‘End of life choices’ (due May 2016), it’s very helpful to know who is supporting and who is opposing the legalisation of euthanasia.
The program features five guests – two support euthanasia and two OPPOSE euthanasia (and support palliative care). The fifth person has terminal cancer and “is determined to have a good and conscious death without euthanasia.”
Thanks to Denise Cameron at Pro-Life Victoria for the notification below which includes details about the participants!
You can send a written or video question at the ABC QANDA page (Click here).
Tom Mortier’s article, about Andrew Denton’s recent statements supporting euthanasia, is very insightful, since Andrew Denton interviewed Tom earlier this year about Tom's experience with Belgium's euthanasia law.
Another insightful article by Michael Brown.
He comments on an article printed in Salon magazine titled “I'm a pedophile, but not a monster," with the subtitle reading, "I'm attracted to children but unwilling to act on it. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?”
Read on to see what Michael says…
Michael Brown , Christian Post Op-Ed Contributor - September 28, 2015.
A shocking article posted on the Salon.com website has many people asking, "Now that we have embraced homosexuality, is pedophilia next?"
The article, written by Todd Nickerson, was titled, "I'm a pedophile, but not a monster," with the subtitle reading, "I'm attracted to children but unwilling to act on it. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?"
Nickerson even points to a website called Virtuous Pedophiles which states, "The goals of our organization are to reduce the stigma attached to pedophilia by letting people know that a substantial number of pedophiles do not molest children, and to provide peer support and information about available resources to help pedophiles lead happy, productive lives. Our highest priority is to help pedophiles never abuse children. We hope you will explore our web site with an open mind."
What are we to make of this? And how does this tie in with gay activism?
As I pointed out in 2011, we shouldn't be surprised with the push for the acceptance of pedophilia, meaning both sympathy for the pedophile, who would doubtless say, "I didn't choose this. I'm born this way and cannot change," and recognition that "intergenerational intimacy" can often be consensual and beneficial — as disgusting as it is even to write those words....
Read the full article - click here.
An insightful article from Albert Mohler…
Why has Playboy decided to NOT publish nude photos of women in their magazine in the future (from March 2016)?
And is it ‘good news’ or ‘bad news’?
(The answer lies in the fact that pornography is now so readily available on the internet…)
But what will Playboy publish in the future?
When you’ve read Albert’s article, please read the recent article from Canberra Declaration The War Is Not Over!– it reports on the Playboy decision, provides some horrifying statistics about access to pornography (such as the ‘average age of first exposure to pornography is 11 for boys, and 13 for girls) and asks us to ACT. . .
Family Voice are campaigning to ensure that ISPs filter out pornography and that people have to ‘opt-in’ to receive it. Please follow the links in the CD article to contact your MPs and Senators.
Albert Mohler - October 14, 2015
"A venerable parable from Confucian China told of an elderly man who had seen emperors and events come and go, and observed from his Confucian worldview that good news and bad news were often difficult to tell apart. “Good news? Bad news? Who’s to say?,” he would reply to any news from his neighbors.
I thought of that parable when I read the headlines that announced the news that Playboy would cease the publication of nude photographs of women in its magazine. From any moral perspective, that should appear as good news. The headlines might suggest that Playboy has had a change of heart. A closer look at the story, however, reveals a very different moral reality. Playboy acknowledged that its decision had nothing to do with any admission that pornography is morally wrong. Instead, the publishers of the magazine were acknowledging that their product was no longer commercially viable as explicit pornography because pornography is so pervasive in the Internet age that no one need buy their product.
Scott Flanders, Playboy CEO, told the media that his product had been overtaken by the larger culture. “You’re just one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And it’s just passé at this juncture.”
That is one of the most morally revealing statements of recent times. Playboy has outlived its ability to transgress and to push the moral boundaries. As a matter of fact, it was a victim of its own sad success. Pornography is such a pervasive part of modern society that Playboy is now a commercial victim of the very moral revolution it symbolized and promoted for decades. . .
Click here to read the full article...
The Labor government in Victoria, led by Daniel Andrews, is pushing through a raft of legislation in the coming weeks – legislation that we believe is totally un-Biblical and will RESTRICT religious freedom!
Before the last election, Labor leader Daniel Andrews promised a range of new laws to ‘remove discrimination’ related to homosexuality.
Immediately after the election, Daniel Andrews appointed a ‘Minster for Equality’, Martin Foley, who pushes the issue continually – and then announced an expansion of the Safe Schools Coalition (prior to the election they promised to make it ‘compulsory’ for state high schools).
Then, in July 2015, Mr Andrews appointed lesbian activist Rowena Allen as the state’s ‘Gender and Sexuality Commissioner’ (source).
Having established those positions, they are now introducing legislation to expand ‘rights’ for homosexuals.
So what legislation are they putting forward in the next few weeks?
- Adoption by homosexual couples.
- The removal of exceptions or exemptions for religious groups and Christian schools regarding the employment of homosexuals.
- ‘Exclusion zones’ around abortion clinics.
We expect the government will want to get them ‘passed’ by the end of the year – parliament sits 20-22 October, 6-8 and 20-22 November and 8-10 December) (Calendar)
On other weeks, Members are likely to be in their electorates!
If you live in Victoria, PLEASE CONTACT your SIX Members and Party leaders
Each voter has ONE Member in the Legislative Assembly and FIVE Members in the Legislative Council).
ALSO CONTACT the Party leaders.
Contact details below in the ACTION section…
Express your CONCERN…
If we don’t express our concern, then ALL they will hear is the OTHER SIDE, and they are actively campaigning for CHANGE!
The three issues in brief…
1. The ability of religious organisations and Christian schools to decide to NOT employ homosexuals
Labor has promised to REMOVE exemptions/exceptions for religious groups and Christian schools from the Equal Opportunity Act – they currently allow religious groups and religious schools to choose to NOT employ homosexuals (or people living together, etc).
The relevant sections are Sections 82 and 83.
Labor REMOVED these exemptions just before the previous election, but the Coalition RE-INSTATED the exemptions. It is expected that the Labor government will introduce laws to this effect BEFORE the END of this YEAR.
The law now states that a religious group or school has an exception to the Equal Opportunity Act – it states that the anti-discrimination law doesn’t apply to “religious belief or activity, sex, sexual orientation, lawful sexual activity, marital status, parental status or gender identity” if it “conforms with the doctrines, beliefs or principles of the religion; or is reasonably necessary to avoid injury to the religious sensitivities of adherents of the religion.”
No BILL has been introduced to parliament yet – but please contact your MPs and leaders and ASK them to RETAIN the exceptions/exemptionsfor religious groups in the Equal Opportunity Act.
Religious groups and Christian schools would be UNABLE to operate if they cannot choose staff based on their beliefs, doctrines and principles.
2. ADOPTION by homosexual couples
Another of Labor’s PROMISES was to legislate to allow ADOPTION by homosexual couples.
For FULL details, see our Campaign page, published last week.
This one is URGENT - DUE for debate THIS WEEK (from 20 October).
3. Exclusion zones around abortion clinics
The Labor government has also promised to put forward a GOVERNMENT Bill regarding ‘exclusion zones’ around abortion clinics to ban protests outside abortion clinics.
This is in place of a Bill proposed by Sex Party MP Fiona Patten, which was unworkable – she proposed a 150 metre exclusion zones with penalties of up to 12 months in prison!
The government Bill is expected to be more ‘moderate’ but will still aim to ban peaceful prayer and protest outside abortion clinics.
Please ASK your MPs and Party leaders to OPPOSE the introduction of ‘exclusion zones’ as they restrict freedom of speech.
Action – If you live in Victoria, PLEASE contact your MPs
If you live in Victoria it is vitally important that you CONTACT your Member in the Legislative Assembly and your FIVE Members in the Legislative Council.
To QUICKLY find YOUR SIX Members
– click here, type in your postcode, click SEARCH!
For DETAILS, click on BOTH ‘View Electorate’ buttons.
Also write to …