GAY TRUTH

An Australian Christian leader has been reported to the government for speaking up for marriage between one man and one woman. If same-sex marriage is legislated, he won’t be the last. Our choice as Christians will be compromise or honour Christ’s definition of marriage and be punished by an intolerant government. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Hobart, Julian Porteous , is now the subject of an official complaint to the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission. He will now undergo a mandatory process to answer the allegation made against him. He could end up in court. If found guilty, he could be fined. His alleged crime? He promoted Catholic teaching on marriage to the parents who enrolled their children in Tasmania ’s Catholic schools. Entitled Don’t Mess with Marriage https://www.sydneycatholic.org/pdf/DMM-booklet_web.pdf, the booklet he distributed respects the dignity of same-sex attracted people while talking about the goodness of man-woman marriage and why children

Justice Michael Kirby, High Court of Australia (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Slogans such as ‘marriage equality’ and ‘equal love’ have dominated the gay marriage debate so far. But as the federal parliament inches closer to dealing with the three ‘marriage equality’ bills that are before it, we are finally beginning to see their consequences. During the recent Senate Hearings into one of the bills, the Green’s Marriage Equality Amendment Bill, former High Court Justice Michael Kirby was asked what logical reason could be given for not extending ‘marriage equality’ to other configurations of love such as consenting polygamous and polyamorous ones. “The question that is before the parliament at the moment is the question of equality for homosexual people,” he told the Senate.“There may be, in some future time, some other question. The lesson in courts and in the parliament, I suggest, is that you take matters step by step.” And it is clear by recent events that there are those who are

English: Tony Abbott in 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Any referendum questions on marriage must canvass the consequences of change, allowing a free and open debate, Australian Christian Lobby Managing Director Lyle Shelton said today. “This debate can’t continue with television networks like Channel 7 and Channel 10 refusing to run innocuous advertisements putting the other side of the argument,” Mr Shelton said. “The word ‘bigotry’, used again by journalists on social media last night, must be dropped from the public discourse so that there is complete freedom to put the alternative view.” Mr Shelton said the Prime Minister Tony Abbott ’s floating of a referendum or plebiscite next term of Parliament gave breathing space for ordinary Australians to be allowed to know what is at stake. “Any referendum questions must canvass the harms to freedom of speech, religion and conscience raised by the Australian Human Right’s Commission’s ‘freedom commissioner’ Tim Wilson

FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS “Our first question benchmarks the question from Sexton 2011 and finds the same high level of support for the fundamental rights of the child: 76% of Australians agree that “where possible, as a society, we should try to ensure that children are raised by their own mother and father”. “We get the same figure, 76%, in response to our question about marriage as a compound right: whether people agree “that the right to marry includes the right to found a family”. “Significantly, that means a quarter of Australians (24%) do not understand that the right to marry includes the right to found a family, as defined in theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights Article 16. That means they do not understand that laws for homosexual marriage include the right for two men to create a family by surrogacy or adoption – with the consequence that any state laws which presently prohibit same-sex adoption or surrogacy will be overturned. “If every fourth Australian fails to under

SUMMARY FINDINGS · By a margin of three to one, Australians agree we should try to ensure that children, where possible, are raised by their own mother and father. · By a margin of three to one, Australians agree that the right to marry includes the right to create a family . · By a margin of three to one, Australians think it is more important that a child should have a mum and dad than that two men should have the right to marry and create a family. · By a margin of three to one, Coalition voters would be "MUCH LESS likely" to vote for an MP who supports same-sex marriage. SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS Society is faced with an inescapable choice.

Same-sex 'marriage' forces us to choose between giving priority to: · children's rights to have both a mum and dad · homosexual adults' claims to marry and create a family. Faced with this choice, Australians overwhelmingly give priority to the rights of the child, not the right

Official 2005 photo of Chief Justice John G. Roberts (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) “Senator Wong was wrong in her declaration to the Labor national conference that ‘there is nothing to fear from equality’”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australian Marriage Forum. “There is always something to fear when the self-interest of the powerful crushes the rights of the weak, and that is what so-called “marriage equality” does. “ Marriage equality ” is a selfish adult-centred movement that tramples on the rights and needs of the child, and that is an abuse of power: · In the name of adult “equality” it destroys the rights of children to have both a mother and a father in their life - which is a profound injustice. · In the name of “equal love” between two men it destroys the more primal love between a mother and baby – and that is an unloving act. · In the name of “ anti-discrimination ” it discriminates against certain children who will be denied their biolog

As the Australian Federal Parliament reconvenes, in a week that will see yet another same-sex 'marriage' Bill tabled, the Australian Marriage Forum has placed a full page Ad in The Australian, challenging the injustice of so-called “marriage equality”. “It is time to take the gay lobby down from their moral high horse”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australian Marriage Forum. “They are obsessed with an adult-centred view of “marriage equality” that removes just discrimination against homosexual adults while inflicting unjust discrimination against children”, he said. “If 'equality' for adults can only come at the cost of inequality for kids, where is the justice in that?” Dr van Gend asked. “If 'equal love' for two gay men can only come at the cost of destroying the primal love between a mother and her baby, what is loving about that?” “And if a movement that has demanded 'tolerance' of society now shows gross intolerance of anybody who disag

Pro and anti-Proposition 8 protesters rally in front of the San Francisco City Hall as the California Supreme Court holds a session in the to determine the definition of marriage (Strauss v. Horton cases). (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson ’s call for freedom of conscience to be protected is welcome but does not meet the social justice objections to redefining marriage, the Australian Christian Lobby said today. “It is good that Mr Wilson wants to avoid the overseas experience where florists, cake makers, photographers and wedding chapel owners are being hauled before courts and punished with fines for their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman,” ACL Managing Director Lyle Shelton said. “ACL sincerely thanks Mr Wilson for his good faith in recognising that millions of Australians will always believe the timeless definition of marriage and that they should be shielded from legal action for publicly manifesting their beliefs. “We al

( MercatorNet ) -- Australia’s leading gay activist claims that a booklet defending natural marriage by the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference clearly breaches an anti-discrimination act. Worse, it exposes “vulnerable children” to “damaging messages”. Rodney Croome, national director of Australian Marriage Equality , is angry that Catholic schools in the state of Tasmania are distributing “ Don’t Mess with Marriage ”. Archbishop Julian Porteous plans to give 12,000 Tasmanian Catholic school children copies to pass on to their parents. Some teachers were horrified at the prospect of Catholic schools distributing Catholic literature, says Mr Croome: The Catholic Church has every right to express its views from the pulpit but it is completely inappropriate to enlist young people as the couriers of its prejudice. The booklet says to gay students in Catholic schools that their sexuality is wrong and that their aspiration to marry is a danger to marriage, religion and societ

December 13, 2013 ( MercatorNet ) - There were tears of indignation outside of Australia’s High Court yesterday, but it was the result that everyone expected: a law passed on December 3 authorising same-sex marriage in the Australian Capital Territory was unconstitutional. The marriages of the 30 or so gay and lesbian couples who had exchanged vows under the law have now been annulled. “This is devastating for those couples who married this week and for their families,” said the spokesman for Australian Marriage Equality , Rodney Croome . “However, this is just a temporary defeat. What is far more important is that the ACT’s law facilitated the first same-sex marriage on Australian soil and showed the nation the love and commitment of same-sex couples. The marriages in the ACT prove that this reform is not about politics, but about love, commitment, and fairness.” It had always been clear that under the Australian Constitution , the regulation of marriage is exclusively a Federa

“ Victoria ’s deputy chief psychiatrist – and State Government-appointed equal opportunities champion – has joined forces with doctors lobbying the Federal Government to ban same-sex marriage. Twenty-two Victorian GPs, anaesthetists, obstetricians, palliative care specialists and psychiatrists, including Prof Kuravilla George, have joined 150 colleagues interstate to argue gay marriage poses a health risk to society. “In a letter to the Senate’s inquiry into marriage equality, the group wrote that it was ‘important for the future health of our nation’ to retain the definition of marriage as being between a man and woman. ‘We submit the evidence is clear that children who grow up in a family with a mother and father do better in all parameters than children without,’ they wrote. The doctors also said they were concerned legalising gay marriage would ‘normalise’ homosexual behaviour and the ‘health consequences’ linked with it, such as HIV and syphilis.” Finally a group of doctors and