HOW LEGAL IS THE SYDNEY MARDI GRAS?

People who marched in Saturday’s Mardi Gras in Sydney may see the annual event as a celebration of diversity, or even compassion. This year, several groups have used the parade as a platform for political comment. And not just the ever-present push for the deceptively named “marriage equality”; all sorts of left-leaning political issues were highlighted.   

Media coverage of the event has been overwhelmingly positive. Of course it has! Anyone who dares to criticize the event is liable to be publicly slandered, pilloried and persecuted. Any public figure who dares speak anything other than celebratory praise for the gay lifestyle will be in danger of losing their job.

I decided to do some research on public decency laws because, despite the fact that I know the NSW Police appoint an officer each year to check on such matters, I wondered how some of the costumes (or lack thereof) can be deemed acceptable.

According to justanswer.com, Section 393 of the Crimes Act 1900, “A person who offends against decency by the exposure of his or her person in a public place, or in any place within the view of a person who is in a public place, commits an offence.” 

What would happen if a man appeared outside a school wearing nothing but a small cloth covering his private parts? What would security personnel in shopping centres or sports venues do with someone cavorting around in such a state of undress? In more personal situations, proponents of such behaviour could even (quite legitimately) be charged with sexual abuse.

I realize, of course, that people who deliberately choose to watch the parade cannot then complain about what they, or their children, might happen to see. My point is that the Mardi Gras actually celebrates and promotes things that would be illegal almost anywhere else.

Public decency laws often include exemptions for things done in the name of entertainment, and perhaps this excuse might be used to support the legality of the Mardi Gras parade. But who could deny that this event deliberately pushes the limits of public decency? Who determines what is acceptable and what is not?

It is not a celebration of diversity but a celebration of perversity.

WHEN SHOULD A POLITICIAN RESIGN?

Federal Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, has come under fire this week after it was revealed an Iranian man, Reza Berati, died in the riots at the Manus Island detention centre. Labour Senator, Doug Cameron, made it quite clear that he thinks Morrison should resign. Another Labour Senator, Sue Lines, said that Morrison “definitely does have blood on his hands”.

Before going any further, I should own up that I have recently taken out membership in the Liberal Party in Victoria. Over the years, when I was pastoring churches, I always felt it was inappropriate to align myself too closely with any political party, even the Christian ones. But I was very impressed with Cory Bernardi when I heard him speak recently. So, yeah, we’ll see how it works out.

Anyway…

When should a politician resign? When something tragic happens somewhere that falls within his or her area of responsibility? Obviously not. No Police Minister can guarantee the safety of every individual on our roads, or even in their homes. No Sports Minister can take all the blame if someone dies in a freak sporting accident. No Finance Minister, even with the best will in the world, can ensure the prosperity of every individual in the nation.

Politicians, by the very nature of their work, deal with many complex, difficult issues. If they are working hard on an agenda that they honestly believe is the best course of action, and problems occur, the responsibility of judgment comes back to the voters, who can remove them at the next election.

The Bible actually exhorts us to pray for government authorities (1 Timothy 2:1,2). Wouldn’t it be something if, someday, a government minister was trying to deal with a crisis situation somewhere, and the opposition MP said: “I know Minister X is working hard in extremely difficult circumstances. Let’s all pray that God will give Minister X the wisdom and discernment to find an answer to these challenging problems.”

But yes, I believe there are times when politicians should resign. If they are involved in criminal activity of any kind, if they have abused their position to financially benefit themselves or close friends and family, if they have deliberately deceived the public, or if they are unable to carry out their duties due to ill health or any other circumstance.

We have a great political system in Australia but I think maybe we have imbibed a little too much Red Indian culture. Politicians are always looking for the next scalp!

DISRESPECT FOR MARRIAGE LAWS

Last week, according to reports, a 35 year old Pakistani-born man was arrested in Parramatta for officiating at the Newcastle wedding of a 26 year old Lebanese man to a 12 year old  girl. The detectives who arrested the man apparently said that the iman was “no longer part of the mosque” that he had been involved with since 2009.

I would not wish to draw unwarranted conclusions about Muslims in Australia from this news report (I certainly am not privy to all the necessary facts) but I think I can detect the smell of audacity here.

I cannot believe that anyone could imagine it was OK to officiate a wedding involving a child bride anywhere on Australan soil. Ignorance cannot possibly be an excuse. We are left with two possibilities. Either the people concerned are simply thumbing the nose (in total disrespect) at Australian laws and values, or they somehow feel that people will respect their culture enough to turn a blind eye.

But enough clichés. It must be assumed, in any case, that they placed obligation to Islam ahead of obligation to life and citizenship in Australia.

So am I, and many others like me, wrong to fear the potential islamisation of our nation? Even apart from the fact that Islam misrepresents the Jesus that Christians love and worship,  it contradicts the values of decent Australians in countless ways.

Multiculturalism argues that we can find room for these people in our society, and that we can make some allowances for their particular cultural and religious requirements. I strongly suggest that this argument is flawed.

If we allow Muslim men to marry young girls (more than just one if they so desire) and if we allow Sharia banking, Muslim courts to rule on issues involving Muslims, public toilets and facilities to be Muslim approved, and food to be halal, the supposedly minor accommodations in the name of multiculturalism will, by stealth, completely transform our nation.

Muslims will get everything they want and the rest of the nation will just have to “get over it.”

The audacity here lies in the expectation (by some Muslims at least) that they should be allowed to fully live out their faith in Australia. It is, I’m afraid, an audacity that comes from a supremacist view that will remain largely unspoken, lest too many Australians begin to speak out against Islamic progress here.

SOCIALIST PARTY – ALWAYS UP FOR A FIGHT

I was concerned yesterday to read that the spokesperson for the group of protesters who have been trying to stop the East West Link project in Melbourne is a member of the Socialist Party. Even more troubling is the report in the Herald Sun that they have considered bringing children to the protests, just to boost numbers.

One video on the Socialist Party website shows a man speaking to a small group of protesters outside the offices of Land Lease in Melbourne. He describes the East West Link as “an unpopular project that nobody wants.”

If the letters to the editor in today’s paper are anything to go by, that description would be more apt for the protesters themselves.

The current news section of the website contains an article that says: “We are on track to turn the 2014 state election into a ‘referendum’ on the East West Link.”

The question we must ask is: Why would socialists be so passionate about a government infrastructure project? The answer: they’re always up for a fight and this just happens to be an issue that they can find ways to justify.

The socialist party claims to represent the working class (their international parent organisation is the Committee for a Workers’ International). In their own words: “The Socialist Party has a proven track record of campaigning and fighting for the rights of working class people. Over the years we have led and supported countless struggles. We have consistently campaigned against imperialist wars, racism, sexism and homophobia.”

So how does protesting against alleged marriage “inequality” have anything to do with the rights of working class people?

The conclusion is inescapable. The raison d’etre of the Socialist Party is to fight and to be seen fighting. They attack Tony Abbott as Liberal Prime Minister but they also attack Labour and even the Greens as caving in to big business.

The protesters have admitted that they are losing the propaganda war at present. Well of course they are! Anyone in this country can write articles and newsletters claiming the moral high ground, but sabotaging public works and deliberately attempting to stir up social unrest is not the way to make friends and influence people.

WHEN HATE SPEECH IS LEGAL

Anti-Christian hate speech has reached an all-time audacious low in Australia. Bill Muehlenberg, on his culture watch blog, has alerted us to a blasphemous performance on the programme of the Adelaide Fringe Festival which starts later this month.

In “Come Heckle Christ” Joshua J Ladgrove poses as Jesus so that people can abuse and insult him, or throw stuff at him. The promo says the performance is for “Anyone who enjoys yelling at Jesus whilst watching a dramatic re-enactment of everyone's favourite fairy-tale: The Crucifixion of Jesus The Christ.”

The same “show”, which is no more nor less than hate speech in the guise of comedy, is also booked for the Melbourne Fringe Festival.

http://www.melbournefringe.com.au/fringe-festival/show/come-heckle-christ/

Bill, quite rightly, asks why these people are targeting Christ, not Mohammed or Buddha. “They are gutless cowards once again picking on a soft target. They would never dare to do something like this to Muslims or other easily offended groups. They are just a despicable bunch of Christophobes who think they are being oh so clever.”

This is a game for these people. Let’s see just how much we can get away with. Let’s see how many Christians we can upset.

Bill urges Christians to contact the festival sponsors, chief of whom is BankSA, also the festival organisers and the politicians who allow public money to be spent on such rubbish. See these details on http://www.billmuehlenberg.com . Click on the article ‘More Ugly Anti-Christian Bigotry’ and scroll down.

The National Civic Council has set up a petition, which I believe every decent Australian should sign. You don't have to be a Christian to recognise that this sort of stuff is unacceptable. http://againstthetide.org.au/the-petition-against-the-blasphemous-fringe-show-come-heckle-christ

Personally, I think the promo for this show already crosses enough lines to warrant legal action in that it specifically and blatantly incites hate speech.

GIVING OXYGEN TO RACISM

The best way to kill a fire is to deprive it of oxygen, right?. Without air, a fire will fade away and die. So why do the most vocal opponents of racism in Australia keep giving oxygen to the fires of racist issues?

Today is the official Australia Day holiday and our new Australian of the Year, aboriginal footballer Adam Goodes, will highlight racism everywhere he goes. Instead of just getting on with living together as Australians, we’ll be talking about racism more and more.

Some aboriginal groups have provoked racism by publicly referring to 26th January as “Invasion Day”. Or “Survival Day”. Do they not understand that such rhetoric keeps the issue alive? Do they not see that they are stoking the fire?

Some incredibly ignorant vandals scrawled the words “26th Jan Australia’s shame” on the walls of Captain Cook’s cottage in Melbourne. Newsflash: the only thing that does is to add more oxygen to the fire!

Yes, there have been terrible instances of racist violence in our national history. A new book by Carl Weiland, of Creation Ministries International, documents the horrific results of Social Darwinism in the aftermath of Charles Darwin’s ideas about evolution. Australian aboriginals were seen as unevolved throwbacks to primitive ape-like ancestors. Therefore, it was believed, they were scarcely human and could be killed with impunity.

When Adam Goodes pointed out a young girl in a football crowd and called her “ape” remark a racist slur, he was actually giving oxygen to this misguided theory that should have been snuffed out long ago.

The best antidote to racism is not stomping on the fire again, but acknowledging what the Bible has taught from the beginning: God created humans as humans.  We never were apes or ape-like creatures.  We are, as per the title of Carl Weiland’s book, “One Human Family”.  In God’s eyes, we are all the same.

The irony is that no-one is really black or white.  I know supposedly white people who are far darker in skin colour than, say, Adam Goodes.  The so-called differences are not all that great.  In fact, genetically, it’s been proven that there are more differences within so-called races than there are on average from one so-called race to another.

Nothing we do now can change the past.  We cannot atone for the ignorance of people who lived more than 200 years ago.  Our energies need to be directed towards love and understanding in the present, living together under the grace of God, and moving forward to a more harmonious future.

Let’s stop giving oxygen to the fires of racism!

CONGRATULATIONS MR PUTIN

The Winter Olympics will be held from 7th to 23rd February, mostly in Sochi, a resort city on the Black Sea in Russia’s deep south. Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, has been widely criticised for his comments in defence of Russia’s anti homosexual propaganda laws.  Some gay activists have tried to link the Russian law with a claimed increase in anti-homosexual violence.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported Dmitry Isakov, the first person to be charged under the new law, as saying: “The problem with that law is that it sends a signal that says gays are people you can fine, who you can insult, who you can maybe even beat up,"
Isakov is also quoted as saying: "Effectively, we don't even have the right to fight discrimination."

Mr Putin, who is passionate about ensuring the success of the Winter Olympics, has openly denied that he is prejudiced against gays. But he has asked people from Western nations to respect the traditional Russian culture on these matters.

But no, respect is not something that many gay-activists understand. Mr Putin said that Olympic visitors could  “feel quite secure, at ease, but leave kids alone, please." This, of course, sparked an outcry. How dare he suggest that homosexuals are paedophiles?

Homosexuality is heavily promoted in Australia, even to children, on the theory that people are either born gay or not. Therefore, children who are not gay cannot be affected by the propaganda. This assertion is based on ideology, not facts. It has certainly never been proved. To the contrary, evidence is beginning to show that the “you may be gay” message is leading to unhealthy sexual experimentation and severe gender confusion.

I congratulate Mr Putin for standing firm in the face of international misunderstanding and condemnation. Protecting children is more important than bowing to the insatiable demands of the homosexual lobby.