Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Even More Anti-Christian Bigotry

Oct 11, 2010

We live in an age in which no group or person is allowed to be offended, vilified or discriminated against – except Christians that is. It has been open season on Christianity for some time now, so the double-standards of the PC brigade are rather startling, to say the least.

Indeed, Christianity is actively being targeted by its many enemies, the mainstream media, and by an activist judiciary. On a regular basis courts are warring against Christianity, using various discrimination laws and equal opportunity legislation to do so.

What is even more galling about all this is the lies being told by the other side. Every time I publically debate some of these activist groups, they assure everyone that Christians will not be put at risk. For example, when I debate homosexual activists about the dangers of society granting them special rights, they deny that Christians will be adversely affected by this.

I reply that they not only will be, but they already have been. When governments grant special rights to activist minority groups like the homosexual lobby, they of necessity take away rights from the majority. And many of these discrimination laws are doing just that.

What it amounts to is reverse discrimination. If a court says a homosexual cannot be “discriminated” against under any circumstance, that means religious bodies for example will be forced to employ homosexuals, even if it goes against their deeply held religious beliefs.

And it will mean small business owners or home owners who for various reasons wish to employ or rent to only certain people will be forced to do just the opposite. There are often very limited exemptions to these laws, but they are easily circumvented, so time and time again Christian groups are being targeted.

One recent court pronouncement is just the latest example of this. This is how a newspaper reported the story yesterday: “A youth camp owned by the Christian Brethren church has been ordered to pay $5000 compensation for discriminating against a suicide prevention group for young gays. Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal judge Felicity Hampel found the Phillip Island camp breached the Equal Opportunity Act when it refused to take a booking from members of Cobaw Community Health Service’s Way Out project.”

The judge claimed it was not clear from the “homepage” of the website that this was a Christian organisation. But a quick look at their site would have revealed that it certainly was. And given that there would have been hundreds of other such camp sites and retreat centres to choose from, why did this homosexual group so intently decide on this particular Christian campground?

It all sounds like a set up job to me. And that of course would not be the first time. One just need think of how the Victorian government effectively sought to entrap Christian pastors who were holding a seminar on Islam some years ago in Victoria.

There is a concentrated move to target Christian groups, and effectively put them out of business if they seek to remain true to biblical principles. And as usual, this judge was totally ensconced in the PC camp, embracing the homosexual activists’ ideology.

Judge Hemple said this: “”They are not entitled to impose their beliefs on others in a manner that denies them the enjoyment of their right to equality and freedom from discrimination in respect of a fundamental aspect of their being.”

There are plenty of problems with this statement. Homosexual activists are of course imposing their beliefs on the rest of society all the time. Why doesn’t the judge equally object to this? Why is the judge taking sides with the social engineers and activists, while siding against religious groups with long-standing conscientious concerns about such matters?

And how in the world is this discrimination against a fundamental aspect of their being? This is simply pushing the pro-homosexual myth that homosexuals cannot change. Never mind the evidence on this: tens of thousands of people have left the homosexual lifestyle and gone on to heterosexual marriage and family.

Also, this is a complete furphy about discrimination. There would be hundreds of campgrounds around Melbourne to choose from. Why did this homosexual group insist on just this one? We have a pretty good clue as to why this happened, but obviously the judge does not have a clue – or just does not want to know.

But we expect this from the secular left. It is happening all the time. But what we don’t expect is for those who should know better to side with the homosexual activists. Some Christians have actually been siding with the activists against the Christians.

One said they should have allowed this group in, to show them grace. He said it was only the Pharisees who were ungracious and not accepting. But what in the world does pharisaism have to do with anything here? This is about the right of Christian groups to use their facilities as they see fit.

If homosexuals demand to preach in our churches, must we accept that as a ‘grace’ moment as well? Sorry, but this person misses the point here big time. There is a war going on to shut down Christianity, of which this is just one example. But by his reasoning we should invite pedophiles into our Sunday Schools in order to show them grace.

Indeed, until this person invites drug dealers, conmen and pimps into his home in order to ‘show grace’, I think we need not pay too much attention to such concerns, even if they are the result of good intentions, or the desire to somehow be Christlike. Jesus said that often the children of this world are wiser than the children of light. That’s for sure.

And another believer complained about this group not being allowed in, and that suicide was an issue affecting all of us. But this case of course had absolutely nothing to do with suicide prevention, and everything to do with activist groups targeting a Christian site, knowing full well there were hundreds of others to choose from.

But some believers are so naive and gullible, they will usually side with the enemies of the faith. Indeed, there were believers who sided with the Muslims in the court case I mentioned above. Lenin used to call Christians and other Westerners who supported the Communist agenda “useful idiots”. Not a bad term.

The truth is, there is a war going on. But many believers live and act as if there is no war going on. Or, for one reason or another, they have decided to join with those who have declared war against the church. Sadly, many of them think they are actually being more like Christ when they do side with the militant secular activists. Go figure.

We have a clear message from this case. It shows quite clearly that if you are a Christian group which seeks to maintain biblical absolutes, and refuses to cater to homosexual activists, you will be fined in Victoria. And if things keep moving in this direction, it may well soon be more than just fines.

[1187 words]

55 Responses to Even More Anti-Christian Bigotry

  • Hi Bill,

    I too was troubled by what I read yesterday. It seems the judge is working according to a double-standard. On the one hand, he doesn’t think it’s legitimate for a Christian camp organization to, as he puts it, “impose” its views on others. However, on the other hand, he seems to have no problem trying to coerce others into accepting the prevailing legitimisation of homosexual behaviour. As you rightly point out, the group had many many camp sites from which to choose. Why make a persistent effort with this particular camp site?

    And it seems to me that the judge’s comments reflect a basic logical flaw, since the Christian Brethren were not trying to stop members of the group from engaging in homosexual behaviour; that indeed would have constituted the attempt to “impose” one’s beliefs upon another. Instead, they simply expressed grave reservations about giving tacit approval to a lifestyle they -and I – believe to be a manifestation of humanity’s sinful state. By suggesting that the camp site tried to impose its beliefs on the organization, the judge made a significant error in his use of language and his interpretation of the camp site’s actions.

    Interesting to note that the article from which you quote sat right next to another speaking about the increasingly visible presence of real-life vampirism as a new form of spirituality. Is the paper trying to suggest that Christianity is passe?

    Scott Buchanan

  • The way the homosexual rights movement carries on, you’d be forgiven for thinking they were the only ones being discriminated against. There’s plenty of other groups out there who suffer silently under genuine discrimination, but aren’t as well organised and vocal, and lack the support of the mainstream media.
    Ross McPhee

  • Is this case decision being appealed? Particularly when religious liberty is at stake and the decision is contrary to Article 116 of the Constitution, and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.
    John Heininger

  • The Christian Brethren campsite on Phillip Island is not the only recent victim of this type of discrimination.

    Channel Ten has told Kenneth Copeland Ministries ( ) that the contract for their program, “Believer’s Voice of Victory”, which used to be broadcast at 2.30 am weekdays, will not be renewed. Supporters of the ministry are contacting Channel Ten to ask them to reconsider, but I gather they have not yet been successful.

    After receiving one complaint, presumably by a homosexual activist, Channel Ten said the program broadcast on 2 June 2010 breached the Commercial TV Code of Practice (1.9.6): .

    Section 1.9.6 of the Code prohibits the broadcast of any program which is likely to:
    “provoke or perpetuate intense dislike, serious contempt or severe ridicule against a person or group of persons on the grounds of age, colour, gender, national or ethnic origin, disability, race, religion or sexual preference”.

    You may not agree with everything Kenneth Copeland teaches, but I believe that on 2 June he was merely gently expounding biblical teaching on homosexual behaviour – including Romans 1: 27-32. He said, “It’s not who you are, but what you do.”

    How long before they ban the Bible altogether?

    Ros Phillips

  • The infant church was dynamic under persecution. We started to weaken when we became “official” under Constantine. Christianity was the “in” belief and perhaps many simply drifted in for social convenience, rather than under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I don’t welcome all this but God will bring good from it if we must endure it.
    Anna Cook

  • Well I suppose now we can hire GLBT building or facility for christian activities and they couldn’t / wouldn’t refuse us?

    How fun would it be to hold a series of talks with people sharing their recovery from homosexuality such a building?

    Really though, most Christians would have way more manners if a private business run by someone homosexual asked them not to have their meetings there.

    Jay Rusty

  • Is it possible, then, that books which oppose homosexuality or Islam are already being quietly removed from the shelves of Christian bookshops, around most states in Australia, so as to avoid potential fines; perhaps unbeknown to customers, who may have purchased these books as a means of information and/or educating others, especially children?
    Trevor Grace

  • Thanks Trevor

    It most certainly is possible. This is just the tip of the iceberg. All over the Western world so-called ‘hate-speech’ laws are being enacted, and the Bible is considered to be full of hate speech. It is only a matter of time before they start clamping down on all sorts of literature, and of course websites such as this.

    In the light of all this, this new warning is worth heeding:

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • If I am running a vegetarian restaurant and someone comes in and demands a meat dish, I have every right to refuse them. In a moment of generosity I might point them to numerous restaurants, just across the street that cater for their taste. I am not attacking meat eaters or telling them to stop eating meat; I am merely saying that my customers have a right not to have either the taste of smell forced down their throats.

    Earlier this year, I had the privilege and opportunity of placing a petition on the UK government’s petition site that reached over 35,000 names. Basically, it was asking for the right for churches not to employ out-proud, practising, self-identified, gays, queers, pinks LGBTs. Mercifully the attempt by the government to force Churches to do so was defeated in the House of Lords. Since the list of signatories to the petition contained the names of heavy weight churchmen and academics, I also assume that they sent supporting letters to the House of Lords.

    Muslims are not forced to employ Jews and the Labour party is not forced to have a Liberal/Conservative leader. So why should Christians be the only ones forced have their integrity compromised and open to attack?

    However, unless we demolish once and for all the idea that homosexuality is a state of being instead of an acquired taste and behaviour, we are wasting our breath. This lie, once and for all needs to be exposed and put to death.

    The word “homosexual” is a modern, evolutionary invention, as fanciful as “slimy custard man,” the “GayTranselvanian,” or the Nazi superman. It needs to be stripped from the Bible. The fact that it appears only once, 1 Corinthians 6:9, in the NIV version, in no other, ought to make us suspicious; even more so when we realise that one of the original translators, Dr Virginia Mollenkott, was herself a lesbian.

    The Site, New International Perversion has this to say:

    ‘A literary critic on the NIV translation was homosexual author Dr. Virginia Mollenkott. In Episcopal, Witness (June 1991, pp. 20-23), she admits, “My lesbianism has ALWAYS been a part of me. . .” To no surprise, “sodomite” is completely removed from the NIV. (Deut. 23:17, I Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46, II Kings 23:7) And of course, I Cor. 6:9, “. . . effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. . .” is replaced with the non-offensive “. . . nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders. . .” Notice the NIV in I Cor. 6:9 does NOT condemn “homosexuals” or the “act of homosexuality” – but ONLY “homosexual OFFENDERS”.’

    The case against Mr and Mrs Wilkinson

    David Skinner, UK

  • John H you said:

    Is this case decision being appealed? Particularly when religious liberty is at stake and the decision is contrary to Article 116 of the Constitution, and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.

    Please check carefully, because the Federal Constitution Article 116 does not provide a blanket freedom of religion. It gives a specific (and denominational) freedom from religious tests for public office.

    The UNO ICCPR is riddled with loopholes and weasel words so that the States can implement its “protections” in any way they choose, and as you have seen Justice Felicity Hemple follows the PC line all the way.

    If you seek religious freedom as a fundamental right, you will have to look back to 1688 and the “Glorious Revolution” in the UK, ( – wiki for speed, I’m sure there are plenty of more scholarly references available). The Bill of Rights 1689 ( ) followed the enthronement of William and Mary.

    Even there the context was Catholic vs Protestant, so it isn’t clearly a matter of universal religious freedom, but mainly denominational, within the Christian faith.

    By virtue of various Succession Acts and Statutes of Westminster, the “uncodified Constitution of England” ( was collectively but very deliberately applied to the colonies/States, but it is a fearsome task to trace it all back and still have such rights survive later things such as the Australia Acts of 1986.

    So our difficulty is that the lawyers are mostly not intersted in supporting the Christian cause for religious freedom. They are predominantly in the PC camp, and don’t realise that we stand for what they seek and enjoy, and they won’t realise its loss until it’s too late.

    Here, I remember Martin Niemoller’s famous statement often attributed to Bonhoeffer “First they came…”

    But thanks Bill for this site!

    John Angelico

  • When I was at university there were student union room for our use. We used the womyn’s room that we had to remove pictures from before use for the sake of the men in our Bible Studies. We also used the prayer room. First we were asked to take of our shoes in deference to the Muslims, then we were asked to use the room the Muslim women prayed in rather than the men, then we were kicked out of the prayer rooms completely. We even held a Bible study on the staircase once because there was nowhere else to go. One room for womyn, two for Muslims and none for Christians. Anti-discrimination at work.
    Kylie Anderson

  • Yes quite right Kylie

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • We should watch how the pro-gay lobby reacts to this development. Here’s how some pro-gay sources have reported the win so far:

    Note particularly what is said in the opening paragraph:

    “A case before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) could have future implications on the way religious groups can legally discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.”

    Should we expect more to come?

    Jereth Kok

  • Thanks Jereth

    You bet your boots we can expect more of this. This is just the beginning. And it is largely due to apathetic, lazy and careless Christians who just don’t seem to give a rip about such matters. Lord Carey has just written that “Christians must toughen up and speak out”.

    Or as Martin Niemoller, German pastor and Holocaust survivor, put it: “In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Some, especially sodomites who also self-identify as Christians, say that Christians should be so confident of their faith that they should be able to stand on their own feet and not need protective legislation. Just as Voltaire contemptuously said “God forgives because it’s his business,” so there are those who would say that “Christians are persecuted because that is their calling.”

    And yet both Islamic and gay fascists are frenziedly and rabidly pushing for more and more repressive laws that protect their ideologies whilst controlling the minutiae of our everyday lives – indeed for every thought; every emotion and every sneeze. No standing on their own feet in the market place of ideas.

    As for the high incidence of suicide amongst homosexuals, this cannot be blamed upon an un-accepting society. Sodomites have never had it so good. The wind has been definitely blowing in their favour for the last decade at least. Gays commit suicide because what they are searching for can never be found in homosexuality.

    Elton Johns former lover committed suicide
    Stephen fry tempted to take own life
    Gay website founder ‘yelled Waheey and somersaulted off the balcony’ Suicide of Garry Frisch, founder of
    Kevin Greening: risks, drugs and the face of homosexuality
    Death wish of homosexuals
    Narth’s analysis.

    David Skinner, UK

  • Another strike for totalitarian, secular leftism. What a deceit has been the Rawlsian decree that secular leftism is ‘neutral’ between competing belief systems.

    But I don’t think this is JUST an issue of anti-Christian secularism (although that certainly is a major part). This is also an issue of violation of private property. I believe that if Australian held to private property in a much more robust way then these gay, secular fascist forces would have a much harder time bullying Christian groups into giving up their rights. If it is a Christian groups’ private property then they have a right to invite whomever they wish – it is their property after all.

    Damien Spillane

  • The most iniquitous thing about western governments under the thrall of secularism is that they have said that there should be a clear distinction between public and private morality; and the ‘real world’ and religion. Whilst the government wants to compartmentalise private and public, and secular and religious it does not hesitate to intrude and eat into the most intimate area of our lives.
    Dr. Katherine Rake of Gordon Brown’s government funded Family and Parenting Institute said last year, “We want to transform the most intimate and private relations between women and men.”

    David Skinner, UK

  • Yes, Bill, I can’t help but wonder if there was something strategic in launching the first strike at the Brethren church (which is small and relatively obscure in this part of the world). I mean, why didn’t they go for the Catholics first? Might it be because they knew they couldn’t take on Dennis Hart and a team of well funded Catholic lawyers, and expect to win? (Am I being too cynical?)

    Maybe in time to come, Neimoller’s saying could be adapted along these lines:
    “In Victoria they came first for the Brethren, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Brethren. Then they came for the Presbyterians, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Presbyterian. Then they came for the Salvos, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Salvo. Then they came for the Baptists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Baptist. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

    Jereth Kok

  • Thanks Jereth

    Well said and great line!

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Greetings,

    Brothers and sisters, there is another side to this anti-Christian bigotry that should not go unseen.

    Christ warned us ahead of time, “that many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other and of the increase of wickedness where the love of most will grow cold” (Matt 24:10-12).

    The Scriptures counsel us, “that the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so” (Rom. 8:7). “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces” (Matthew 7:6).

    In obedience to the Lord, we are required to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us, “that you may be sons and daughters of your Father in heaven” (Matt. 5:44-45). And “bless those who curse you” and “pray for those who mistreat you” (Luke 6:28). We must forgive otherwise we will not be forgiven (Matt. 6:15).

    My point is, if we do not bless, pray for, and forgive these anti-Christian bigots who persecute us we will bear the fruit of hatred and bitterness which is contrary to the Spiritual freedom which Christ blesses us with.

    The devil wants to overcome us and will use disobedience and unforgiveness as an entry point to conquer us and defile our hearts. We are not unaware of the devil’s schemes and ought to consider that he also stands at the door and knocks that whoever opens up he will come and eat with them that they may eat with him.

    Therefore, we must encourage one another (Heb 3:13), just as iron sharpens iron (Prov. 27:17) that we do not lose connection with the Head (Col 2:19), because God gives the Spirit without limit (John 3:34; Luke 11:13; Col 1:29). We must fan into flames what God has given us, for he has given us, “a Spirit of power and of love and of a sound mind (2 Tim 1:6-7).

    Then we will be strong in the Lord’s mighty power and remember that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Ephesians 6:10-14).

    Dale Keily
    Yarra Ranges, VIC AUST

  • I always maintain that homosexuals took the first step in discrimination against heterosexuals by taking the stance that for various reasons they don’t want sexual relations with heterosexuals, a sort of heterophobia. I have homosexual friends and have asked them what’s the situation and they say they don’t hate women and like women as friends although not sexually. Something about all women puts them off, eg one cited a woman’s smell and another the sex act. Sometimes they are reported as referring contemptuously to women as “breeders”. However, some homosexuals lionise larger than life woman as icons. Clearly there is some psychological thing going on which seems to emanate from the mother figure, which I wish psychologists would enlighten us on but they are annoyingly silent. I wouldn’t be surprised if some men simply can’t relate to girly narcissistic women and some women recoil from macho crude men. Those same-sex people I know have a background that suggests they are on the rebound from some situation to do with relationship breakdown or betrayal – although not all. Some seem to have everything going for them but just find people of their own sex more physically attractive and more understanding. The big trouble is that, with the advent of feminism and the female resentment of Men, men and women have polarised in the battle of the sexes and you notice the sad situation that men and women are not finding soul mates in each other or happiness but instead recoiling to their own sex for relationships or staying single and lonely. It seems to be a problem for men and women to forge lasting relationships and this is creating a massive problem with fatherless, unwanted,deserted or illegitimate children. In other words we have generational dysfunction. In my opinion this could be improved if people thought of themselves firstly as thinking humans and secondly as their sexual identity, thus losing the prejudice and hatred of the opposite sex.
    Rachel Smith

  • Thanks Bill for your article.
    Oprah is pushing a new book called, “Conversations with God.”
    it sounds harmless enough, but don’t judge a book by its cover. The author answers various questions asked by children using the “Voice of God.” The answers that he gives however, are not Bible-based and go against the very infallible word of God.
    For instance, when a girl asks the question, “Why am I a lesbian?” His answer is that she was ‘born that way’ because of genetics (just as you were born right-handed, with brown eyes, etc). Then he tells her to go out and “celebrate” her differences.
    Another girl poses the question “I am living with my boyfriend. My parents say that I should marry him because I am living in sin, Should I marry him? His reply
    “Who are you sinning against? Not me, because you have done nothing wrong.”
    Another question asks about God’s forgiveness of sin.
    His reply, “I do not forgive anyone because there is nothing to forgive…….There is no such thing as right or wrong and that is what I have been trying to tell everyone, do not judge people. People have chosen to judge one another and this is wrong because the rule is ‘judge not lest you be judged.”
    This is a real attack against all children.
    The devil roams about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. (1 Peter 5:8)
    Anne Van Tilburg

  • This is the second major attack on religious freedom by Victorian courts in the last decade. The first was the 2 Danny’s case back in 2004. That case was ultimately overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court. This was a victory for religious freedom, because since then no one has dared to take legal action against the church on the grounds of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

    Does anyone know how things proceeded in that case, and what led to the successful appeal? Could a similar course be followed with this case?

    Jereth Kok

  • Jereth,

    A good summary of the case, with links to more detailed information is available here:

    Mansel Rogerson

  • Thanks, Mansel. Interesting read.

    From the point of view of the defeated campsite, $5000 is not a large sum of money. Especially considering that it cost $300,000 for the two Dannys to appeal their case to the Supreme Court.

    You would forgive them for hanging up the gloves at this point. But the worrying thing about that is that it would leave this ruling in place, serving as a legal precedent for many future attacks on Christians.

    See this link:

    “In a ruling which has major implications in future cases of how religious groups can legally discriminate on the bases of sexual orientation, the Victorian Court ordered the Christian Youth Camps to pay a compensation of $5,000 to Way Out.”

    Sounds like they are hungry for more.

    Jereth Kok

  • Thanks Jereth,

    You’re quite right. And this case was judged under the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 which has now been superceded by the much worse Equal Opportunity Act 2010.

    In practice these laws are really just a big green light for homosexual groups to target Christian businesses, schools and churches to have them harassed, fined and shut down.

    All a homosexual group has to do now is identify a Christian institution, apply for a job or a service with it, and if turned down, to make a risk-free complaint to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission.

    Mansel Rogerson

  • To my mind, this ruling is morally wrong and I entirely disagree with it. Sadly it was also completely predictable that the decision went this way – it was what I was expecting – and not surprisingly the court has lived up to my worst expectations of it. Bill I agree with you entirely that only a handful of Christians ever bother to stand up and denounce poor decisions like this and as a result political activists are continuing to gain confidence in their attacks on Christians and Christian values.
    Andrew Stagg

  • Christian churches throughout Australia should be joining together in a class action to reverse this ruling. For as night follows day it will surely be used as a precedent to affect all churches that have getaway camps weekend retreats or even conference facilities for hire.

    Divided we fall.

    Dennis Newland

  • As has been said before gays are more than catered for. Why should vegetarians demand that all restaurants provide vegetarian food or Muslims, for that matter, demand that every shop and restaurant provides Halal meat?

    It is not so much that Christians are stopping gays from expressing their perverted tastes but that gays wish to stop Christians from exercising self control and moral constraint. The whole Christian life is about putting to death the flesh. We battle everyday against the old man. Instead Gays demand that we follow them in smashing down the moral barriers and enter their world of absolute sexual anarchy – straight and gay.

    David Skinner, UK

  • Absolutely, Dennis. It will be used as a precedent, and indeed, the gay lobby has already indicated that they intend to ramp up their war on Christianity by taking their campaign nationwide.

    “This decision suggests the ability of those [religious] organisations to discriminate will be narrowed. It’s certainly not binding on other jurisdictions, but clearly … it would be influential, so we think it’s got nation-wide importance because there’s similar legislation in other states and territories.”

    Jereth Kok

  • I presume someone has already written instructions for the managers of Christian churches/ministries/camps etc on how to handle a potential “customer” asking for anti-Christian rights. And I assume these instructions will not be given away on this forum… Yes???
    Tim Lovett

  • Thanks Tim

    Sadly I suspect many church groups would not have any thoughts on this (whether written or not). Many have no idea of the greater battles taking place around them. As but one indication, a leading Christian legal group issued a short statement a decade ago when the Victorian religious vilification laws were passed. The statement basically said this legislation was no big deal, so don’t worry too much about it. They really did not have a clue as to what was actually going on.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Dear Bill, Your article was spot on as usual. Homosexuals have taken advantage of the tolerance that has been shown to them over the decades by liberal democracies like ours. Unfortunately this tolerance is starting to backfire on us badly. Instead of being grateful they have become more and more militant and demanding ridiculing any person or group who does not agree with their perverse behaviour and demands. Apparently they are not getting it so easy in some countries a fact which the media makes much of I notice.
    Patricia Halligan

  • I believe that it is only when parents themselves fight this battle that this evil will be put to death. This fight appears to be taking place in Hamilton, Ontario Canada. Its leader, Phillip Lees appears to be in heavy demand at the moment and is therefore temporarily difficult to contact. But here are the contact details:

    David Skinner, UK

  • Hi Bill, greetings in our Lord Jesus Name. It is certainly disgusting and we can speak a lot about it but all it amounts to – just words. We can and should pray but we knowing that He is control of the HISTORY of all events and He is the MASTER over all these. The good news is like the saying – they can take away our “outward” appearance and “perceived” recognition – but they cannot take away our life and faith and hope and belief and joy, the very weapons which will still be effective in saving souls. Like a camp we just attended, the Pastor Edward Chan from Singapore said that what we need is personal evangelism and keep a watching lookout for ‘divine appointments’ to make a difference in someone else’s life. It no point bombarding someone when he or she i not ready – the Lord knows the exact time, place, what to say and how to say and how to start etc – all we need to do is being sensitive to His Holy Spirit prompting. I have begun to learn to experience this and I have to confess I am still learning in this area. But all these will not rob my joy and belief in Truth. God bless.
    Jon Leong, Perth

  • The persecution via the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 is going to come thick and fast unless it is defeated at every step.

    What the US seems to do well is create Christian lobby groups that are specific in their targeting which seek to gather funding from businesses and groups affected by their particular area. Maybe this is something that some bright minds/heavy hitters in Australia may want to consider.

    Garth Penglase

  • “This is simply pushing the pro-homosexual myth that homosexuals cannot change. Never mind the evidence on this: tens of thousands of people have left the homosexual lifestyle and gone on to heterosexual marriage and family.”

    You really think that people like that no longer have any homosexual desires?

    You really think human sexuality is so malleable that it’s a simple matter of choice?

    Could you, Bill, decide, just for five minutes, to be attracted to a member of the same sex? Is that a choice within your control?

    If not for you, then what makes you think that gay people can switch sexualities on a whim?

    Maurice Colbourne

  • Thanks Maurice

    But you don’t have to take my word for it. Plenty of more honest homosexuals have clearly admitted to the ability to change. Let me just quote two such activists (and many more could be cited here):

    “I think the idea that sexuality is genetic is crap. There is absolutely no evidence for it at the moment, and I think it is unhealthy that people want to embrace this idea. It does reflect a desire to say, ‘it’s not our fault’, as a way of deflecting our critics. We have achieved what we have achieved by defiance, not by concessions. I think we should be recruiting people to homosexuality. It’s a great lifestyle and something everybody should have the right to experience. If you believe it’s genetic, how are you going to make the effort?”

    “To be Haitian or a hemophiliac is determined at birth, but being gay is an identity that is socially determined and involves personal choice. Even if, as many want to argue, one has no choice in experiencing homosexual desire, there is a wide choice of possible ways of acting out these feelings, from celibacy and denial . . . to self-affirmation and the adoption of a gay identity. Being gay is a choice”.

    And of course you are simply calling those tens of thousands of people who have made genuine change liars, simply because they do not fit into your homosexual ideology and agenda.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • When the so-called “homosexual Ammendment Law” was passed into legislation in NZ despite a overwhelming referendum result against the Law, we used to joke that “…at least they’re not making it compulsory..” From the nature of your judges comments, perhaps that’s the next step in their campaign.
    Bruce Burn, NZ

  • It works both ways though. If a Christian group were refused access to a property or campground offered for rental to the public, they would be able to claim discrimination.

    Angie Robinson

  • Thanks Angie

    But I must call your bluff. It is all one way traffic here. Christians are the ones being discriminated against, not homosexual activists. Indeed, time after time VCAT has allowed homosexual groups to discriminate against others. These laws have little or nothing to do with genuine equal opportunity, but everything to do with special rights for homosexuals.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • With respect I must ask why the camp chose not to allow homosexuals. Was it the express purpose of the group being homosexual? Would a pro-choice group be allowed to camp? What about de-facto couples?

    I don’t know who the camp allows/disallows but I am just questioning consistency. What Christian principle is applied when deciding if a group can use the campsite?

    With respect
    Kylie Anderson

  • Thanks Kylie

    As to the specific polices on all this you of course would have to ask them. But surely every small business as well as every Christian organisation has a right and a responsibility to set all sorts of limits. Every other group, organisation and club in the country does, so why can’t Christian organisations? And we must not be naive here. There are many activist groups hard at work to break down every sort of barrier, to effectively shut down those biblical Christians who speak out on these issues. The end will be one in which homosexual activists for example can ask to teach in your Sunday school, and you will have no legal means to say no to this. This is where this is all heading, and sadly far too many believers are clueless about the relentless attack the Christian church is under.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Yes. Perhaps my point is: Is it written in policy or just a thing they decided when the time came? I would hope policy would be easier to defend in court than a one time decision. But perhaps it makes no difference under the anti-discrimination laws.
    Kylie Anderson

  • Thanks Kylie

    As I say, one would need to ask them for specifics. But you are right on both points: written policies could be a wise move for all such groups, but given our draconian discrimination legislation, that still may not do very much good!

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Hi Kylie,

    I believe the Bible gives man a fundamental right to own (i.e. control) property in the eigth commandment. In exercising this right, the campsite (as well as everyone else) has the right to accept or refuse applications to use their property entirely as they see fit. The proper role of the civil government is to uphold this right, not contradict it.

    It is always a privilege to use another’s property and never a right. We Christians therefore deny our God-given freedoms and contradict God’s role for the civil government when we refuse to oppose completely and in principle all government “anti-discrimination” legislation.

    Mansel Rogerson

  • Bill,

    I made a factual statement about how the law works. I don’t know what you think “call your bluff” means, but your use of the expression is weird in this context.

    Discrimination law applies to all kinds of organisations that operate in the public sphere, i.e. property for rent in this instance. The action taken by the camp is no different from a hotel which refused to serve a black person because of their race. It is a fairly simple principle in law and Christians do themselves a disservice by suggesting that this is somehow reverse discrimination. Think how silly that hotel would look if it claimed it was being discriminated against when the law says sorry, you can’t refuse to serve someone because of their race. That’s how ridiculous you look.

    I think Christians need to show some Christian love and compassion on the homosexual issue. Gays often have miserable lives because of the way they are treated by society. Thankfully, most people in the community have come to be more accepting and have stopped persecuting them. It’s about time Christian dinosaurs like you did the same.

    Angie Robinson

  • Thanks Angie

    But let me call your bluff again, since you continue to make non-factual statements. You now take a page straight out of the homosexual activists’ handbook, with your silly claim that homosexual lifestyle choices are somehow on a par with innate characteristics such as skin colour. The truth is, tens of thousands of people have successfully and decisively left the homosexual lifestyle, while I am not aware of any white person who has morphed into a black person, or vice versa.

    And if you really want to show love and compassion to homosexuals (or anyone else trapped in their sinful lifestyles), you need to let them know that with the help of Christ they can be set free from their harmful and destructive lifestyles. And that of course has absolutely nothing to do with persecution, so let me call your bluff there as well.

    If seeking to offer real help and healing to homosexuals, and remaining true to biblical teaching, makes me a dinosaur, then I will gladly wear your slur as a badge of honour.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Angie, Christianity has been the driving force behind the abolition of slavery and of changing people’s racial discrimination since this is a principle strongly held in the Bible, namely because it is an inherent characteristic of a person and ttherein lies the truth of the matter. All Christian establishments would be acting against their beliefs is they were to turn a black or yellow person away. However the distinction here is with homosexuality which is clearly and unambiguously spoken against in the Bible, just the same as with witchcraft/clairvoyancy/adultery etc. and as such is something which Christians, up until recently, have a right to refuse to assist/be involved with/accept. These would include a naturists convention, or a polygamists convention or a “swingers” convention, or any such group who is engaged in things which are against the principles clearly stated in the Bible. However “swingers” or adulterers were indeed born with their sexual “preference” yet we know it is a matter of discipline and will to refrain from such things. Homosexuality is no different being simply a sexual sin, a terrible one as, more than others, it gives way to uncontrollable and unnatural desires, & like bestiality, is abhorrent to God as well. The Bible describes sexual sins as being the only sins that we commit against our own bodies, against ourselves, as they create in us awful habits that bind us and are not easily let go of. Once the door is opened to sexual sins, turning from such sin becomes increasingly difficult the more it is indulged, and it has an addictive quality to it – scientists have shown that what we give in to directly affects our chemical makeup. As with serial pornographers, nymphomania etc. homosexuals find that this is especially so.

    Your argument is false on two counts: (a) homosexuality isn’t inborn, that’s a lie which is propagated by many to justify their lusts & (b) Christians turn away things that are against Biblical principles, not on the basis of whether they are accepted by greater society (such as swingers / adulterers etc.) or not. Any conference aimed a promoting or propagating such activities should be rejected by Christians.

    Garth Penglase

  • Bill,

    I have news for you. People do not “choose” their sexuality. If gay people stop dating members of their own sex and have a straight marriage, then they still have homosexual impulses, whether or not they choose to act on them.

    Christianity, or any other religion, is however, a lifestyle choice. This is why religious organisations oughn’t be allowed to impose their own prejudices on other people. You could easily give up the Christian lifestyle and become tolerant if you wished. There is no reason why a homosexual ought to give up acting out their natural impulses, just because a minority of people like you don’t approve. It’s nothing to do with you how consenting adults behave.

    Peace and love,

    Timothy Brooke

  • Thanks Timothy
    But I must call your bluff here. While there is both nature and nurture at work in the development of the homosexual condition, it seems that in the majority of cases a weak or absent father figure, and/or abuse in childhood, is a leading factor in people embracing the homosexual lifestyle. Thus one’s environment is a leading factor in all this, as the person starved of same-sex love and affection from their parents will wrongly seek to make up for that deficit by same-sex sexual encounters.

    But despite such unfortunate backgrounds, plenty of people have moved on and recovered their heterosexual identity, including heterosexual marriage and family life. I know many such people. They are living proof that homosexuality is not innate and inalterable.

    And your silly statement about ‘nature made me this way so I must act that way’ is easily refuted. Let me just substitute a term from your sentence:

    ‘There is no reason why an arsonist ought to give up acting out their natural impulses, just because a minority of people like you don’t approve.’

    ‘There is no reason why a pedophile ought to give up acting out their natural impulses, just because a minority of people like you don’t approve.’

    ‘There is no reason why someone into incest ought to give up acting out their natural impulses, just because a minority of people like you don’t approve.’

    ‘There is no reason why someone into overeating ought to give up acting out their natural impulses, just because a minority of people like you don’t approve.’

    All sorts of lifestyle are being pinned down to genetics or nature. So by your reasoning, whatever tendencies or inclinations we find ourselves we should just indulge in them, no questions asked. Sorry, but civilization is all about restraining or denying unhelpful, anti-social, or self-destructive desires, cravings or leanings. It is what separates us from animals.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Thank you Bill for standing up for the truth. Unfortunately many people do not want to admit their wrongs despite being shown they are in error.

    Fortunately there are plenty of people who lived that lifestyle, and have left behind them and moved on as you have been showing on this site time and time again.

    Here are a few testimonies in case anyone is interested. Christ is still alive.

    Jesus Christ Saved Me from 27 Years of Homosexuality

    Is Someone Born a Homosexual?

    Freedom from Homosexuality – Testimony

    James Smith

  • As there is nothing to prevent the Cobaw Community Health Service’s Way Out project group, or any homsexual group or individual, in doing the same thing again to a range of Christian organisations or businesses, it seems not only reasonable but the right thing to do that we should be willing to support the Brethren church in any way we can (ie with lawyers, financially, letters, protest rally, etc) so they can challenge their $5000 discrimination fine. This is a good opportunity, and witness, to come to the assistance of other brothers and sisters in Christ who are standing up for what is right and good.
    Trevor Grace

  • You people are absolutely insane.It is funny though,I was surfing the net looking for examples of religious hate and intolerance and look what I found.You people make it to easy.Your right though,in not too many years we gays will be excepted as completed equals and Your not going to be able to stop that.If you attack me for my “gayness”your gonna be held accountable by law.We’re not going away ever and were fighting back if this means blowing the church to hell so be it.Remember I’m here,I’m queer,and your gonna have to deal with it.
    Larry Dillon

  • Thanks Larry

    Yes we all know how loving and tolerant you guys are, so thanks for again confirming what we all already knew. And we have seen plenty of your side demonstrating this as you continue “blowing the church to hell”. We’d sure hate to see you guys in action when you are being intolerant and unloving.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

Leave a Reply