CultureWatch

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

ACL Attack: Double Standards, Coverups, and Protected PC Ideologies

Aug 17, 2017

Imagine this scenario: a devout Christian conservative drives a vehicle full of explosives to the main headquarters of a key atheistic homosexual organisation and sets it off, seeking to cause the maximum amount of damage. How would the media and authorities treat this?

We know exactly how they would treat it. They would call this a hate crime, caused by evil Christian teaching, and demands would be made to radically rein in Christian churches. Even more mandatory anti-homophobia courses would be put forward, and calls would be made for Christianity to be further privatised with restricted public influence, given how dangerous it is.

The Age, the SMH, the ABC, the SBS, to name just a few of the media outlets, would all be baying for blood. There would be front page coverage of this story and every major television news network would cover it as their lead story for many days over.

Opinion pieces would be written calling for a crackdown on Christianity and plenty of television programs would appear highlighting what a dangerous, intolerant and hate-filled religion Christianity is. And the police would be the first to say this had everything to do with ‘politics, religion and ideology’.

So has a Christian ever done this in Australia? No. But simply reverse roles here and we have a case that did indeed occur – and exactly as described above. But, the authorities and the media seem to have simply covered it up, lied about it, and lived in denial.

When the Australian Christian Lobby Canberra headquarters was attacked by a man late last year, the police instantly came out with the claim that this indeed was not “politically, religiously or ideologically motivated”. We now know this is 100 per cent false.

It had absolutely everything to do with politics, religion and ideology. We had an atheist homosexual leftist who hated the ACL and wanted to do it real damage. So we are left asking the police two obvious questions: Did you know anything about this guy before you made your very public statement?

And if you knew nothing about the guy, the same concerns arise: why did you make this claim about him and the attack? Either you knew it was indeed about politics, religion and ideology, yet simply lied to the public, or you knew nothing about him and his motivation, in which case you never should have made such a claim.

In either case this is a very serious issue indeed. Either they were telling falsehoods when they knew what was really happening, or they just made things up when they should have waited until they were better informed. Shame. This is not how our police forces should be operating.

And just as a reminder, here is how the SBS ran with the story on December 22, 2016, just hours after the attack. It proudly went with this headline, “Police rule out targeted attack on Australian Christian Lobby office,” and it proudly opened with these words:

Police say the man believed responsible for the explosion at the ACL headquarters in Canberra wasn’t religiously or politically motivated. They are waiting to speak further with the 35-year-old man, who is in a Canberra hospital in a critical condition. “As a result of our conversations with the man, we have been able to establish that his actions were not politically, religiously or ideologically motivated,” ACT Chief Police Officer Mark Walters said.

The truth is now coming out big time as we are learning heaps about the guy who did this with some court documents appearing. Of interest, leftist papers like the Age seem to be running nothing on this story (I will be happy to be proven wrong on this). But thankfully the Murdoch media is giving it a good run. Consider this piece from the Australian. It begins:

The man accused of driving a burning van laden with gas bottles into the Australian Christian Lobby headquarters was a gay activist who disliked the group because of its “position on sexuality” and had searched online how to make plastic explosives and a pressure-cooker bomb.
Court documents tendered to the ACT Magistrates Court yesterday reveal Jaden Duong had also run searches about gay marriage in other countries and, a month before the alleged attack at 10.45pm on December 21 last year, had searched for the “Australian Christian Lobby”.
After the blast at the group’s Canberra headquarters in Deakin, which gutted the ground floor and caused $100,000 of damage, police said the attack was not “politically, religiously or ideologically motivated” and referred to it as a “car fire”.
ACL head Lyle Shelton disputed the police claims. Police allege 36-year-old Mr Duong had stepped up internet searching from July last year for terms including “how to make ammonium nitrate”, “pressure- cooker bomb”, “C4”, “how to buy a gun in Australia”, “gas leak explosion” and “how much gas to cause explosion”.
The US military uses C4, a plastic explosive, and ammonium nitrate has been used as an ingredient in terrorist bombs. Mr Duong also allegedly researched gay marriage in Israel and Germany and searched for “countries with gay marriage”.

The article goes on to give us much more information about this guy:

The Australian understands he previously had volunteered on the political campaign of a gay activist politician and for an LGBTI organisation in San Francisco. The former IT manager’s LinkedIn profile, which was taken offline earlier this year, said he had volunteered on California State Assembly member and gay activist David Chiu’s 2014 campaign for office and on Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf’s 2014 campaign.
A person describing himself online as Jaden Duong was also a contestant in the Mr GAPA 2014 pageant hosted by the Gay Asia Pacific Alliance Foundation in San Francisco. Mr Duong’s LinkedIn profile says he volunteered for political organisation San Francisco Moderates and San Francisco-based social entrepreneurship organisation StartOut, which offers “education, networking, mentorship and access to capital in order to foster entrepreneurs and great business leaders in the LGBTQ community”.
The Australian can also reveal that a Jaden Duong joined the ACL’s email list on July 7 last year before unsubscribing on August 23.

It is terrific that we are finally getting some truth on this ugly episode. Thanks to the Australian for being willing to cover this story. It is interesting to see how other media outlets covered the story – if they did at all. The ABC did have a piece on this, but it was much, much shorter.

And it actually claimed the damage to the ACL building was just a mere $10,000, instead of the $100,000 figure cited in the Australian article. Much more revealing – and indicative of the usual ABC bias – was that no mention at all was made of the fact that he was an anti-religious bigot and an out and proud homosexual.

Channel 7 did do a piece on this story which was much more reliable. It can be found here: twitter.com/7NewsSydney/status/897738180975357952

Lyle Shelton has said this about their story:

Channel 7 journalist Cameron Price has restored my faith in journalism. His tenacious pursuit of the truth is an example for others to follow. At the same time my confidence in the Australian Federal Police has been shattered. We bear no ill will towards Jaden but it is the job of the police to ensure the facts of such incidents are not suppressed. Public safety depends on this and they have let all Australians down.

As I say, just imagine how the tables would be turned if this hate attack was carried out on some secular left organisation by some Bible-believing Christian. He would likely already be languishing in jail by now – and for many years to come.

And the mainstream media would have beaten this story to death, warning us of the dangers of Christian hatred, bigotry and intolerance. There would be even more calls for ‘separation of church and state’ (although only applied to Christianity, not Islam), and churches would likely be having all sermons monitored by now for “hate” content.

So, will radical leftist, homosexual, and atheist groups get treatment like that? Will they be monitored for possibly inciting hate crimes? Um, I just don’t think so. According to our elites and MSM, there is only one source of bigotry and hatred: biblical Christianity.

Atheists, homosexuals and leftists it seems are incapable of ever generating any hate, bigotry and offence. That is how the narrative runs anyway.

www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/gay-activist-did-bomb-research-before-acl-hit/news-story/53500c374454344cc24a29b3303dd26c
www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/12/22/van-crash-christian-lobbys-act-office-not-politically-religiously-motivated
www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-16/christian-lobby-explosion-accused-to-face-trial/8812222

[1406 words]

28 Responses to ACL Attack: Double Standards, Coverups, and Protected PC Ideologies

  • Jaden was a manager in a San Francisco gay bar and he has renamed since his Facebook page to Andy Tran. We have photos evidence and more on the 8chan thread if you click on my name.

    We also have proof that Channel 7 censored their own videos from their channel of the ACT Police Chief’s full statement the day after the attack it wasn’t politically motivated.

    Here is said video from a different camera angle / source and proof of Channel 7’s censorship.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qmoj7XZhE

    We need more eyes to go through this homosexual gay activist USA Democrat Political Staffer Cat Refuge working Terrorist Bomber to see his comments and activities before the attack. Please share your research back if you find anything discussion board you can see by clicking on my name

  • I get criticised by other readers for being too tough on our allies in the culture wars. I think it’s important to call out people — even allies — when they go soft. And here I will do it again.

    I have called out and call out again the Murdoch papers other than The Australian for running the MSM line on this attack. The silence of the Daily Telegraph and Herald Sun is very disappointing — I expected better of them. Even Andrew Bolt’s blog is silent on this. Thankfully The Australian stands up and speaks the truth.

    God was protecting the staff of the ACL that day. And with His protection we will win this war.

  • Yes, thank you, Australian. Journalists need to be accountable if they mislead. Police even more so. Attending the rally against Safe Schools in Canberra last Saturday left me feeling sick as I realised the police had no intention of protecting our freedoms, not in the face of the lgbti lobby. Their right to shout us down clearly held more weight than our freedom to speak to our community. The Canberra Times even reported their success at preventing our message as a victory… Speakers addressing the rally included Lyle Shelton, (ACL), Fred Nile,(CDP) David Kim,(CDP) Tim McNeill, Paul Monagle(AFA) and some extremely brave mums – all desperate to inform the community about the serious issues around this program of sexualisation and gender theory which is being foisted upon our impressionable children by the ACT government without parental consent, (or knowledge in most cases…) A permit had been obtained, the police had been informed. However, as soon as they began to speak lgbti activists invaded the podium yelling their chants and obscuring the speakers, those speakers could not be heard. No police were there initially, then 3 arrived and spent all their energy dealing with a lone protester while ignoring the rabble. One of these three said they could do nothing because there were only 3 of them. Later more police arrived. When questioned the sergeant said that the lgbti gang had a right to freedom of speech too. They were not speaking, they were yelling mindlessly purely to silence our speech. Afterwards I observed a group from the lgbti lobby thanking the police for being chilled. see: https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/2017/8/12/nasty-ambush

  • Well written Bill. Yes, the double standards being exhibited are distressing, when we are supposed to ‘trust’ our police. Unfortunately we are seeing there is no ability to trust any authority in Australia now, because of the stupidity of ‘political correctness’ and their desire to cover up truth. The Lord Jesus is the ‘Truth & the Life’. When society disbands any belief in the reasons Jesus Christ came to earth, and want to find alternative gods, then we are seeing the unfortunate consequences, as forecast in scripture. We will continue to pray for the people of the ‘Great South Land of the Holy Spirit’ to come to their senses, and realise their sins and turn from their wicked ways. Then our Lord may heal our land! 2 Chron 7:14

  • Thanks Peter. But not so fast. Actually Bolt has written on this, and the papers who carry his stuff include the HS and the DT. So they are not as bad as you are making them out to be. See here for starters:

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/bomber-researched-christian-office-before-explosion/news-story/c7fb1e50c2b82b460b82a59f1c40a2e7

    And the DT was among the first to break this story:

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/man-who-allegedly-blew-up-his-van-outside-the-australian-christian-lobby-will-stand-trial/news-story/8c2ebe0342371e8fdbc5db39864bde25

  • Sorry Bill, I missed that on Andrew’s blog — it was half way down the page. My fault.

    But that DT article is exactly the sort of minimising of this man’s actions that we should deplore:-

    “And what was your aim at that location?” the officer asked.

    “My aim was to blow myself up.”

    “Were there any thoughts about property at that location?”

    “Well if that blew up, yay, but actually I was just trying to blow myself up,” he said.

    We need people like Cameron Price who are not afraid to call this a car bombing of the ACL with the aim to cause maximum casualties.

    We don’t need the MSM to falsely claim this was a suicide attempt and that when he had nowhere else go kill himself he thought the ACL’s office was ok as he “disliked” them (and us) anyway. This was targeted.

    We also don’t need the DT feeding the MSM narrative that this is an example of a “vulnerable homosexual” who is driven to suicide by the fake marriage debate. Because that’s what they’re building up to. These people need God’s grace not legalisation of fake marriage.

  • Thanks Peter, I hear you and see where you are coming from and in part agree, but may I say this: if we so easily and quickly chew out everyone else who does not do things exactly like we do, we may well soon be down to a club of one! I do not agree with everything a lot of similar groups and individuals do, but I know we need to work together where possible, otherwise we will get nowhere fast. The DT piece for example may not have been perfect, but it was a hundred times better than the lousy ABC piece if you compare the two. And of course I do not expect secular newspapers to line up with me on many matters as far as that goes.

    So we need to give credit where it is due, and be a bit slower to blast everyone who is not 100% on the same page as us. These battles are too important to keep making enemies with those who are basically our friends and have the same concerns that we do. So where possible we should keep seeking to build bridges instead of burning them. This is not always possible or desirable of course, but we should work toward it if we can. Bless you.

  • Dear Luke, thank you for your link. A lot of interesting information there.

    A question for Bill and all readers:- Is it ok for us Christians to use the word “faggot” as a noun or adjective? I ask this because English is not my first language and sometimes I miss the subtlety about some words.

  • Thanks again Peter. Probably best not to use it. We are trying to reach these folks for Christ as well, so we do not want to unnecessarily appear to be even more offensive than we already seem to be!

  • Dear Bill, I support building bridges and working with people who have the same concerns as us, but that DT article demolishes all of our claims that this was primarily a terrorist attack designed to kill and maim Christians just for the beliefs we hold. I just can’t hold my tongue when I read something like that.

    And are we asking why hasn’t he been charged with terrorism instead of just arson? That exposes how the system minimises and protects the homosexual agenda.

    And we should also ask if the homosexual-Marxist community are disowning this man. We should remember poor Tony Overheu who was shamefully disowned by his own church — removed as an elder — and disowned by his family — his daughter shamed him by declaring she was a false Christian who supported ssm in clear disobedience of Col 3:20 — for exercising his God-given right to take a stand against the sodomite CEO of Qantas.

    Like you say Bill, double standards. And we Christians allow ourselves to be bullied into holding our own believers to a standard the leftists wild never hold their own.

  • Thank you Bill for your great write-up of this, and I’m interested to see it seems to have motivated a somewhat different subset of your readers (i.e. different from the usual bunch of your reader-correspondents) to post comments. Some good additional insights/info there, too, so far.

    Of possible interest to you and some of your readership is that when I googled “gay activist acl bomber” as soon as I saw The Australian report this morning, very little additional news from today came up, but this item dated 19 April 2017 from what appears to be a VERY pro-homosexual news outlet was in the top three:

    http://www.outinperth.com/christian-publication-blames-militant-homosexuals-for-acl-explosion/

    I’d call that rather an “own goal” (from soccer parlance), don’t you reckon? I wonder if they’ll now run an item under the headline “Looks like the Christian Monitor was right to blame militant homosexual for ACL explosion”.

    Thanks again Bill for your courage and timeliness in maintaining your voice.

    .

  • Thanks David. From the ‘for what it is worth department’: your comment was the 60,000th approved comment to appear on my website. Go buy yourself a present!

  • Dear David, I have only recently come to Bill’s blog due to safe schools and ssm and found out about it via the Liberal Party; Damien Tudehope, and the ACF group they encouraged us to organise in our church communities to defend our children. I have learned so much in only a few weeks!

    And I never would have known about 8chan and outinperth without this blog.

  • 60,000 approved comments! What a task you’ve had to handle all those—and not in vain, according to 1 Cor. 15:58. The Lord bless you, Bill!

  • Thanks David. And that does not include all the unapproved comments which might be another 30,000 or so: all the hate comments and cussing comments and unintelligible comments and anonymous comments, etc.!

  • The revelations about this event are particularly chilling in light of the claim that a plebiscite on SSM will be a threat to the homosexual community, and that a ‘Yes’ vote will have no impact on religious freedom etc. If neither the police nor the media can be honest about domestic terrorism against Christians, then what hope is their to expect them to be honest about ‘minor infringements’ such a loss of employment, or loss of freedom (Ake Green), or protection from homofascist aggression? This piece simply reinforces the idea that the Free West is dying, and the world is increasingly divided between nations practicing HomoMarxist Law – Europe and The Americas, Sharia Law – the Islamic World, and the totalitarian or authoritarian regimes – Russia, China, South Africa, Zimbabwe etc. There are a handful of island or sub-Saharan nations that exist outside this paradigm, but they don’t rate much international attention. Perhaps Christians should be spending more time learning about how Muslim world Christians and totalitarian regime Christians operate and less time on TV etc. Yes I’m doubtless at least as guilty as the next but …

    And as for Peter’s earlier question, about the only time I’d use or encounter faggot outside a purely historical (Victorian or more likely medieval) context would be in a probably somewhat risque comment\joke – something along the lines of grabbing the marshmellows, tossing another faggot on the fire, and enjoying a grand old time. It’s linguistically correct but pokes fun at the concept homophobia. Assuming my Chinese is right, perhaps a very simple equivalent to the ambiguity would be something like … ????????, but that’s probably a little more polite.

  • Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, my wife and I have just returned from dinner with friends from our church. We talked about the ACL attack. Our friends — all committed Christians — were 100% sympathetic to Jayden Duong. I don’t know what to do.

    I tried to explain it was an attack on all of us as Christians but they didn’t want to understand this. Maybe it’s because the attacker was Asian, but also many of our children work in the IT industry and as a lot of the work is on contract some have children who have worked with him and others who know people who have worked with him. They say that even though he is “gay” he was a nice man, hard worker (Chinese value this), good colleague and good mentor. They say he had mental issues but he is not a terrorist.

    They said the major reason for the explosion was Mr Duong’s wish to kill himself and that and the fact he did it by an act of self-immolation in front of the ACL office means it was an act of protest. Self-immolation in Chinese culture has a long tradition as an act of the weak and oppressed against the strong and powerful and/or as a form of protest against persecution.

    My friends said instead of claiming to be the victims of an attack, we as Christians should be in silent prayer and contemplation of how our “words and actions may have contributed to a mentally fragile man’s decison to try to take his own life” by self-immolation and that I should remember that as he tried to commit suicide before he might try to do it again.

    They also say there was no one at the ACL office so he couldn’t have killed anyone but himself. (Is this true? I thought the ACL office was full of people.) And that he didn’t ram his van into the building but instead he parked in front of it before self-immolating. (Does anyone know which one is the truth?)

    Please help me with what I can say to my fellow Chinese Christians. I worry that as this attack involved self-immolation it has turned many Chinese from sympathising with the ACL to sympathsing with Mr Duong. I also learned tonight there are a lot of homosexuals in the IT industry and as many young Australian Chinese work in IT it has the effect of normalising homosexual sin in their eyes. With the plebiscite vote soon we need good points to make sure the Australian Chinese Christian community remains motivated to vote NO in large numbers. All help appreciated.

  • I’d suggest you wait for much older and wiser heads to pipe up, but here’s my 2c:

    I’m open to the notion Jayden Duong is mentally ill. He’s homosexual and suicidal. At the very least both conditions put him very far from God. Since even the best of us is a sinner we can’t exactly throw stones in that regards, but it’s clear he needs serious help. The issue is whether he wants to receive it. A second issue would be how representative is he of the wider militant homosexual community? Given the deafening silence about the attack, and the desire by various individuals and groups to see Christians shut up I have my concerns.

    That the attacker is Asian is something I only recently learned, but it’s not something I consider pertinent. That Duong is known to others as a nice man, hard worker, good colleague, and good mentor has no impact on his capacity to hate. Consider Luke 11:11-13 What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

    or
    Luke 6:32-33 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.

    Being evil does not preclude being good or generous, at least not to those who show they love you. Even sinners do that. The real test is how we respond to those who hate us, and that’s challenging. Duong’s response was to research explosives, read about homosexual marriage in other countries, and search for info on the ACL. Note I’m not arguing Christians hate homosexuals, but that Duong hates Christians. I usually think in terms of WW2 parallels both as I had an interest in the period growing up, and because I studied it a little at various times. If we say that the Nazis were nice men, good fathers, hard workers, good colleagues, and good mentors – obviously it would vary depending on the individual in question, would such claims supersede the significance of the horrors they committed? The existence of mental issues may be a factor, but does not excuse his actions. According to The Australian article linked in Bill’s post Duong spent at least 6 months considering this attack. Either he failed to get help during this time, or he didn’t want help. Either choice makes the attack a deliberate action.

    I have heard of Buddhist self-immolation practices, but the problem is that the homosexual community is not weak, and the ACL is not powerful. Such claims juxtapose the David and Goliath scenario. The ACL are considered a fringe group by non-Christians whereas the homosexual community has hundreds of major corporations supporting them as well as most politicians, both the ABC and SBS plus the MSM more generally, assorted progressive religious leaders and organisations, various academics and universities, millions of dollars to fund their agenda, claims of widespread community support, and laws which they can use to muzzle their opponents. Against that Christians have very little, except God. Yes David won, and yes we can win with God on our side but taking out the ‘imaginary sky fairy’ as opponents jeeringly put it means Christians are left with no corporate sponsors – a beer company that supported a respectful discussion of SSM caved shortly after the backlash, a handful of academics – written off as bigots and targeted for unemployment by lobbyists, a handful of politicians such as Abbott and Bernardi – written off as fringe extremists, church leaders – written off as religious cranks, bigots, child molesters, or some combination thereof, and conservative voters – written off as a vanishing small number of people in aged care. Sorry I’m probably venting a little but the SSM lobby tries to claim a power imbalance, and there is one, but it supports them rather than opposes them, or at least it does if you remove God from the equation which you must if you don’t believe in God.

    Duong is a homosexual activist, and has worked to advance the homosexual agenda in America by serving as a volunteer in several political campaigns as well as other homosexual community organisations. To suggest that the words of Christians may have shattered the last of a mentally fragile man’s control strikes me as inconsistent with the facts. This is a man who planned his bombing, and who has served the homosexual cause for several years at least, Yes I agree it is entirely possible he may attempt suicide again, and needs help, but to suggest Christians are to blame for his suicide attempt is IMHO misguided at best, dangerous at worst. Should Jesus have remained silent lest His listeners respond negatively?

    I believe you are correct that the ACL office was abandoned at the time of the attack – it was late evening as I recall, but when the IRA attacked empty structures it was still considered a terrorist attack, and when empty churches or synagogues are vandalised or destroyed it is considered a hate crime. Does the fact there were no victims really matter? As for parking then self immolating rather than ramming and self immolating, I believe that was a technical decision – he had to stop then detonate the gas whereas a crash could have precluded this if he’d been trapped in the drivers seat and unable to trigger anything.

    That there are a lot of homosexuals in the IT industry doesn’t surprise me, but it doesn’t really matter either. Just look at Google, or Facebook, or Youtube, or any other of the major players. IT is very very liberal, so does it really matter whether any particular person is homosexual if they are anti-God?

    In short my points could be summarised as:
    *Being a nice guy to supportive colleagues has no bearing on a person’s capacity to hate,
    *The attack cannot be a traditional act of immolation by the weak against the strong since Duong’s position is supported by the majority of politicians and journalists, hundreds of corporations including transnationals as well as some of Australia’s most powerful, and purportedly most Australians, as well as many of the ultra-wealthy,
    *Duong has spent several years advancing the homosexual agenda,
    *He spent months considering this attack,
    *And the absence of ACL staff plus the failure to destroy the building in no way changes the fact that it is a hate crime frighteningly close to a successful terrorist attack.

    At the end of the day all we can do is hope and pray. Perhaps co-ordinated prayer and fasting may help? From what I’m reading it’s worked wonders in the Islamic world, and they suffer under a regime even more hostile than ours.

    Hope some of this may help.

  • Andrew S Mason One thing I have to point out about your comment, although you’re right about how the homosexuals having the MSM behind them, we have to remember the MSM also stands with the Muslims to. Now we all know how the majority of Muslims feel about Same sex marriage and it isn’t anything like the MSM claims. No matter how hard they tried to state the majority of Muslims are tolerant about homosexuals it doesn’t change the majority’s ways. I remember one time the media tried to show gay muslims and the Muslims on facebook didn’t like it and the story received huge backlash from them. Note I’m NOT saying that the Muslims are our allies but what I’m saying is that one can’t be both pro Gays and Pro Islam because that’s a recipe for disaster. And I do have a feeling that the MSM and the Left who try to is going to have to choose a side eventually, if they choose the homosexuals then they lose the Muslim votes. Take a look at starbucks. But sadly for the gays, I don’t believe the left really cares about them because if they did they wouldn’t be defending the people who want to kill them.

  • Thanks James. In theory Muslims are opposed to homosexuality but it does not always pan out that way. They want polygamy legalised, so they are willing to back “homosexual marriage” to get what they want. See here for example:

    http://bernardgaynor.com.au/eyes-sydney-muslims-vote-yes-redefining-marriage/

    And here:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-chancellor-germany-same-sex-marriage-vote-lgbt-muslim-mps-berlin-bundestag-cdu-sdp-a7819391.html

    My friend Ewan McDonald gets to the heart of this:

    There are two main reasons Muslims would support SSM.
    Firstly, it’s a step towards redefining marriage to accommodate polygamy, and secondly, it’s a further undermining of the Judeo-Christian foundations of our society. SSM will silence the church but will have little impact on Muslims since they are effectively immune from all the various anti-discrimination laws. They are immune because these laws are selectively applied by the anti-Christian / pro-Islam secularists who govern us.

  • The shadowy figure of the agent provocateur springs to mind in Mr Duong’s case. the usual agent provocateur joins the movement he seeks to bring down, encourages them to push beyond legal activism and watches the targeted movement run foul of state law enforcement agencies.

    Whatever, the dynamics of the situation, one thing is plain: Terrorism of any kind on the part of those who follow the Author of the Sermon on the Mount is totally out of character and unacceptable as a godly response to the explosion and fire in question. Those who condemn the servants of Christ as intolerant would love us to be provoked to something other than love and good works.

  • The headline should have read:-

    ACT POLICE COMPLICIT IN TERRORIST ATTACK

    Why we are criticizing other Christians while the ACT police are allowed to get away with promoting very obvious untruths; I simply do not understand. When the police start deliberately promoting falsehood all of society should be concerned, not just all Christians.

    We already see the devil’s strategy in situations like https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/04/you-must-open-a-gay-venue-in-office-complex-planners-tell-developers
    where the Islamic Mayor of London is promoting the homosexual agenda so suicide bombings from homosexuals really should be opening people’s eyes to the fact that that the agenda for both is coming from exactly the same place. People are being hoodwinked. Yes love is the way forward but don’t forget that people like Charles Manson used to preach “love” too. The difference is knowing what real love is and the major part of that has to be love for the truth.

    How the ABC so obviously gets away with such obvious bias and disrespect for the truth the the other main issue here. They apparently are able to push every false religion and every false doctrine, all pseudoscience and all sexual immorality with complete immunity but apparently cannot mention anything about the truth behind Christianity justifying this on the lie that this is secularism. What they do is the opposite of true secularism. Yes they always have well planned excuses like pushing occult ideas onto children as entertainment or promoting pseudo-scientific ideas such as the multiverse because some scientists have this atheistic religious belief or pushing sexual perversion justifying it on the basis that homosexuals have been treated badly, but these are just excuses for denying the real truth and one for which there is a huge amount of evidence.

  • It’s the anti Christ spirit at work.
    And it will get worse. Prophecy fulfilled.

  • Thank you and God Bless, Andrew. Some good points there, especially the part about being nice is no proof that someone is not evil. I will use that.

    Perhaps I should have explained how we see self-immolation in our tradition. When foreign or domestic tyrants have used force to oppress people, the most powerful response was a man — usually a Buddhist monk — sitting down in the forecourt of the tyrant’s palace and setting himself alight. Self-immolation is seen as a act of martyrdom with as much power to move hearts as the martyrdom of the early Christian saints. The example of the saints’ martyrdom convicted the Roman people of the righteousness of our cause, and in Eastern history acts of self-immolation have marked many eventually successful struggles against tyranny. Unfortunately the firebombing of churches and synagogues isn’t a good argument because that doesn’t mean the bomber sacrifices his own life. The fact the fire was lit in front of the building and that it was not intended to take anyone’s life other than the person lighting it, concords with the Eastern martyrdom narrative. The fact Duong is an activist is irrelevant — anyone who self-immolates is an activist, and it is that sacrifice of ones life to make a statement that makes people sit up and consider there must be some merit to the cause. It has always been the case throughout Chinese and Asian history and this sort of thinking is hard to undo.

    I agree that Duong isn’t the oppressed one, but the fact that he tried to self-immolate in Chinese eyes is proof that he is or felt he is oppressed, because no one who is an oppressor or a tyrant is ever known to us to do anything like this. The best I could say in reply was if he was indeed mentally ill he maybe thought he was part of the oppressed while actually being part of the oppression.

    This led to another difficult situation for me. My friends said if he was mentally ill then I should stop pointing to him as an example of the extremist homosexual agenda. They made two points, one spiritual and one political. The spiritual point was that IF he is mentally ill, and IF he had been negatively affected by the political debate around marriage and homosexually, and IF this caused him to try to commit suicide, how would I answer to the Lord IF my encouragement for all Christians to condemn him caused him to try to commit suicide again. I said there are many if’s there but I need a better response I think. Are there any verses protecting and encouraging believers if they drive sinners away?

    The political point they made is one I in fact understand. My friends said if he is intent on suicide he will probably try again. (He is free on bail isn’t he? Maybe he should be in a mental institution.) And if he does and chooses a crucial point during the postal plebiscite and announces that what we Christians have been saying in the (fake) marriage debate has driven him to take his own life, than that would be very damaging to our campaign to preserve marriage. It doesn’t matter if what he says is true or not but we will be blamed anyway. We always are!

    The fact Duong is Asian shouldn’t matter but I was trying to understand the unexpected sympathy among my church friends for him. I thought if they saw their own sons in him that might explain why one of my friends was so interested to know whether anyone had gone to him and offered pastoral care. I said I didn’t know but I had read (thanks to Bill) that Lyle Shelton bears no ill will against him. That’s proof of our forgiveness.

    And I agree the number of homosexuals in the IT industry shouldn’t matter but unfortunately it does. Aspirational Australian Chinese want our children to study hard, get a good qualification and get a good-paying job. Unfortunately it seems that all the good-paying jobs are in industries with workplace cultures that proclaim the sin of sodomy. In order to fit in our children forget what we taught them in church/youth group and they come back home and back to our churches saying things such as “it’s not for me to judge that guy for being gay, if he’s okay with it I support his decision.” They so easily forget that sodomy is a sin that transcends religion and goes to the heart of God’s creation. The Benedict Option is starting to look very attractive.

  • So on 21 December 2016 the ACL headquarters in Canberra was attacked by a homosexual activist, causing $100,000 damage. Earlier – on 18 March 2016 – Cory Bernardi’s Adelaide office was trashed by protestors who disagreed with the so-called ‘Safe Schools Program. On both occasions the leftist media played down the damage done, and those responsible. Nobody in their right minds would deny that this is a growing trend. And it seems obvious to me that the increase in such violence is proportional to the denial of personal responsibility. In fact, the mantra of such activists could well be “Absolute Rights versus Zero Responsibility”. Dare I say that teaching personal responsibility is no longer regarded as an essential part of every child’s education, both at home and at school? This is producing a generation of moral bankruptcy. And it is no coincidence that this trend is accompanied by a moral relativism that is totally independent of biblical values. The upcoming plebiscite on homosexual ‘marriage’ is just one example of this. There are many others. If ever our nation needed revival, it is now!

  • James Tirrito, good point. There is an article here: that seems relevant.

    It’s a short article that notes both the Muslim and Chinese communities are adamantly opposed to the changes. Naturally the ABC doesn’t have any stories like this – they’re focused on Tasmania’s rejection of legislation that would give religious people protection from homosexual persecution, and another arguing that Christian views deserve no respect and no tolerance. On a plus note the latter piece does say that what we consider core beliefs may be viewed differently by others even if we consider them a fundamental part of our identity then goes on to say that any idea can be questioned, even those we consider part of our identity, but and that claiming an attack on such ideas is an attack on a person thus a denial of human respect is a fallacy of human offence. Despite that I suspect any questioning of SSM, homosexual identity, or the choice of a homosexual lifestyle would be deemed bigotry. Sorry it’s Their ABC and I get irked.

    What I was going to say before getting sidetracked was that Christian leaders and organisations should partner with ethnic and religious groups on this issue given shared interests. If we make it clear that marriage is a shared value across all communities and religious groups, not the belief of a small minority, or something advocated by the elites, perhaps something can be achieved? By making groups the Left traditionally support rather than Christians the focus it may be harder for the ABC to ignore and attack those defending marriage.

  • Peter, just a short response to your point about self immolation and your other question.

    As I understand it when a Buddhist monk etc sets himself on fire only the immediate area is affected. He uses petrol etc to turn his body into a human torch and anyone further away than say a meter is safe. By contrast Duong constructed a car bomb using multiple gas cylinders. Had Duong self immolated you might have an argument, but that’s not what he attempted – his self inflicted burns were an accident. And while he relied on gas cylinders to create an explosion, he researched C4 but was unable to source any. A better comparison would be a jihadist suicide bomber who fails to kill himself in the act of destroying his enemies.

    As regards the point about condemnation and driving sinners away, I’d suggest a distinction needs to be made between the man and the sin. Yes it’s easy to avoid making the difference, and I’m linguistically lazy, but even Scripture conflates the two at times e.g. 1 Corinthians 6:9 – Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality. As for driving sinners away, I’m not quite so sure about that one. You have verses such as Romans 12:9 – Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. If a sinner insists their values be accepted or they’ll leave are you driving them away, or being true to God? Other verses in that section may apply as well. There is also the likes of 1 Corinthians 10:24 – Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. If a sinner chooses to flee the Gospel that’s his choice, you’re not driving him away. The part that falls on you is what message you advance. Consider Christ. He associated with taxcollectors and prostitutes. Both sinners abhorred by their society, and perhaps akin to the Christian perception of the homosexual community. Christ never compromised His message, but was divinely lead in how to interact and communicate with them, and some chose to repent and follow Him. Note too that we cannot change a person’s heart, only they can. Does this help?

  • I think the homosexual movement is synonymous with the Clintard movement In the US.

    They are being made to believe that a certain Political Ideology will come into effect.

    It will not.

    Homosexuals are the footsoldiers of the fascist and enemies of Democracy.

    But unconditional tolerance led us all here.

    Unconditional tolerance leads to tolerance of ineptitude, incompetence, corruption, perversion.

    And remember: an open mind is like a fortress, left with it’s gates unbarred and unguarded.

Leave a Reply