The homosexual marriage vote in Australia was only announced a few days ago, but we already see where all this is taking us. Let me offer here a number of random, but loosely related, observations and assessments, including many that have to do with the spiritual implications of all this.
-Over 12.7 million Australians voted, which is around 80 per cent of eligible voters. Some 7.8 million voters went with the ‘yes’ camp, while some 4.9 million went with the ‘no’. There were 16 million Australians who could have voted, so that means those who voted ‘yes’ were around 48% all up – not exactly a majority.
-The fallout from the marriage vote will be utterly devastating. Sure, a finalised bill has not even been voted on yet, but we can assume with all the main parties fully committed to it (with a handful of dissenters), it will go through soon enough. It will not take long to start seeing what a seismic shift this really is. This in fact is already starting, but it will simply be ratcheted up many more notches in the near future.
-The speed with which these parties and pollies are seeking to ram all this through is quite shocking. Would they have been so fast in nailing down the fundamental nature of marriage if a ‘no’ vote had won? If the electorate voted to allow the public execution of Christians, why do I suspect that most parliamentarians would rush a bill through on that one as well?
-All the talk now is about any possible exemptions to protect religious convictions. As I have said so often, most of these exemptions are not worth the paper they are printed on. Not only are they woefully inadequate, but they are as durable as cotton candy. Any government that can grant you exemptions can also snatch them away. Even if the Turnbull government puts a few in place, it is likely that Labor will win the next federal election, and we know that they will pull them out pronto.
-The yes camp keeps saying any exemptions or religious protections in a homosexual marriage bill are discriminatory. Really? So would they force a Jewish baker to make a cake for some neo-Nazis with the words “Hitler was right” on it?
Would they force a Muslim baker to bake a pork pie for some infidels?
Would they force a black baker to bake a cake for a KKK celebration?
Would they force an atheist to bake a cake for a Christian baptism?
Would they force a steak restaurant to hire a hardcore vegan chef?
Would they force a Labor party-supporting baker to make a cake for a pro-Liberal party function?
Would they force a Labor party official to hire a Liberal party member as a staff worker?
-The yes camp is now saying we must go with the ‘yes’ result, even in electorates where the ‘no’ vote won. But you can’t have it both ways. If they demand that Abbott and others respect how their electorate voted on marriage, and insist they run with that, then that goes for Labor as well. They predominate in Sydney’s west, but that is strongly Islamic and it voted strongly against the marriage redefinition. So will Labor MPs there vote no? If not, why not?
-So where is all that counselling and all those safe places Victorian Premier Dan Andrews promised to those who were not happy with the vote results?! Oh yeah, that was only meant for all the ‘yes’ snowflakes if the ‘no’ vote got up. He certainly never had the rest of us in mind.
-The majority can and does get it wrong at times. Here the majority bought the propaganda of the militants, and many may well one day regret being so gullible and so ignorant. But what is true and what is right does not depend on a majority vote. If 99% of the population decide that 2+2=5, they are still wrong.
Spiritual considerations
-The percentage of those who voted yes is basically the same as the percentage of Christians in Australia. Christians were 52 per cent of the population at the last census. And of all eligible voters, those who voted yes make up around just over 48%. Had all Christians simply voted, and voted no, we would have won handsomely. This tells you a lot about the utterly appalling state of the church in Australia today.
-In light of the marriage vote, the other day I prayed for a word from the Lord in my morning Bible reading. I got this as part of my regular reading: “On that day a great persecution broke out against the church” Acts 8:1. I believe this indeed is what we will now increasingly see. Real Christians will be the main target of the militants, and things will get worse and worse real fast.
-There is a flood of wickedness, immorality, and ungodliness washing over this land. Indeed, as Paul says, “they invent ways of doing evil” (Romans 1:30). Yet most Christians don’t know and don’t care about it. The only thing that bothers them is the biblical Christian who raises a warning. It was exactly such a situation that saw ancient Israel harshly judged by God and driven into exile. Our prospects are not looking very good at the moment.
-Three time in Romans 1, where Paul discusses how fallen mankind rebels against God, and where homosexuality is singled out as a primary example of this, he speaks of God “giving people over” to their sins and lusts:
Romans 1:24 Therefore God gave them over
Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over
Romans 1:28 so God gave them over
It sure seems like God has given Australia over, and it is now judgment time.
-The wild celebrations we now see remind me of Exodus 32:17-19:
“When Joshua heard the noise of the people shouting, he said to Moses, ‘There is the sound of war in the camp.’ Moses replied:
‘It is not the sound of victory,
it is not the sound of defeat;
it is the sound of singing that I hear.’
When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain.”
-The trouble is not just those “Christians” who actually voted ‘yes’, but the many who are utterly unconcerned about the outcome, who do not give this the slightest thought. They have zero concern for God, his word, his intentions for human sexuality and the institution of marriage. They just wander through life totally clueless and careless. The war against God and marriage and family and our children does not seem to bother them one lousy bit.
-If you go to a church where the pastor or leader never said a word about this marriage vote, or, worse yet, encouraged a ‘yes’ vote, it is time to flee from that place. The Holy Spirit of God no longer dwells in there, and neither should you. Find a church where the Word of God is believed and obeyed, and flee these reprobate, carnal places.
-This is what champions who stand on principle do: “Margaret Court says she is inclined to end her 50-year association with the Liberals over same-sex marriage, believing the major parties are presiding over the nation’s moral decline.”
https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/same-sex-marriage-court-may-cut-ties-with-liberals-over-yes-vote-ng-b88660956z
-Those who stood resolute in opposing this destruction of marriage may have lost in the eyes of the world, but you have won massively in God’s eyes. By standing for what is right and what is true, despite all the opposition and hate, you have the smile of God upon you. Well done, good and faithful servants. Keep standing strong.
-“Archbishop Fisher said he wished to acknowledge all those who had courageously spoken up for traditional marriage in very difficult circumstances. ‘From the outset it has often seemed a David and Goliath struggle with politicians, corporates, celebrities, journalists, professional and sporting organisations drowning out the voices of ordinary Australians and pressuring everyone to vote Yes,’ the Archbishop said. ‘What’s remarkable is how many stuck to their guns and voted No or abstained’.”
https://www.sydneycatholic.org/news/latest_news/2017/20171115_1620.shtml
-My friend Mark Rabich said this in part:
“Friends, the only way forward is going to be diligent preparedness for civil disobedience. Which might come, in fact usually does, in unexpected and instant fashion. You need to be forearmed. And ‘protections’ need to be seen for what they are: a hollow and futile insult….
I have zero faith in our courts and parliaments, even at the highest level – it is obvious they despise the real legal and moral foundations of this country and just find ways to bury them under the weight of modern legalese. May the traps they set ensnare them….
My allegiance is to God and truth and it’s not for sale. I don’t need temporary protecting from evil offered by fallible and unreliable man, I already have something better eternally in the resurrected life of Jesus Christ and his assured and strong promise to me. I must bear witness and obey the highest lawgiver in the universe when an authority on earth departs from common sense, and let God take care of the outcomes.
To be clear, I don’t write this with relish, I write this with deep concern and considerable consternation; I fear failing like Peter or any of the other disciples that ran away if severe testing comes my way. But there is no other possible response that honours Him. I simply pray that God gives me the daily strength to bear witness truthfully to Him to others in a way that does not violate the conscience within me, that voice that He put inside me. I hope I am ready at any time for this. This must remain my highest priority.
My biggest fear is acting unloving towards the one who paid everything to save me. That thought terrifies me, because denying Jesus has such severe consequences: ‘So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.’ -Mt 10:32-33”
-Another friend, Ewan McDonald, rightly said this: “This is the inevitable result when a nation decriminalises sodomy. Once sodomy is decriminalised, it is only a matter of time before opposition to sodomy is criminalised.”
He also offered this sad but succinct summary of the situation:
“The marriage survey has at least clarified a few things:
No one can credibly claim Australia is still a majority Christian nation;
Secular (evolutionary) Humanism is the clear majority religion in Australia;
There are only a handful of true conservatives still remaining in the Liberal and National Parties;
A large part of the church is either lukewarm or overtly apostate.”
-Regardless of what legal changes occur today or tomorrow or whenever, and regardless of any penalties for defying the new and bogus law of the land, I will say this loud and clear:
HOMOSEXUAL “MARRIAGE” IS WRONG, AND IS NOT MARRIAGE.
Here I stand. I can do no other.
35 Replies to “More Reflections on the Marriage Vote”
Thank you Bill. Here I stand. I can do no other too!
Great article, Bill. Absolutely spot on. We will need to shine for Jesus now more than ever and through the persecution hopefully win more souls for Christ as they see us not bow the knee to Baal.
In response to CULTURE WATCH 17 Nov 17:
No Need to stay strong Bill, just stay true to your conscience as God will read your conscience not your writings which, in my view are worthy of text.
As for those who voted no – stay true;
For those who voted yes, you may be excused for your ignorance;
For those who abstained, Jesus gave the parable of the three servants who were given an amount of talents – the first gambled and lost; the second invested and profited and the third hid them and returned them to the master. The master rebuked the one who hid their talents saying that at least the one who gambled tried.
There can be no excuse for abstaining and the survey was lost on their account – God knows who they are and who we are.
John Abbott
The most moral and law abiding people in the nation have suddenly become reprobates and subversives. “I have zero faith in our courts and parliaments, even at the highest level – it is obvious they despise the real legal and moral foundations of this country and just find ways to bury them under the weight of modern legalese. May the traps they set ensnare them….” AMEN and AMEN !!!!!
When Samuel warned Israel about taking themselves a king (1 Sam 8) they took no notice either. How many centuries did Israel suffer before they were released from tyranny? This generation has chosen to ignore the warnings. Yes they have been manipulated by a cunning and evil strategy and the huge problems with modern promulgation of false information, but the responsibility still lies with those who have chosen evil and sexual immorality over truth. There may, however, be some opportunities. Some atheists who are smart and who don’t have a deep seated hatred of God, will see some of the problems. How can you, for example, have men claiming to be women competing in the Olympics without seeing how unfair this is? The problems with basing laws on imagination instead of fact will inevitably lead some people to question the foundation of these concepts. More and more cases of sham homosexual relationships, set up specifically for the abuse of children, will also be exposed as techniques of detection improve and will lead some to also wonder. We live in an age when the scientific evidence for God’s involvement is becoming close to irrefutable and some will see this as well. We will also be a witness to Muslims who are open to truth. They will see how God’s plan for peaceful resistance is correct and taking to arms in a human way is not.
Unfortunately we live in a time when the evil that is in people needs to be revealed for just how evil it is. This cannot happen without the evil coming to its fruition just as happened with Jesus. This is simply a prerequisite for the judgement. My view is that Satan will rest on his laurels for a small bit, after all he has brought the nations that were salt and a light to the world into subjection, then some human rationality will see through the great deception and will resist a little. It will be at that time that Satan will manipulate the hardhearted so as to completely conquer all of the nations, the ones he has previously considered to be easy beats and not his main adversaries. Surprisingly, given the left leaning nature of many Jews, I believe the prophecies tell us that Israel will be somewhere near the last of nations to adopt homosexual “marriage” even though they already have homosexual divorce, and that will be the trigger showing that the harvest is fully dry. That is when the full blown attack on Israel will occur.
The points you are making are very valid. I don’t understand why our politicians are ignoring the simple truth that no one can force another person to act against their religious beliefs. For example, an Orthodox Jew or Muslim baker can and certainly will refuse under their religious grounds to bake a pork pie for anyone. So why can’t a Christian, Jewish or Muslim baker refuse to bake any cake for a same-sex marriage couple on the grounds of their religion? Baking such a cake would be an endorsement of the same sex marriage, which would be in direct violation of their religion. One shouldn’t have to be a priest or a rabbi to have protection under the law from being persecuted or sued for their religious beliefs. The exact same rule should apply for anyone with a religious conviction. There’s another reason we must have such protection. I can almost guarantee we won’t see any Jew or Muslim being asked to bake cakes for same-sex couples but Christians ones will be because they are the real targets of persecution by the left. So we must have protections in place to prevent such persecutions taking place. If the politicians can’t see this is all true and act accordingly then they are in effect persecutors of Christians and only Christians.
Amen Bill. My mum and I will stand with you. I have been warning people for years they must stand for truth and raise their voice, but to no avail.
Jodi and Betty
I agree with most of what is said here, but I do take issue with the 52% of Australians are christians. If that really was the case the “No” vote would have won. What is recorded in the census is no real indicator of faith.
About 18% of Australians attend church once a month, which is a better indicator of christian commitment. I would say about half of those are the real deal, so 9-10%.
So really the No vote did extraordinarily well, although much worse than we hoped for.
I agree that committed christians need to be preparing ourselves for persecution. Maybe not being thrown to the lions just yet, but trial by various “human rights” tribunals and even more mocking in the public square than in the past. We will learn to rejoice that we can share in the sufferings of Christ.
My prayer for this nation is a genuine revival that sees millions of people across the country swept into the kingdom and transformed. That is the only hope for Australia.
Thanks Keith. Yes obviously to point out that 52% of Australians identify as Christians does not mean that they really are. That would go without saying. The percentage of Australians that really are genuine biblical Christians would be rather small indeed.
Greetings Bill
Thank you very much for what you have done to defend the faith and are doing to encourage and warn Christians about issues like this.
A 75 year old Christian friend of mine wrote the comment below and thankfully it got printed in the local Central Queensland newspaper. Just wanted share it with you and others.
Kind Regards,
We cannot disregard the universal order
As of this week, we Australians have demonstrated that we no longer understand the ramifications of stepping outside the universal order of things. Of course many will wonder what on earth I’m talking about because in our material world most have lost sight of what some call ‘Intelligent Design’. We have demanded freedoms that were not ours to demand let alone extend to others. Freedom of choice exists within a universal order which has provided parameters for our guidance and welfare. This should be obvious to everyone for as children we were kept safe within the boundaries set by our parents and this should have been our training ground. When we broke through those boundaries we were faced with whole new freedom to experience the consequence of our disregard of the rules which governed our lives then. As adults we still have the constraints of those extended laws which also provide our freedoms. But as is the way with unrestrained human desires, we always want to ‘go beyond’. I do not hate anyone for not believing as I believe but I am fearful for our nation when we determine to legislate a so-called equality or license that in the ‘grand scheme of things’ is not ours to give, no matter the emotional or political pressure to do so. We have chosen to disregard the fact that when we plant a corn seed and expect tomatoes there is something amiss in our thinking processes. This is an appeal for the people of Australia to think about what we have demanded and to consider where our demand will take us. It may be ‘ A bridge too far.’
And are people who identify as conservative really diehard conservatives?
Does anyone else feel we were defeated by Fifth Column elements in the No camp?
It has now been revealed Tony Abbott was a key player in killing off the Patterson Bill In order to make same sex marriage legal by Christmas so that, he said this himself,
He didn’t want his sister to have to get married in the British Consulate on the 2nd of February next year. And he will be attending! One of the first of “their” marriages in Australia and one of “our” leaders will honor it with his presence.
Was Tony Abbott ever really committed to our cause?
And why was it the big No votes were from those ethnic religious people? Why has Christian White Australia lost its compass? Rural Australia too! Very disappointed to see conservative rural Australia turn away from God.
Yes we are being taken for a biiig ride.
I can usually tolerate the argy-bargy on the ABC, but yesterday I turned Richard Glover off.
The intimations, laughingly, were about protections for objectors, and declaring that any protection was promoting discrimination. Florists and bakers – giggle!
There did not seem to be any understanding at all about the difference between people and their actions. Specifically, that objectors are wanting the freedom not to agree with, or be seen to be promoting, or celebrating, actions that they regard as immoral. A birthday cake is vastly different from a wedding cake for a gay wedding, for the same customer, (unless the ordered decorations are unpalatable, – pun intended).
There are plenty of illustrations here; not selling alcohol to a person perceived to be drunk, not selling — many things– to a minor. Not selling medication without a prescription or if there is doubt about its improper use. Not allowing a person with a gambling problem to bet. Enforcing dress rules in clubs and bars. Refusing to lodge tax returns that one believes to be erroneous. Not accepting copy for an advertisement or a notice that is harmful. Refusing to teach or promote an idea that one strongly disagrees with, and/or in such a way that it cannot be criticized. etc etc. None of this goes to the person but to the behaviour.
Likewise, it is still legal to drink alcohol, to gamble, to get into porn, to visit a prostitute, to smoke tobacco, to swear and curse, to complain bitterly, to get angry, to be depressed, to be anorexic, to be demonised, to self harm. To be married, to attend church, to gather with friends, celebrate Easter, celebrate Eid, join in with Halloween. Plus a lot of other things – just don’t be complained about or get caught! OR To act homosexually, to have an abortion, and soon, to have a gay wedding, it seems. BUT that does not mean I that have to do these things, or even agree that these are right and proper, or promote these things, or allow them in my home or business, or be involved with them in anyway.
So the legality of SSM has to do with permission, with restrictions. The legislation must only say what I may do, if I wish. It has nothing to do with what I must do, or must agree with. Those who want SSM should find those who are willing to share in the celebration, to help them with the celebration.
I have already flagged my status as a conscientious objector, to my local member.
(Not that I can readily think of a situation yet, where this would apply to me any longer.)
We have sent the petition emails to our MPs as was suggested by one of your readers.
I am now developing an email/fax to them to be more specific about my views.
It is good to see John Howard making appropriate comments.
We may well be coming to a place where we can but stand.
I must confess to a certain, discernible adrenalin surge, when I realise that soon, certain opinions I hold dear will no longer have the support of Australian law. Feels odd to contemplate soon becoming an “outlaw” on account of certain divinely ordained truths regarding human relationships.
The matter of “exemptions of religious or other conscientious objection” to certain state-sanctioned practices and the ideology of their adherents is a matter of freedom of speech: One ought not to be made to recant or resile from from one’s honestly held personal beliefs and moral code simply because the “faithful” of another religion or sacrilege demand goods and services be provided which deny one’s own creed and moral standards.
The word “boycott” arose amid the injustices of absentee landlordism in 19th Century Ireland.
Just thinking…
We are told that women, ladies, girls,females, XX people, receive less pay then men, boys, blokes do, XY people.
Question: If a man (XY) decides he wants to be a woman (XX) (impossible off course, cant change XY to XX) is “she” prepared to accept a lower rate of pay, ie XX female pay rate? If not, why not? After all “he” will now be a “she” (yes it is crazy)
I am aware that these XY “females” will win in sporting events and the XX “males” will be at a disadvantage ( i am getting a headache trying to keep up with this, its doing my brain in, i am still trying to figure out how 2+2=5 and how that farmer is going to end up with a herd when he only has 2 bulls).
So will we now have pay rates; XY males, XX females, XY females, XX males and those who want to be ?? whatever beings.
How many glass ceilings will we now have?
No I am not joking. Get used to it folks, this is what is happening. Talk about mixed up.
I am a NO voter and always will be.
I put my trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, He WILL sort it out and justice will prevail.
Well I am a florist as well as well as a pregnancy counsellor so I know my days are numbered before I will have to face these so called anti discrimination laws. We only have one court that is higher than this land and it is that judge I am truly accountable too.
Excellent article, Bill. Yes, it is the church that has fallen down. It has taught lies and half truths to its congregations. It has wallowed in historical and cultural contexts instead of preaching the Word of God in its power. It has grown fat and self-indulgent on niceness and comfort zones. Where are the Elijahs shouting on the street corners? Getting arrested and carted off to jail while nobody notices. Well, if the kindness of God is what leads us to repentance, then kindness it will be. Judgement would be a kindness right now to wake up our sleeping giant and trimming off the baby fat to get us back into the battle where we should be.
So Mr Andrews was going to provide the poor depressed yes people with counselling should they lose, but he did not have the rest of us in mind. Well, Mr Andrews, you do not need to because the no voters are of sound mind.
Many times I have seen or heard misotheists claim they don’t want a theocracy, but it certainly feels like it to me right now! Anti-Christian secular humanism is a religion, and whether it be the ‘Korrekt™’ view on homosexuality, abortion, sex education, the environment, welfare, immigration, the ABC, genuflections to all other religions (except when they dare to get any of the others inKorrekt, except when that religion is Islam), any level of dissent must be squashed. For the all the talk of ‘diversity’, there is precious little of it. You must conform, or else. Virtue signalling is encouraged, especially with loud proclamations and visible displays of KorrektThink™, with lavish rewards of TheFeelz™ promised.
I find it especially remarkable in the same month we are talking of closing down climbing Ayers Rock for the sake of the local aboriginal tribe, it’s highly likely to be the same people openly celebrating trampling all over a great many more people’s cherished beliefs.
True followers of Christ simply cannot call two men or two women ‘marriage’. We just cannot. It would be spitting in God’s face. We love God first, and we understand the significance of the coming Wedding of Christ and His bride. There are not two Christs or two brides. The invitation is only open to those who pay Jesus Christ the full respect He is due.
Thanks Mark. As usual, Douglas Wilson nailed it: “Every society is a theocracy. The only question is who is Theo?”
While waiting for my car to be serviced today, I happened to see a snippet of Sunrise or whatever it’s called – the program with Karl Stefanovic as host – and his co-host, a woman was interviewing a young actor who identified as gay.
I assume this was the case, because he was saying that the ‘No’ voters and their ilk were “aggressive” and “negative” and hurtful, etc. He was so offended that he seemed to be seeking revenge and he wasn’t happy. He couldn’t see his hypocrisy, of course, that two wrongs (sic) make a right. He was bent on aggressive payback for, as he said, being put through this agony. He was one mixed up bloke, but the point he was making was obvious.
‘No’ voters will pay.
So, where is the love? What a sham campaign they ran about ‘love’. This bloke doesn’t know much about it and so many gullible people bought his argument hook, line and sinker. They have the gall to accuse Christians of being unloving. If the consequences were not so serious, it would be laughable.
I was stunned by the outcome of the SSM vote. The evangelical church I attend has a pastor who DID strongly oppose the ‘yes’ vote – but still a number of church members voted ‘yes’. And I personally know a number of liberal ‘Christians’ who voted ‘yes’. This being the case, I am sure we would be horrified to know the actual number of ‘Christians’ who voted that way. In some cases, this was due to peer pressure, and the desire to be ‘liked’ by one’s Facebook friends.
Only today I saw a video of one of Australia’s first male couples celebrating the fact that they could soon be ‘married’. I confess I was disgusted not only by their crude behaviour, but by all the over-the-top, gushing comments that were posted about this “beautiful celebration of SSM”. I probably made the mistake of commenting that I didn’t agree. The next thing I knew, I was receiving unprintable comments which basically amounted to me being a ‘kill joy’ and a ‘wowser’! On the one hand, they say it is “all about love”, but in reality there is very little (if any) true love about it, but rather a deliberate flouting of the holiness of marriage, which was in the heart of God before mankind was even created.
For the past two days I have been listening to the sound of gentle rain – and I keep wondering whether this is indeed our Father’s tears, as He sees the destruction of morality and the celebration of the profane. And it is happening right in our midst, with barely a voice raised against it. May God help us all – and bring this nation to its knees before it is too late.
Gays have very few options for life long partners suitable for marriage as they can only draw from a very small pond – about 1.5% of the population for each sex – less after you have taken out those not old enough to marry or those not wanting to settle down, which appears to be most. That’s not a lot of options for such a decision, and life we know is not all about sex, and if it is, then your marriage is not likely to last. Broader interests help but the gay community is not very broad due to it’s demographics.
I can’t then see marriage working for gays as they will also need to be ‘housed’ in either community, one relatively conservative in daily and weekly practise due to the responsibilities of rearing young life, while the other extremely liberal due to it’s lifestyle, both then appear to be inappropriate to the interests of ‘married gays’, more so if they have children.
Married gays may be equivalent in the eyes of the law with heterosexual marriages but it is natural law that assists in the marriage itself as children bind the marriage, and natural law is also demographics. Marriage seems very out of place for gay behaviours and norms.
God Bless Bill.
Once again Bill, you have nailed the things that have overtaken our Nation and the horrors that are to come. Keep up the insightful writing for the people who find support in your word because our main stream media is owned by the Cultural Marxists and therefore by Satan..
The Book “The Long March” should have been a wake-up call to all who read it. Even the novel 1984 projected insights that we can tick off coming into play each day.
Hi guys I am new to this site and must say i love it, anyway what I don’t get about this ssm postal survey(the word says it all) is what did we actually agree to,we know that redefinition is what they are after,however the definition of marriage is there for all to see in Quick and Garrans Annotated Constitution and it defines it as “a union between a man and a woman on the same basis as that on which the institution is recognized throughout Christendom and its essence is that it is 1. a voluntary union 2. for life 3. of one man and one woman 4. to the exclusion of all others. (Bethell v Hildyard, 38 Ch. D. 220). Interesting, I am no expert, however I have read enough to understand that if defined in the Constitution any changes without it going to a referendum and those changes being spelt out in crystal clear fashion so as everyone that then votes in a valid legal framework and not an appraisal of a vague general question is ‘void ab initio’. We are still a Constitutional Monarchy and as so the crown is sworn to uphold the laws of our Lord on Coronation and anything less is a criminal breach of the trust we consent to.These are the Trojan horses they also use to undermine and change the rule book they (the public trustees are accountable to). Another interesting point is that all laws require a Proclamation date and a Proclamation certificate before they have any lawful/legal legs. Thanks for the platform Bill and God bless.
Bill,
The Australian laws are established to detect, prevent and criminalise harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public and society from harm. The NSW government regulates (controls) a legal prostitution practice by forcing the registration of sex worker which allows government authorities the ability to detect the spread of STDs including drug-resistant STDs which cause infertility and a shorten life-cycle. The Old and the New Testament both recorded a “Harlot marriage.” The sex worker and their client are examples of “any 2 people” who can marry. The sex worker and the client can easily fulfil all requirements for a civil registered marriage and a legal divorce as these 2 people can easily obtain a legal divorce by demonstrating an “irretrievable breakdown.” Once the fee is paid for sex, then the love and commitment has irretrievably broken down.
The idea a sex work and their client can have a right to a legal “Harlot marriage” as people marry for the person and not for sex. The majority of Australians would never believe a sex worker and their client can have a genuine marriage even if it is legitimate by a public record. A sex worker and their client have a civil right to self-determination to achieve “marriage equality.” Once they no longer have to pay income tax nor collect GST for the government as the client’s fee for sex is simply a matter of giving some money to one’s spouse. MPs have told Australians for years that a “same-sex marriage” would be good for society as “more people would be marrying.” A “Harlot marriage” runs rings around “same-sex marriage” because sex workers can get married several times a day.
A “Harlot marriage” trumps a “same-sex marriage” as it is genderless, non-discriminative, non-procreative and a non-exclusive sexual relationship. A “Harlot marriage” allows a sex worker and their client a legal right to naturally procreate new-life or they can have children with other people like same-sex partners. A “Harlot marriage” will come into conflict with the NSW regulated prostitution practice. The Australian goverment is going to change the Marriage Act to create a “marriage between any 2 people” in order to register person-centred marriages such as same-sex marriages will be regulated (controlled) by the Marriage Act, no-fault divorce, domestic and family violence laws and criminal laws such as marital rape. The Australian laws need to protect the public and society from harm of paper marriage and paper family as this leads to scientific experimentation of human reproduction like the “handmade Tales.”
The Australian parliament no longer wants to regulate (control) a “one flesh” marriage (union) between husband and wife as the harmful behaviour of adultery, desertion, separation and divorce (breaking of a marriage oath) are acceptable practices in the “Harlot marriage.” The other harmful behaviours between husband and wife include abuse, rape and murder (death) but these behaviours are controlled by other Australian laws
The LGBTIAQ party dictators demand a civil right to a no fault divorce for same-sex marriages overseas, and Michael Tiyce of Tiyce and lawyers recently offered a free pro-bona no fault divorce for the Christian married couple in Canberra (Nick and Sarah Jensen). These cases are evidence that a no fault divorce is a benefit or reward rather than a deterrent to a marriage and family breakdown which is a massive cost for Australian governments, society and children suffer the most from the separation of their biological parents.
God answered Christians prayers for freedom from government regulation (control) of our “one flesh” marriage and family as we wanted to be controlled by God’s laws on “one flesh” union between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life. The no fault divorce which was introduced in 1975 was a corrupt law as adultery and the breakage of the marriage oath (contract) are no longer punished to deter a marriage and family breakdown, and the civil registered marriage was no longer based on a lifelong contract nor faithful sexual intercourse between a man-woman married couples as they were no longer required to consummate their marriage. The no fault divorce treated married couples’ marriage oath (contract) as a delusional fantasy.
Christians will need to separate from this new deregulated marriage practice which has been created for a “Harlot marriage” by identifying as an “independent marriage,” so they can clearly explain a “one flesh” union in Genesis which is the opposite to a “Harlot marriage” like the sunlight is the opposite to the moonlight.
Denis, I think the law of marriage is defined under an Act of parliament. The constitution just allows the government to make such laws.
More the worry and as Bill has pointed out, we are not sure where all this will lead. For example, the safe schools program is very much a worry. I know of instances of homosexual material being handed out at schools under the guise of safe schools.
Ben it’s all part of their agenda to place a wedge between as many people and God as possible. The onus is on the parents to act accordingly. Perhaps the best option is to take their children out of the traditional school system and place them in a Catholic one assuming they are protected there. Even if one doesn’t agree with all their doctrines and beliefs, like myself, it’;s still by far the best option. It’s much easier to correct the children at home on such doctrinal matters than to try and undo the terrible damage the kids will suffer under the traditional education system.
Sheryl
We may be on the way there, but at the moment in the new Marriage Amendment Act, marriage is “understood as the union of 2 people to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life;” Objects 2A (a).
I understand that Muslims can avail themselves of “harlot marriage” under their various understandings of Sharia Law.
If the Amendment act gets up substantially as it is, and includes the understandings as above then the SSM concession has only achieved a part of the common debauchery.
Some say there will be a huge rush for marriages now, (up to 20,000 according to at least one opinion). I doubt that estimate and the touted financial windfall to the wedding industry in the early months of 2018.
If the SSM people are honest, they will balk at the twin ideas of “to the exclusion of all others” and “voluntarily entered into for life”. Many gay men especially, will have difficulty with this.
I believe that we will see only a comparatively few SS marriages in 2018, and that there will be a further push to water-down marriage, especially the two understandings of exclusivity and for life.
The 1975 easy “no fault” divorce is already part of that system as you point out.
Thanks Joe. Of course homeschooling is also becoming much more of an option for many concerned parents.
Interesting article in the SMH today. “The Yes & NO city” Sydney.
The electorate of Blaxland in Sydney’s west had the lowest YES vote in the country at 26%, and has a married rate well above the national average.
While the city seat of Sydney had the equal or second highest YES vote in the country at 83.7%.
Yet of those over 15 years only 24% are married which is way below the 48% average and the lowest in the city area.
Have fun with that!
So Bill, do I detect shades of Martin Luther here? “Here I stand. I can do no other.” Perhaps we all need to go back to Wittenberg – or else make this our confession and stance for the new era that is apparently being forced upon us. I received this today on Pinterest from a close relative and friend: “Tis the season… to have your life choices mocked at the dinner table!”
Well said Bill. Praying for grace for you and other faithful believers in Australia. His grace is sufficient, and will be sufficient. Stand in the evil day.
Bruce Knowing,
The new Amendment to the Marriage Act will be falsified because this law understands same-sex partners can’t have biological children together in order for them to found a family which is based on the misinterpretation of a human right that man and woman have a right to marry and found a family. Therefore, the words “exclusion of all others” is false as the only way same-sex partners can have children in a marriage relationship is for them to have a sexual relationship with other people and this can involve sexual intercourse, IVF and or surrogacy. Also, the amendment law understands that same-sex partners have been in a sexual relationship prior to this change of law so there is no expectation of faithfulness to one person prior to a civil registered marriage. The new Amendment means that the purchase of a legal marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony as now the only evidence of a civil registered marriage. This had never been enough evidence of a genuine marriage, but there is no description of the type of sexual relationship expected between same-sex partners which is the same as a man-woman married couple. The non-procreative sexual activities of same-sex partners isn’t the same as sexual intercourse which can procreate new-life.
The Amendment of the Marriage Act will create the idea “people marry for the person and not for the sex” as there will be no detail of any sexual relationship in a civil registered marriage. This is extremely different to a “one flesh” marriage as it is a sexual relationship with a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful “one flesh” union (sexual intercourse) between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life with a male and female remodel. Therefore, a “one flesh” marriage is designed for sexual intercourse within one union and within a marriage oath (contract) which makes it impossible to get a STD and have a child out of wedlock (this is a marriage oath, and not a legal state marriage certificate as Adam and Eve never purchased one but they had a “one flesh” union). Unfortunately, the increase spread of drug-resistant STDs such as gonorrhoea and HIV/AIDS means it is extremely important for a “one flesh” union to separate from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice in order to be a role model for children because without new drugs they’ll be at a high risk of infertility and early death.
The words “for life” in the Marriage Act is also false because the no fault divorce proves it is a lie as “irretrievably broken down” is the only requirement to end the civil registered marriage. There is no way I want any of my 3 children or 15 nieces and nephews to ever enter into a deregulated civil registered marriage practice which has been completely falsified with lies. I am demanding from my MPs to allow me to identify as an “independent marriage” as my right for self-dtermination. It is obvious the new amended Marriage Act is no longer regulating (controlling) a “one flesh” marriage from the harm of adultery nor the breakage of a marriage oath as both of these are acceptable behaviour and practice of a “marriage between any 2 people” which includes a “Harlot marriage.”
I am well informed how the legal practice works in the healthcare system as I have worked for more than 24 years in critical care. If the state government forced me to assist in a legal abortion practice or the proposed assisted dying practice in the future, then the only choice I would have as a healthcare professional with my Christian beliefs is not to renew my registration of practice as I don’t believe I should participate in death-care practice as this isn’t real healthcare nor treatment because if I did these to my family I would be charged with murder. The regulations of nursing, midwifery and medicine are all to protect the public from harm but it is impossible to protect unrelated people from harm when these practices will allow healthcare professionals to legally kill with their consent as there isn’t anything more harmful than death.
The registration of a man-woman marriage wasn’t for their benefit but it is for the benefit of society because it is a massive cost for the governments and children as they suffer the most when biological parents separate. The words “nursing,” “care,” and “treatment” aren’t ambiguous words even if the government decided to put a death-care practice into the nursing and medical practices. The Australian government can’t redefine “one flesh” (marriage – sexual intercourse) as these aren’t ambiguous words even if the government redefined a Marriage Act the word “marriage” only refers to a civil registered marriage and not the historical records of the Bible as the Australian laws doesn’t govern the behaviours and practices of the Bible. The government can’t force me to register my spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) in a legal abortion practice in order to make females who have had a legal abortion feel better about themselves. The behaviour and practice of a miscarriage and legal abortion are different and the Australian law treats them as not equally the same despite them having both a dead neonate/fetus. Therefore, the Australian government can’t expect that I would identify with a Marriage Act that is falsified with lies in order to make civil registered married couples feel good about themselves. The practice of nursing and medicine is full of discrimination as accurate reports and appropriate care and treatment are all a requirement by laws and regulations. I will be charged with perjury in court if I don’t understand the truth about biological sex based on the binary genders of male and female.
I am not discriminating against nor mistreating a pregnant woman when I refuse to participate in a legal abortion practice. I am not discrimination nor mistreating a terminal ill person when I refuse to participate in the proposed voluntary assisted dying practice. Australians understanding that to participate in a legally killing practice (death-care) of an unwanted neonate and or terminally ill person shouldn’t be forced upon a healthcare professional’s moral conscience. I am not discriminating nor mistreating people who identify as LGBTIAQ when I refuse to participate in a legal same-sex marriage practice as I don’t believe that “marriage is between any 2 people.” The word “people” includes a registered nurse and their patient. The nursing regulation prohibits an adult sexual relationship with a patient, let alone call their “love” a marriage. Will the nursing regulations be forced to change since the Marriage Act has been forced to change by the idea “love is love.” Australians now believe in the idea that people can’t control who they fall in love with so they can’t control how long this love will last nor the type of love they will experience. Also, I don’t believe in the sexuality and gender theories for myself which have created the idea that “marriage is between any 2 people.”
Christians can see the “Harlot marriage” is publicly displayed in the world news especially the recent report of teenage girls are offering their virginity to the highest bidder, and one girl gave her reason for doing this practice was to explore her sexuality and there wasn’t any point wasting it on a boyfriend especially when this money can be used for her studies, purchase a house and travel the world. A “Harlot” marriage trumps religious freedom as the government benefits for a civil registered marriage makes it tempting to identify with the idea “only a legitimate marriage is real” but this isn’t the truth as my “one flesh” marriage is genuine according to God’s regulation (control) not whatever decision the Australian parliament will define, register and regulates (controls) a civil registered marriage. The new amendment will create a conflict between the sexual behaviour and practice of a “one flesh” marriage based on a belief in natural human reproduction which is extremely different to the idea people marry for the person and not for the sex so “marriage is between any 2 people.” The right to purchase a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony isn’t a “one flesh” marriage but this is the only way for a civil registered marriage to exist (paper marriage and paper family). Australians would think it would be crazy to legally treat all cars and trucks as only a “vehicle” but they can’t discriminate between natural human reproduction isn’t the same as scientific experimentation of human reproduction.
Dear Bill,
Thank you for this article.
I was really angry this week when I read a letter in one of the local papers. It accused Andrew Hastie one of the few liberal MPs who has shown leadership in the No campaign of a ‘rant’ and being ‘off the planet’ because of his defence of traditional marriage.
I had no computer but I felt compelled to defend this Christian, family man and ex soldier all the same so I immediately put pen to paper and wrote a letter to the paper defending him saying that we needed more of his calibre to represent us in parliament.
The letter writer was making the point that not all children in traditional marriages were well cared for as if that justifies changing the definition of marriage.
I said that of course Mr Hastie would know that all traditional marriages weren’t perfect because marriage had to be worked at like everything else but marriage between a man and woman was the best we had in this increasingly godless world.
I also asked how he dared accuse Mr Hastie of a ‘rant’ when I had had the opportunity to listen to what I thought was a well reasoned argument he had put forward during the campaign.
Unfortunately this letter was typical of the rude and irrational comments which were common during the campaign for SSM. I suspect that this writer was indifferent to it which in my opinion was far worse than being actively for it.
Thank you Bill. Here I stand. I can do no other too!
Great article, Bill. Absolutely spot on. We will need to shine for Jesus now more than ever and through the persecution hopefully win more souls for Christ as they see us not bow the knee to Baal.
In response to CULTURE WATCH 17 Nov 17:
No Need to stay strong Bill, just stay true to your conscience as God will read your conscience not your writings which, in my view are worthy of text.
As for those who voted no – stay true;
For those who voted yes, you may be excused for your ignorance;
For those who abstained, Jesus gave the parable of the three servants who were given an amount of talents – the first gambled and lost; the second invested and profited and the third hid them and returned them to the master. The master rebuked the one who hid their talents saying that at least the one who gambled tried.
There can be no excuse for abstaining and the survey was lost on their account – God knows who they are and who we are.
John Abbott
The most moral and law abiding people in the nation have suddenly become reprobates and subversives. “I have zero faith in our courts and parliaments, even at the highest level – it is obvious they despise the real legal and moral foundations of this country and just find ways to bury them under the weight of modern legalese. May the traps they set ensnare them….” AMEN and AMEN !!!!!
When Samuel warned Israel about taking themselves a king (1 Sam 8) they took no notice either. How many centuries did Israel suffer before they were released from tyranny? This generation has chosen to ignore the warnings. Yes they have been manipulated by a cunning and evil strategy and the huge problems with modern promulgation of false information, but the responsibility still lies with those who have chosen evil and sexual immorality over truth. There may, however, be some opportunities. Some atheists who are smart and who don’t have a deep seated hatred of God, will see some of the problems. How can you, for example, have men claiming to be women competing in the Olympics without seeing how unfair this is? The problems with basing laws on imagination instead of fact will inevitably lead some people to question the foundation of these concepts. More and more cases of sham homosexual relationships, set up specifically for the abuse of children, will also be exposed as techniques of detection improve and will lead some to also wonder. We live in an age when the scientific evidence for God’s involvement is becoming close to irrefutable and some will see this as well. We will also be a witness to Muslims who are open to truth. They will see how God’s plan for peaceful resistance is correct and taking to arms in a human way is not.
Unfortunately we live in a time when the evil that is in people needs to be revealed for just how evil it is. This cannot happen without the evil coming to its fruition just as happened with Jesus. This is simply a prerequisite for the judgement. My view is that Satan will rest on his laurels for a small bit, after all he has brought the nations that were salt and a light to the world into subjection, then some human rationality will see through the great deception and will resist a little. It will be at that time that Satan will manipulate the hardhearted so as to completely conquer all of the nations, the ones he has previously considered to be easy beats and not his main adversaries. Surprisingly, given the left leaning nature of many Jews, I believe the prophecies tell us that Israel will be somewhere near the last of nations to adopt homosexual “marriage” even though they already have homosexual divorce, and that will be the trigger showing that the harvest is fully dry. That is when the full blown attack on Israel will occur.
The points you are making are very valid. I don’t understand why our politicians are ignoring the simple truth that no one can force another person to act against their religious beliefs. For example, an Orthodox Jew or Muslim baker can and certainly will refuse under their religious grounds to bake a pork pie for anyone. So why can’t a Christian, Jewish or Muslim baker refuse to bake any cake for a same-sex marriage couple on the grounds of their religion? Baking such a cake would be an endorsement of the same sex marriage, which would be in direct violation of their religion. One shouldn’t have to be a priest or a rabbi to have protection under the law from being persecuted or sued for their religious beliefs. The exact same rule should apply for anyone with a religious conviction. There’s another reason we must have such protection. I can almost guarantee we won’t see any Jew or Muslim being asked to bake cakes for same-sex couples but Christians ones will be because they are the real targets of persecution by the left. So we must have protections in place to prevent such persecutions taking place. If the politicians can’t see this is all true and act accordingly then they are in effect persecutors of Christians and only Christians.
Amen Bill. My mum and I will stand with you. I have been warning people for years they must stand for truth and raise their voice, but to no avail.
Jodi and Betty
I agree with most of what is said here, but I do take issue with the 52% of Australians are christians. If that really was the case the “No” vote would have won. What is recorded in the census is no real indicator of faith.
About 18% of Australians attend church once a month, which is a better indicator of christian commitment. I would say about half of those are the real deal, so 9-10%.
So really the No vote did extraordinarily well, although much worse than we hoped for.
I agree that committed christians need to be preparing ourselves for persecution. Maybe not being thrown to the lions just yet, but trial by various “human rights” tribunals and even more mocking in the public square than in the past. We will learn to rejoice that we can share in the sufferings of Christ.
My prayer for this nation is a genuine revival that sees millions of people across the country swept into the kingdom and transformed. That is the only hope for Australia.
Thanks Keith. Yes obviously to point out that 52% of Australians identify as Christians does not mean that they really are. That would go without saying. The percentage of Australians that really are genuine biblical Christians would be rather small indeed.
Greetings Bill
Thank you very much for what you have done to defend the faith and are doing to encourage and warn Christians about issues like this.
A 75 year old Christian friend of mine wrote the comment below and thankfully it got printed in the local Central Queensland newspaper. Just wanted share it with you and others.
Kind Regards,
We cannot disregard the universal order
As of this week, we Australians have demonstrated that we no longer understand the ramifications of stepping outside the universal order of things. Of course many will wonder what on earth I’m talking about because in our material world most have lost sight of what some call ‘Intelligent Design’. We have demanded freedoms that were not ours to demand let alone extend to others. Freedom of choice exists within a universal order which has provided parameters for our guidance and welfare. This should be obvious to everyone for as children we were kept safe within the boundaries set by our parents and this should have been our training ground. When we broke through those boundaries we were faced with whole new freedom to experience the consequence of our disregard of the rules which governed our lives then. As adults we still have the constraints of those extended laws which also provide our freedoms. But as is the way with unrestrained human desires, we always want to ‘go beyond’. I do not hate anyone for not believing as I believe but I am fearful for our nation when we determine to legislate a so-called equality or license that in the ‘grand scheme of things’ is not ours to give, no matter the emotional or political pressure to do so. We have chosen to disregard the fact that when we plant a corn seed and expect tomatoes there is something amiss in our thinking processes. This is an appeal for the people of Australia to think about what we have demanded and to consider where our demand will take us. It may be ‘ A bridge too far.’
And are people who identify as conservative really diehard conservatives?
Does anyone else feel we were defeated by Fifth Column elements in the No camp?
It has now been revealed Tony Abbott was a key player in killing off the Patterson Bill In order to make same sex marriage legal by Christmas so that, he said this himself,
He didn’t want his sister to have to get married in the British Consulate on the 2nd of February next year. And he will be attending! One of the first of “their” marriages in Australia and one of “our” leaders will honor it with his presence.
Was Tony Abbott ever really committed to our cause?
And why was it the big No votes were from those ethnic religious people? Why has Christian White Australia lost its compass? Rural Australia too! Very disappointed to see conservative rural Australia turn away from God.
Yes we are being taken for a biiig ride.
I can usually tolerate the argy-bargy on the ABC, but yesterday I turned Richard Glover off.
The intimations, laughingly, were about protections for objectors, and declaring that any protection was promoting discrimination. Florists and bakers – giggle!
There did not seem to be any understanding at all about the difference between people and their actions. Specifically, that objectors are wanting the freedom not to agree with, or be seen to be promoting, or celebrating, actions that they regard as immoral. A birthday cake is vastly different from a wedding cake for a gay wedding, for the same customer, (unless the ordered decorations are unpalatable, – pun intended).
There are plenty of illustrations here; not selling alcohol to a person perceived to be drunk, not selling — many things– to a minor. Not selling medication without a prescription or if there is doubt about its improper use. Not allowing a person with a gambling problem to bet. Enforcing dress rules in clubs and bars. Refusing to lodge tax returns that one believes to be erroneous. Not accepting copy for an advertisement or a notice that is harmful. Refusing to teach or promote an idea that one strongly disagrees with, and/or in such a way that it cannot be criticized. etc etc. None of this goes to the person but to the behaviour.
Likewise, it is still legal to drink alcohol, to gamble, to get into porn, to visit a prostitute, to smoke tobacco, to swear and curse, to complain bitterly, to get angry, to be depressed, to be anorexic, to be demonised, to self harm. To be married, to attend church, to gather with friends, celebrate Easter, celebrate Eid, join in with Halloween. Plus a lot of other things – just don’t be complained about or get caught! OR To act homosexually, to have an abortion, and soon, to have a gay wedding, it seems. BUT that does not mean I that have to do these things, or even agree that these are right and proper, or promote these things, or allow them in my home or business, or be involved with them in anyway.
So the legality of SSM has to do with permission, with restrictions. The legislation must only say what I may do, if I wish. It has nothing to do with what I must do, or must agree with. Those who want SSM should find those who are willing to share in the celebration, to help them with the celebration.
I have already flagged my status as a conscientious objector, to my local member.
(Not that I can readily think of a situation yet, where this would apply to me any longer.)
We have sent the petition emails to our MPs as was suggested by one of your readers.
I am now developing an email/fax to them to be more specific about my views.
It is good to see John Howard making appropriate comments.
We may well be coming to a place where we can but stand.
I must confess to a certain, discernible adrenalin surge, when I realise that soon, certain opinions I hold dear will no longer have the support of Australian law. Feels odd to contemplate soon becoming an “outlaw” on account of certain divinely ordained truths regarding human relationships.
The matter of “exemptions of religious or other conscientious objection” to certain state-sanctioned practices and the ideology of their adherents is a matter of freedom of speech: One ought not to be made to recant or resile from from one’s honestly held personal beliefs and moral code simply because the “faithful” of another religion or sacrilege demand goods and services be provided which deny one’s own creed and moral standards.
The word “boycott” arose amid the injustices of absentee landlordism in 19th Century Ireland.
Just thinking…
We are told that women, ladies, girls,females, XX people, receive less pay then men, boys, blokes do, XY people.
Question: If a man (XY) decides he wants to be a woman (XX) (impossible off course, cant change XY to XX) is “she” prepared to accept a lower rate of pay, ie XX female pay rate? If not, why not? After all “he” will now be a “she” (yes it is crazy)
I am aware that these XY “females” will win in sporting events and the XX “males” will be at a disadvantage ( i am getting a headache trying to keep up with this, its doing my brain in, i am still trying to figure out how 2+2=5 and how that farmer is going to end up with a herd when he only has 2 bulls).
So will we now have pay rates; XY males, XX females, XY females, XX males and those who want to be ?? whatever beings.
How many glass ceilings will we now have?
No I am not joking. Get used to it folks, this is what is happening. Talk about mixed up.
I am a NO voter and always will be.
I put my trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, He WILL sort it out and justice will prevail.
Well I am a florist as well as well as a pregnancy counsellor so I know my days are numbered before I will have to face these so called anti discrimination laws. We only have one court that is higher than this land and it is that judge I am truly accountable too.
Excellent article, Bill. Yes, it is the church that has fallen down. It has taught lies and half truths to its congregations. It has wallowed in historical and cultural contexts instead of preaching the Word of God in its power. It has grown fat and self-indulgent on niceness and comfort zones. Where are the Elijahs shouting on the street corners? Getting arrested and carted off to jail while nobody notices. Well, if the kindness of God is what leads us to repentance, then kindness it will be. Judgement would be a kindness right now to wake up our sleeping giant and trimming off the baby fat to get us back into the battle where we should be.
So Mr Andrews was going to provide the poor depressed yes people with counselling should they lose, but he did not have the rest of us in mind. Well, Mr Andrews, you do not need to because the no voters are of sound mind.
Many times I have seen or heard misotheists claim they don’t want a theocracy, but it certainly feels like it to me right now! Anti-Christian secular humanism is a religion, and whether it be the ‘Korrekt™’ view on homosexuality, abortion, sex education, the environment, welfare, immigration, the ABC, genuflections to all other religions (except when they dare to get any of the others inKorrekt, except when that religion is Islam), any level of dissent must be squashed. For the all the talk of ‘diversity’, there is precious little of it. You must conform, or else. Virtue signalling is encouraged, especially with loud proclamations and visible displays of KorrektThink™, with lavish rewards of TheFeelz™ promised.
I find it especially remarkable in the same month we are talking of closing down climbing Ayers Rock for the sake of the local aboriginal tribe, it’s highly likely to be the same people openly celebrating trampling all over a great many more people’s cherished beliefs.
True followers of Christ simply cannot call two men or two women ‘marriage’. We just cannot. It would be spitting in God’s face. We love God first, and we understand the significance of the coming Wedding of Christ and His bride. There are not two Christs or two brides. The invitation is only open to those who pay Jesus Christ the full respect He is due.
Thanks Mark. As usual, Douglas Wilson nailed it: “Every society is a theocracy. The only question is who is Theo?”
While waiting for my car to be serviced today, I happened to see a snippet of Sunrise or whatever it’s called – the program with Karl Stefanovic as host – and his co-host, a woman was interviewing a young actor who identified as gay.
I assume this was the case, because he was saying that the ‘No’ voters and their ilk were “aggressive” and “negative” and hurtful, etc. He was so offended that he seemed to be seeking revenge and he wasn’t happy. He couldn’t see his hypocrisy, of course, that two wrongs (sic) make a right. He was bent on aggressive payback for, as he said, being put through this agony. He was one mixed up bloke, but the point he was making was obvious.
‘No’ voters will pay.
So, where is the love? What a sham campaign they ran about ‘love’. This bloke doesn’t know much about it and so many gullible people bought his argument hook, line and sinker. They have the gall to accuse Christians of being unloving. If the consequences were not so serious, it would be laughable.
I was stunned by the outcome of the SSM vote. The evangelical church I attend has a pastor who DID strongly oppose the ‘yes’ vote – but still a number of church members voted ‘yes’. And I personally know a number of liberal ‘Christians’ who voted ‘yes’. This being the case, I am sure we would be horrified to know the actual number of ‘Christians’ who voted that way. In some cases, this was due to peer pressure, and the desire to be ‘liked’ by one’s Facebook friends.
Only today I saw a video of one of Australia’s first male couples celebrating the fact that they could soon be ‘married’. I confess I was disgusted not only by their crude behaviour, but by all the over-the-top, gushing comments that were posted about this “beautiful celebration of SSM”. I probably made the mistake of commenting that I didn’t agree. The next thing I knew, I was receiving unprintable comments which basically amounted to me being a ‘kill joy’ and a ‘wowser’! On the one hand, they say it is “all about love”, but in reality there is very little (if any) true love about it, but rather a deliberate flouting of the holiness of marriage, which was in the heart of God before mankind was even created.
For the past two days I have been listening to the sound of gentle rain – and I keep wondering whether this is indeed our Father’s tears, as He sees the destruction of morality and the celebration of the profane. And it is happening right in our midst, with barely a voice raised against it. May God help us all – and bring this nation to its knees before it is too late.
Some thoughts on where all of this is taking us…?
Now that SSM is to be legalised in Australia then should this not justify other groups from also trying to achieve ‘Marriage Equality’? For example Human-Animal Marriages
• It was love at first sight: World’s first person to “marry” a dolphin
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10694972/#.Wg6C5NKWZdh
• For love and compassion: German man ‘weds’ his dying cat
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8658327.stm
• It’s just Fake marriage for now: Australian Man Married His Labrador (2010). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1334993/Joseph-Guiso-marries-dog-Honey-sunset-ceremony.html
Australia’s about to open the floodgates …. and swimming lessons will not save us from the deluge or worse, much worse. God bless you and yours.
Thanks Marie. Yes, in my 2014 book Dangerous Relations I document numerous examples of the slippery slope in action:
https://www.amazon.com/Dangerous-Relations-Homosexuality-Bill-Muehlenberg/dp/1500516031/
Gays have very few options for life long partners suitable for marriage as they can only draw from a very small pond – about 1.5% of the population for each sex – less after you have taken out those not old enough to marry or those not wanting to settle down, which appears to be most. That’s not a lot of options for such a decision, and life we know is not all about sex, and if it is, then your marriage is not likely to last. Broader interests help but the gay community is not very broad due to it’s demographics.
I can’t then see marriage working for gays as they will also need to be ‘housed’ in either community, one relatively conservative in daily and weekly practise due to the responsibilities of rearing young life, while the other extremely liberal due to it’s lifestyle, both then appear to be inappropriate to the interests of ‘married gays’, more so if they have children.
Married gays may be equivalent in the eyes of the law with heterosexual marriages but it is natural law that assists in the marriage itself as children bind the marriage, and natural law is also demographics. Marriage seems very out of place for gay behaviours and norms.
God Bless Bill.
Once again Bill, you have nailed the things that have overtaken our Nation and the horrors that are to come. Keep up the insightful writing for the people who find support in your word because our main stream media is owned by the Cultural Marxists and therefore by Satan..
The Book “The Long March” should have been a wake-up call to all who read it. Even the novel 1984 projected insights that we can tick off coming into play each day.
Hi guys I am new to this site and must say i love it, anyway what I don’t get about this ssm postal survey(the word says it all) is what did we actually agree to,we know that redefinition is what they are after,however the definition of marriage is there for all to see in Quick and Garrans Annotated Constitution and it defines it as “a union between a man and a woman on the same basis as that on which the institution is recognized throughout Christendom and its essence is that it is 1. a voluntary union 2. for life 3. of one man and one woman 4. to the exclusion of all others. (Bethell v Hildyard, 38 Ch. D. 220). Interesting, I am no expert, however I have read enough to understand that if defined in the Constitution any changes without it going to a referendum and those changes being spelt out in crystal clear fashion so as everyone that then votes in a valid legal framework and not an appraisal of a vague general question is ‘void ab initio’. We are still a Constitutional Monarchy and as so the crown is sworn to uphold the laws of our Lord on Coronation and anything less is a criminal breach of the trust we consent to.These are the Trojan horses they also use to undermine and change the rule book they (the public trustees are accountable to). Another interesting point is that all laws require a Proclamation date and a Proclamation certificate before they have any lawful/legal legs. Thanks for the platform Bill and God bless.
Bill,
The Australian laws are established to detect, prevent and criminalise harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public and society from harm. The NSW government regulates (controls) a legal prostitution practice by forcing the registration of sex worker which allows government authorities the ability to detect the spread of STDs including drug-resistant STDs which cause infertility and a shorten life-cycle. The Old and the New Testament both recorded a “Harlot marriage.” The sex worker and their client are examples of “any 2 people” who can marry. The sex worker and the client can easily fulfil all requirements for a civil registered marriage and a legal divorce as these 2 people can easily obtain a legal divorce by demonstrating an “irretrievable breakdown.” Once the fee is paid for sex, then the love and commitment has irretrievably broken down.
The idea a sex work and their client can have a right to a legal “Harlot marriage” as people marry for the person and not for sex. The majority of Australians would never believe a sex worker and their client can have a genuine marriage even if it is legitimate by a public record. A sex worker and their client have a civil right to self-determination to achieve “marriage equality.” Once they no longer have to pay income tax nor collect GST for the government as the client’s fee for sex is simply a matter of giving some money to one’s spouse. MPs have told Australians for years that a “same-sex marriage” would be good for society as “more people would be marrying.” A “Harlot marriage” runs rings around “same-sex marriage” because sex workers can get married several times a day.
A “Harlot marriage” trumps a “same-sex marriage” as it is genderless, non-discriminative, non-procreative and a non-exclusive sexual relationship. A “Harlot marriage” allows a sex worker and their client a legal right to naturally procreate new-life or they can have children with other people like same-sex partners. A “Harlot marriage” will come into conflict with the NSW regulated prostitution practice. The Australian goverment is going to change the Marriage Act to create a “marriage between any 2 people” in order to register person-centred marriages such as same-sex marriages will be regulated (controlled) by the Marriage Act, no-fault divorce, domestic and family violence laws and criminal laws such as marital rape. The Australian laws need to protect the public and society from harm of paper marriage and paper family as this leads to scientific experimentation of human reproduction like the “handmade Tales.”
The Australian parliament no longer wants to regulate (control) a “one flesh” marriage (union) between husband and wife as the harmful behaviour of adultery, desertion, separation and divorce (breaking of a marriage oath) are acceptable practices in the “Harlot marriage.” The other harmful behaviours between husband and wife include abuse, rape and murder (death) but these behaviours are controlled by other Australian laws
The LGBTIAQ party dictators demand a civil right to a no fault divorce for same-sex marriages overseas, and Michael Tiyce of Tiyce and lawyers recently offered a free pro-bona no fault divorce for the Christian married couple in Canberra (Nick and Sarah Jensen). These cases are evidence that a no fault divorce is a benefit or reward rather than a deterrent to a marriage and family breakdown which is a massive cost for Australian governments, society and children suffer the most from the separation of their biological parents.
God answered Christians prayers for freedom from government regulation (control) of our “one flesh” marriage and family as we wanted to be controlled by God’s laws on “one flesh” union between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life. The no fault divorce which was introduced in 1975 was a corrupt law as adultery and the breakage of the marriage oath (contract) are no longer punished to deter a marriage and family breakdown, and the civil registered marriage was no longer based on a lifelong contract nor faithful sexual intercourse between a man-woman married couples as they were no longer required to consummate their marriage. The no fault divorce treated married couples’ marriage oath (contract) as a delusional fantasy.
Christians will need to separate from this new deregulated marriage practice which has been created for a “Harlot marriage” by identifying as an “independent marriage,” so they can clearly explain a “one flesh” union in Genesis which is the opposite to a “Harlot marriage” like the sunlight is the opposite to the moonlight.
Denis, I think the law of marriage is defined under an Act of parliament. The constitution just allows the government to make such laws.
More the worry and as Bill has pointed out, we are not sure where all this will lead. For example, the safe schools program is very much a worry. I know of instances of homosexual material being handed out at schools under the guise of safe schools.
Ben it’s all part of their agenda to place a wedge between as many people and God as possible. The onus is on the parents to act accordingly. Perhaps the best option is to take their children out of the traditional school system and place them in a Catholic one assuming they are protected there. Even if one doesn’t agree with all their doctrines and beliefs, like myself, it’;s still by far the best option. It’s much easier to correct the children at home on such doctrinal matters than to try and undo the terrible damage the kids will suffer under the traditional education system.
Sheryl
We may be on the way there, but at the moment in the new Marriage Amendment Act, marriage is “understood as the union of 2 people to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life;” Objects 2A (a).
I understand that Muslims can avail themselves of “harlot marriage” under their various understandings of Sharia Law.
If the Amendment act gets up substantially as it is, and includes the understandings as above then the SSM concession has only achieved a part of the common debauchery.
Some say there will be a huge rush for marriages now, (up to 20,000 according to at least one opinion). I doubt that estimate and the touted financial windfall to the wedding industry in the early months of 2018.
If the SSM people are honest, they will balk at the twin ideas of “to the exclusion of all others” and “voluntarily entered into for life”. Many gay men especially, will have difficulty with this.
I believe that we will see only a comparatively few SS marriages in 2018, and that there will be a further push to water-down marriage, especially the two understandings of exclusivity and for life.
The 1975 easy “no fault” divorce is already part of that system as you point out.
Thanks Joe. Of course homeschooling is also becoming much more of an option for many concerned parents.
Interesting article in the SMH today. “The Yes & NO city” Sydney.
The electorate of Blaxland in Sydney’s west had the lowest YES vote in the country at 26%, and has a married rate well above the national average.
While the city seat of Sydney had the equal or second highest YES vote in the country at 83.7%.
Yet of those over 15 years only 24% are married which is way below the 48% average and the lowest in the city area.
Have fun with that!
So Bill, do I detect shades of Martin Luther here? “Here I stand. I can do no other.” Perhaps we all need to go back to Wittenberg – or else make this our confession and stance for the new era that is apparently being forced upon us. I received this today on Pinterest from a close relative and friend: “Tis the season… to have your life choices mocked at the dinner table!”
Well said Bill. Praying for grace for you and other faithful believers in Australia. His grace is sufficient, and will be sufficient. Stand in the evil day.
Bruce Knowing,
The new Amendment to the Marriage Act will be falsified because this law understands same-sex partners can’t have biological children together in order for them to found a family which is based on the misinterpretation of a human right that man and woman have a right to marry and found a family. Therefore, the words “exclusion of all others” is false as the only way same-sex partners can have children in a marriage relationship is for them to have a sexual relationship with other people and this can involve sexual intercourse, IVF and or surrogacy. Also, the amendment law understands that same-sex partners have been in a sexual relationship prior to this change of law so there is no expectation of faithfulness to one person prior to a civil registered marriage. The new Amendment means that the purchase of a legal marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony as now the only evidence of a civil registered marriage. This had never been enough evidence of a genuine marriage, but there is no description of the type of sexual relationship expected between same-sex partners which is the same as a man-woman married couple. The non-procreative sexual activities of same-sex partners isn’t the same as sexual intercourse which can procreate new-life.
The Amendment of the Marriage Act will create the idea “people marry for the person and not for the sex” as there will be no detail of any sexual relationship in a civil registered marriage. This is extremely different to a “one flesh” marriage as it is a sexual relationship with a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful “one flesh” union (sexual intercourse) between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life with a male and female remodel. Therefore, a “one flesh” marriage is designed for sexual intercourse within one union and within a marriage oath (contract) which makes it impossible to get a STD and have a child out of wedlock (this is a marriage oath, and not a legal state marriage certificate as Adam and Eve never purchased one but they had a “one flesh” union). Unfortunately, the increase spread of drug-resistant STDs such as gonorrhoea and HIV/AIDS means it is extremely important for a “one flesh” union to separate from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice in order to be a role model for children because without new drugs they’ll be at a high risk of infertility and early death.
The words “for life” in the Marriage Act is also false because the no fault divorce proves it is a lie as “irretrievably broken down” is the only requirement to end the civil registered marriage. There is no way I want any of my 3 children or 15 nieces and nephews to ever enter into a deregulated civil registered marriage practice which has been completely falsified with lies. I am demanding from my MPs to allow me to identify as an “independent marriage” as my right for self-dtermination. It is obvious the new amended Marriage Act is no longer regulating (controlling) a “one flesh” marriage from the harm of adultery nor the breakage of a marriage oath as both of these are acceptable behaviour and practice of a “marriage between any 2 people” which includes a “Harlot marriage.”
I am well informed how the legal practice works in the healthcare system as I have worked for more than 24 years in critical care. If the state government forced me to assist in a legal abortion practice or the proposed assisted dying practice in the future, then the only choice I would have as a healthcare professional with my Christian beliefs is not to renew my registration of practice as I don’t believe I should participate in death-care practice as this isn’t real healthcare nor treatment because if I did these to my family I would be charged with murder. The regulations of nursing, midwifery and medicine are all to protect the public from harm but it is impossible to protect unrelated people from harm when these practices will allow healthcare professionals to legally kill with their consent as there isn’t anything more harmful than death.
The registration of a man-woman marriage wasn’t for their benefit but it is for the benefit of society because it is a massive cost for the governments and children as they suffer the most when biological parents separate. The words “nursing,” “care,” and “treatment” aren’t ambiguous words even if the government decided to put a death-care practice into the nursing and medical practices. The Australian government can’t redefine “one flesh” (marriage – sexual intercourse) as these aren’t ambiguous words even if the government redefined a Marriage Act the word “marriage” only refers to a civil registered marriage and not the historical records of the Bible as the Australian laws doesn’t govern the behaviours and practices of the Bible. The government can’t force me to register my spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) in a legal abortion practice in order to make females who have had a legal abortion feel better about themselves. The behaviour and practice of a miscarriage and legal abortion are different and the Australian law treats them as not equally the same despite them having both a dead neonate/fetus. Therefore, the Australian government can’t expect that I would identify with a Marriage Act that is falsified with lies in order to make civil registered married couples feel good about themselves. The practice of nursing and medicine is full of discrimination as accurate reports and appropriate care and treatment are all a requirement by laws and regulations. I will be charged with perjury in court if I don’t understand the truth about biological sex based on the binary genders of male and female.
I am not discriminating against nor mistreating a pregnant woman when I refuse to participate in a legal abortion practice. I am not discrimination nor mistreating a terminal ill person when I refuse to participate in the proposed voluntary assisted dying practice. Australians understanding that to participate in a legally killing practice (death-care) of an unwanted neonate and or terminally ill person shouldn’t be forced upon a healthcare professional’s moral conscience. I am not discriminating nor mistreating people who identify as LGBTIAQ when I refuse to participate in a legal same-sex marriage practice as I don’t believe that “marriage is between any 2 people.” The word “people” includes a registered nurse and their patient. The nursing regulation prohibits an adult sexual relationship with a patient, let alone call their “love” a marriage. Will the nursing regulations be forced to change since the Marriage Act has been forced to change by the idea “love is love.” Australians now believe in the idea that people can’t control who they fall in love with so they can’t control how long this love will last nor the type of love they will experience. Also, I don’t believe in the sexuality and gender theories for myself which have created the idea that “marriage is between any 2 people.”
Christians can see the “Harlot marriage” is publicly displayed in the world news especially the recent report of teenage girls are offering their virginity to the highest bidder, and one girl gave her reason for doing this practice was to explore her sexuality and there wasn’t any point wasting it on a boyfriend especially when this money can be used for her studies, purchase a house and travel the world. A “Harlot” marriage trumps religious freedom as the government benefits for a civil registered marriage makes it tempting to identify with the idea “only a legitimate marriage is real” but this isn’t the truth as my “one flesh” marriage is genuine according to God’s regulation (control) not whatever decision the Australian parliament will define, register and regulates (controls) a civil registered marriage. The new amendment will create a conflict between the sexual behaviour and practice of a “one flesh” marriage based on a belief in natural human reproduction which is extremely different to the idea people marry for the person and not for the sex so “marriage is between any 2 people.” The right to purchase a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony isn’t a “one flesh” marriage but this is the only way for a civil registered marriage to exist (paper marriage and paper family). Australians would think it would be crazy to legally treat all cars and trucks as only a “vehicle” but they can’t discriminate between natural human reproduction isn’t the same as scientific experimentation of human reproduction.
Dear Bill,
Thank you for this article.
I was really angry this week when I read a letter in one of the local papers. It accused Andrew Hastie one of the few liberal MPs who has shown leadership in the No campaign of a ‘rant’ and being ‘off the planet’ because of his defence of traditional marriage.
I had no computer but I felt compelled to defend this Christian, family man and ex soldier all the same so I immediately put pen to paper and wrote a letter to the paper defending him saying that we needed more of his calibre to represent us in parliament.
The letter writer was making the point that not all children in traditional marriages were well cared for as if that justifies changing the definition of marriage.
I said that of course Mr Hastie would know that all traditional marriages weren’t perfect because marriage had to be worked at like everything else but marriage between a man and woman was the best we had in this increasingly godless world.
I also asked how he dared accuse Mr Hastie of a ‘rant’ when I had had the opportunity to listen to what I thought was a well reasoned argument he had put forward during the campaign.
Unfortunately this letter was typical of the rude and irrational comments which were common during the campaign for SSM. I suspect that this writer was indifferent to it which in my opinion was far worse than being actively for it.