MEDIA RELEASE
Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012
The Australian Christian Lobby has expressed concern that Labor’s Kate Jones is unavailable to attend a forum for Ashgrove candidates this Sunday.
ACL Queensland Director Wendy Francis said it was disappointing that Ms Jones declined the offer after several date options were presented to her.
LNP Leader and candidate for Ashgrove Campbell Newman will join other candidates at the forum.
Ms Francis said ACL was running more than 20 Meet Your Candidate forums, mostly in marginal electorates.
“The Christian constituency is very concerned for the good governance of Queensland and wants to see a more compassionate, just and moral society,” she said.
“Meet Your Candidate Forums are an opportunity for candidates to make their pitch for the Christian vote and to respond to written questions from the audience.
“It is disappointing that Ms Jones could not make time for this important part of her constituency.
ACL was also disappointed that Premier Anna Bligh and her deputy Andrew Fraser declined an invitation to participate in a leaders Make it Count webcast which went ahead earlier this month with Mr Newman.
“I am concerned about the message Queensland Labor is sending to the Christian constituency,” she said.
“Labor’s Margaret Keech and Michael Choi, by exercising their consciences in crucial votes on the rights of children, have proven that the party can appeal to Christian voters.”
If Margaret Keech and Michael Choi want to protect their images and upstanding character, I suggest they distance themselves from the Labor party as soon as possible. With every passing day the Labor party displays their ever increasing contempt for Christianity, family and morality.
Why would she go ? Just this week I came home to a brochure from the Australian Family Association (which is supported by the ACL) imploring me and other Ashgrove voters to vote Kate Jones last, because she has supported rights for same-sex families during this last Parliamentary term. The ACL has already made its mind up about Kate Jones.
Do Keech and Choi profess to know Jesus personally? It seems so did the former PM. I can see very little in much of activity and speech to indicate a real walk with Jesus.
Why do these politicians have some obligation to attend events that the Christian Lobby hold?
You do not hold power over our politicians, they are not yours to beckon to and demand that they attend your events, they should not fear the wrath of the Christian voters.
There are so many beautiful, wonderful christians in this world that do not attempt the things this group do.
I for one, will personally attempt to be at this event on Sunday, I look forward to hearing what Campbell has and seeing Wendy again
Love and Sunshine
Michael (RipnRoll) O’Brien
I also am making it a priority to attend a similar forum being held in the Redlands on Thursday night. Politicians are free to choose what events they do and do not attend. I am more interested in the questions asked and the responses from those who do attend and the audience.
Adele
Michael,
Given that our politicians are constantly pandering to the demands of the demands of the 1% of homosexuals, it is not unreasonable to expect them to have the courtesy to front a forum of Christian constituents (which make up far more than 1%).
I note your earlier bullying of Mrs Francis when you publicly slandered her as ‘homophobic’ and ‘bigoted’ when she simply, and respectfully, expressed an opinion of which you did not agree. Can we expect more of the same ‘tolerant’ behavior, at this forum?
it really would be a treat, to have people such as yourself attend a forum such as this, and behave with civility, respect and tolerance when opinions and views are discussed which you might disagree with……..
a well thought out response…
Good on you Annette. Michael, these politicians claim to work for the people – the ‘people’ include Christians – a lot of them! If my boss calls me to a meeting, know what? I go!
I have just read this article which I think perfectly illustrates the kind of ‘tolerance’ we now expect of same sex marriage advocates towards those who express other views…..
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/14-year-old-homeschooled-girl-receives-death-threats-for-defending-marriage
That Reaction is WILDLY inappropriate and any sane person would not condone that girl being treated that way.
That being said she is being used as a puppet by adults who should know better, the things she said are still offensive and ill informed.
Many of us are more than willing to debate these issues in a sane and friendly way, I disagree with several issues pertaining to equality issues etc, we debate heavily and still get along well.
thanks Annette for the article, it helps keep the rest of us informed about this debate and how those who disagree are treated. I have always held the view that the bringing up of children, the parents whether same sex or not, want the best for the children under their care, however, we may have the same goals but it is the different roles that both a mother and father bring that assists in the balancing act called life. Same goals different roles.
Michael,
You have made the comment:
‘Many of us are more than willing to debate these issues in a sane and friendly way….’
Can you please give me one single example where any of your side has been ‘sane and friendly’ towards someone who has publicly expressed an opinion on gay marriage with which you did not agree?
One example will suffice…….maybe we could ask the following people how ‘sane and friendly’ and ‘tolerated’ their views have been received.
Margaret Court?
Jim Wallace?
Wendy Francis?
Lyle Shelton?
David van Gend?
Bill Muehlenberg?
Prime Minister Gillard?
Tony Abbott?
Miranda Devine?
Loree Rudd?
Reverend Ian Copland?
Professor Patrick Parkinson?
Jeff Kennett?
Just a few brave souls that spring to mind…. maybe you could also ask the Labor MPs who spoke against gay marriage what sort of ‘sane and friendly’ responses they have received from their colleagues and other SSM advocates…
Annette you are correct:
With its intolerance and standover tactics, the militant arm of the gay lobby is shooting itself in the foot. The vitriol and vile abuse heaped on anyone who speaks up for traditional marriage is no way to win hearts and minds. Saying anything that is not wholly supportive of the gay-rights agenda is the new taboo – with same-sex marriage and adoption the hottest of hot-button topics at the frontline of the culture wars.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/gays-must-curb-vile-vitriol/story-e6frfhqf-1226167514970
It disturbs me that a lot of people associated with the ACL talk about culture wars. It was thrown around a lot at the anti-gay marriage rally held at Parliament’s Great Hall as well. I’m gay, and I’m not at war with Christians.
It’s the same as when posters on here write things like gay ‘marriage’ or same-sex ‘couples’ – using inverted commas like that. These are our lives and relationships you’re talking about, don’t put them in commas like they’re a joke. I agree that the language of some gay people needs to be toned down (eg. I’ve met Wendy Francis and she didn’t seem scared of me, so clearly isn’t a homophobe). But that goes for ACL supporters too. You guys do indeed cop some flak, but you’ve proven yourselves more than capable of dishing it out as well. Respect needs to be a two way street.
So I am all ears MJ, can you present one single example where someone from the anti gay marriage side has made a personal and vicious attack on a homosexual advocate- one example will do?
What graffiti have they done? What slanderous names have they dished out to individuals? How many advocates of SSM have had facebook accounts set up abusing them with all manner of obscenities ? (Wendy Francis had 3)
Please MJ, let me know exactly what slurs have been dished out personally to any of your advocates…..
As the public faces for the Rip n Roll campaign I have heard some Incredulous things from advocates against same sex marriage, I’ve been equated to a child molester to say the very least among the general denegration of the opinions of others toward my basic rights
Michael
Obviously there are many people within Australian society who have legitimate concerns regarding the proposed undermining of a long-established foundation of our society. Concerns, in regards to SSM, include – Where does it stop with the poly-groups waiting in the wings? Are not, children in all this forgotten? Will churches find they have to face Human Rights tribunals if they fail to support SSM? There are lots more questions. Your side does not supply answers.
Yes, Michael some concerned about this uncharted future may inappropriately express their feelings. However by any analysis of blog-sites, of social media including Twitter and Facebook, let alone the gay media, shows for every questionable remark by those concerned by SSM, there are at least 50 not just ‘questionable’ but in many cases disgusting abuse dished out by SSM advocates.
As Marriage is a legal institution, despite wether it’s origins lie in religion or not, there should be no reason why churches should be forced to marry SS couples if they chose not too, as I am not religious I would never ask a church to Marry us, why anyone would want to force someone who doesn’t support them to do that is beyond me. The marriage act is federal legislation, religion should play no part in that.
The children are not forgotten in this, our son is healthy and happy, he visits his biological mother and is thrilled to have two loving fathers. He does not go without anything and participates in a healthy and happy school life. The argument that he is “Deprived” of any basic rights is null and void.
Polyamory should not be a concern, unlike homosexuality, Polygamy is a life choice, if people chose to enter in to that relationship they understand that it is not recognized legally and there is no reason it should or ever will be, this argument is largely grasping at straws.
We “the gays” are not after anything drastic, we just want equality, we are the people who you see every day, half the time you dont even know it, we teach your children, we serve you at the shops, we drive your buses, we are even your politicians, you interact with us so often, our sexuality is only a tiny part of who we are and we just want to be afforded the same legal recognition as anyone else in this country, we dont want special treatment.
I feel ashamed for people from “our side” who spread hateful and nasty messages, we should all be focussed on love and equality together, I see no purpose is slinging mud either side. But it has to be understood the deeply deeply negative effect some of the comments, as I mentioned above, have on members of our community, it can be incredibly upsetting.
Michael – Why should society encourage homosexuality and SSM when:
In regards to homosexuality and health, the homosexual population has a significantly higher incidences of a large number of diseases.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_health
and
Recent studies show homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from a psychiatric problems than do heterosexuals. We see higher rates of suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse. http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html
You say, “unlike homosexuality, Polygamy is a life choice” If so, how do you explain the twins appearing in the GetUp marriage video – one homosexual and one not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lC2oD9sUBE How do you explain Bisexuality? Being the ‘B’ in GLBT. Do you agree with having Polygamous groups (or for that matter Bisexuals) in the forthcoming Gay Mardi Gras – does not that only reinforce the public-perception of both homosexual-promiscuity and a life-choice basis?
How is it that people can enter into heterosexual relationships – even raising children – then become homosexuals ? That seems more ‘confusion’ rather than ‘genetics’.
BTW Australian gay rights activists are advocating an expansion of the “definition of marriage to include a range of relationship models” http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/44576.html and “Members of Australia’s Islamic community believe polygamous marriages should be recognised”. http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Religion/?id=1.0.2281097575
Brian Jones
With regards to homosexuality and health, please quote a better source for your claims. Most statistics in this area (on both sides) are unreliable, nearly everything in the modern world is a major health concern these days, homosexuality should be the least of our concerns health wise.
Brian, more of us suffer mental health issues due to the societal pressures and negativity pushed on to us by outspoken people who condemn homosexuality, by people who tell us we can be “cured” by parents who throw their children from their homes and turn their backs on them because they told them they were gay. If there was less stigma and more acceptance from the wider public, there would be less mental health issues for the GLBTIQ community.
Sam
Just because you are born gay, doesn’t mean that everyone in your blood line is, straight people give birth to gay children, my brother is straight, I am gay, this has nothing to do with choice.
Bisexuality is not a choice, it is when someone is generally attracted to both genders, they dont chose to have this attraction to both men and women, when they finally fall in love it may be with a man or a woman, their sexuality allows no limitations there.
I agree with the “Queer Polyamorists” in the mardi-gras, which is what has been granted to them, I understand why they were initially denied. But to be clear, polyamory isn’t about promiscuity, it’s about people who celebrate a wider lovely relationship, not my thing, but it certainly doesn’t effect my life.
There’s nothing I can do personally to stop public perception of promiscuity other than continue to live my committed, monogomous life with my family. Mardi Gras is about celebrating our lives, our freedom and the rights we do have now, celebrating that we can be gay without fear of persecution or imprisonment and celebrating how far we have come!
People who enter in to heterosexual relationships and have children are usually either, repressed, so scared of ever coming out that they hide, they hide so much that they create these lives and these lies to try and stop anyone from finding out who they are, through nothing but fear, not choice.
Your link makes reference to an incredibly small minority already within a minority who are attempting to piggy back their issues on to a much larger scale fight for marriage equality, polygamy is not a part of ANY “Gay agenda” for any gay person that I know, you need not fear the polyamorists, rest assured.
I cannot speak for Islam, nor will I comment on their behalf.
Michael,
I hardly know where to start in addressing your illogical and vacuous arguments for SSM.
Firstly, why should the choice of polyamorists any less legitimate than the choice of those who are homosexual? All the reputable studies on this emphatically disprove the ‘gene’ argument.
Can I suggest you read Bill Muehlenberg’s book ‘Strained Relation’s for a fuller investigation on this?
In any case you seem to sympathize with bisexuals and polyamorists and consider their sexual promiscuity perfectly fine, so clearly you would support them if they also wanted marriage rights?
If not, can you explain why they do not deserve ‘marriage equality’ too?
Brian Jones makes a good point about the increasing health problems within your community and the taxpayers are the ones picking up the tab for all this.
According to the LGBT health alliance 1000 new case of HIV are recorded annually (already over 17000) and most of these (over 90%) are from homosexual practises and every one of these people need lifetime medication…
As far as mental health- sorry , until the LGBT health organisations actually start researching and rebuking their members for unsafe and promiscuous sex practices, I for one do not accept that their mental problems are because of ‘societal pressures’.
Do you think it is possible that having having random sex with strangers in unhygienic public places, having multiple sexual partners,group sex, and being involved in all manner of weird sexual activities (rimming, fisting, golden showers etc) may have any effect on a persons mental and physical health?
Apart from all this, the main objection people have to SSM is the raising of children. We believe and reputable studies have shown, that children do best raised by married biological parents. The roles of a mother and father are not interchangeable and each brings something unique into the family.
This is the best foundation for children but of course not always possible.
Ultimately, SSM should not be about individuals and their specific arrangements. I am sure many homosexual couples are doing a fine job raising children and may even do better than many other families. That is not the point.
The lawmakers should look at the views and attitudes of the entire homosexual population and compare them to the views and attitudes of heterosexuals when it comes to marriage . When you do this there are major differences, some you have already illustrated.
Most heterosexual believe and support marriage and approx 64% of the heterosexual population gets married. From countries where SSM has been legalised less than 10% of homosexuals actually do get married. The figure is generally around 4-5%.
As you should know, monogamy is practiced more in the heterosexual population and so you would definitely be in the minority of homosexuals in this regard. Obviously monogamy brings stability and thus heterosexual households are , as a whole more stable than homosexual households.
You also mention the Mardi Gras in a positive way. Most Australians would not consider this is anything more than a perverted sex show and should not be funded by taxpayers.
There is a huge disconnect between the attitudes and activities of the majority your community and the general population, this is what the focus should be for our parliamentarians not being swayed by individuals like Kerryn Phelps or Penny Wong, (or even yourself), who may in all honesty be better parents than many people. ( I can’t imagine these individuals would parade semi naked in the Mardi Gras).
If the actions and attitudes of the majority of homosexuals are accurately reflected by people who parade in the Mardi Gras, then this is who the parliamentarians should think about when considering extending them marriage and parental rights, not the Penny Wongs and the Kerryn Phelps.
And one final thing- if what happens in peoples bedrooms is nobody else’s business, then can you please get your hands out of our pockets?
Good Morning Annette,
You are always going to find it hard to see eye to eye with me, but do try.
Obviously this make take some time for you to
Understand.
Choice is NOT part of being gay, gene argument or not, I did not CHOOSE this.
Understandably you see Polyamorist’s as having a choice, as do I.
Neither Gays no Bi-Sexuals choose this.
There is no proof of polyamory of Bisexuality being about promiscuity???
Go and find more statistics if you like, but I wont rely on them, most are made up.
Obviously aids is a concern, hence why we promoted RipnRoll.
Far out, you’ve seen some interesting gay sex, wow!
Understandably I must lead a sheltered life, no-one I have met has been a part of
Curious acts such as these, sure I know people who’ve had a few boyfriends, they’re
Knowledgeable on their sexual safety and dont have mental issues from it.
Young GLBTIQ youth take their lives because they are so AFRAID of how society
Or their friends and family will treat them, they are scared they will be rejected
Understandably so, they live in a world where people still preach intolerance and
Rally to try and stop the “evils” of homosexuality! Imagine growing up like that?
So you main objection to all this is raising children?
Even though “we” haven’t said “we want marriage equality so we can have kids”
Love, is what we’re advocating, legalising our love, who says all gays want kids?
Furthermore, most would be likely to adopt children, you admitted, this is good.
Before you mentioned monogamy as though it’s something gay people dont do?
I’m baffled that you just assume all gay men are promiscuous?
There are many promiscuous young people these days, both gay and straight.
Children are a life choice that gay and straight people make, when their lives and
Homes are stable and safe, regardless of sexuality.
You should attend Mardi Gras, I’ve only been once, but it’s incredible
Obviously, it’s flamboyant, it’s fabulous even!
Understandably, it’s the one day of the year we all get to step out of the shadows,
Come forward and celebrate our community, it’s nothing to do with a sex show,
Really, there was just a lot of glitter and happy people, nothing perverse only
A lot of happy happy people, they are there to celebrate a battle to maintain equality,
Zealous, wonderful people in a strong community.
You should come along and see, you and the ACL, have nothing to fear.
MJ, you are on the right track, but the respect has to be earned, not demanded!
The SSM lobbyists and supporters – the whole lot – still have a long way to go just
doing that!!! They are still calling the War Shots – unfortunately! To way street – when?
I was disapppointed not to be able to hear the views of the Labour and Greens canddidates for Nanango on Monday night, even though they offered their apologies in not being able to attend. I really wanted to hear their views on extending abortion laws in Queensland, their stance to changes to the federal Marriage Act and their understanding of local issues and concerns especially relating to mining and agirculture. These are improtant issues to me. The social and economic issues. With regard to the issues of sexuality in society it is gravely concerning that in our once democratic nation one group seems to beleive it can intimidate and abuse others to force its view on those that don’t agree. Disagreeement does not equal hatred or discrimination. The behaviour towards peacefully, legally assembling people in Martin Place last year was shocking to see. Understanding each other is the greatest challenge. I would appreciate not being judged as well.
Michael O’Brien: The homosexual community has never been able to prove that homosexuality is anything more than a lifestyle choice. And you ask us to turn our established institutions on their head to accommodate that. Not only that, but anyone whoever raises concerns – of which there are many – is likely to be abused. That abuse, some quite vitriolic, remains on the web. No apologies. No retractions.
I appreciate your comment above. “I feel ashamed for people from “our side” who spread hateful and nasty messages”. A first. Also, thank you for the way in which you have argued your case.
A case which is still not convincing.
However, and while I could take up so much of what you say, let me reflect on your Mardi Gras spin, “nothing perverse only a lot of happy happy people” Three examples:
1 Gaydar is a sponsor of the Mardi Gras. Do not Google Gaydar Manzone if you want to keep advocating “nothing perverse”.
2 The Mardi Gras is running a forum “WHAT MAKES SEX COMPULSIVE? This forum will provide an insight into the challenges which many people face as well as an opportunity to look at our own lifestyle choices”. They are Mardi Gras words “lifestyle choices”
3 http://www.hivthebigpicture.org.au/ is a Madi Gras advertiser. Do not look at that website if you want to keep advocating, “homosexuality and health . . . most statistics in this area are unreliable”.
While the heterosexual community, does at times, display less-than-desirable behaviour, nowhere does it demand respect and public money to support it.
Michael O’Brian,
Dear Michael, I echo Sam’s sentiment. Thank you for taking the trouble to talk with people who so strongly disagree with you. In ways, you are a man after my own heart. I too like to talk with those who disagree with me; I find it enlivening. And like you, I am saddened when people respond in anger.
Here are a couple of my observations about SSM.
Sex is a basic drive with a basic function – to keep our species going. Perhaps you too have noticed a certain correlation that may be more obvious with eating than with sex: With basic drives, the more we disconnect them from their basic function, the harder we have to work to keep them healthy. To me it seems that the more we distance ourselves from childbearing, the more public effort has to go into curbing STDs; the more we have to be wary of unrealistic emotional demands in our intimate relationships and the more difficulty ordinary people have in achieving and maintaining stable, long-term relationships.
When we experience deep connection, we yearn for public expression of our union. For most mixed couples, that occurs automatically in the birth of children. For same-sex couples, your sexuality is inherently nonproductive; the best you can do is borrow someone else’s fertility. For you to have any public expression of your shared creativity, that expression of union cannot come from your sexual relationship; it must come from some other aspect of your relationship.
The push for same-sex marriage focuses on gaining public affirmation of your sexual relationship. In this, the campaign distracts from the fact that you cannot have shared fulfilment through your sexual activity. You will need to focus on some other activity to experience shared creativity.
My guess is that, if your campaign succeeds, you will not experience the fulfilment you need and run the risk of disillusionment. You will have to work all the harder just to keep your relationship healthy.
Most friendships have their natural boundaries. If we are sensitive to those boundaries, the friendships can be stable and provide long-term growth and fulfilment. Paradoxically, I think the net effect of same sex marriage would be to make that stability more difficult.
Thank you for putting yourself out there, Michael. I wish you everything that true friendship has to offer.