Children’s Rights Groups Abandon Their Posts

A small cluster of “children’s rights” groups, including the Save the Children, Early Childhood Australia, Relationships Australia, Good Shepherd Australia New Zealand and Australian Council of Social Services, have come out in support of redefining marriage and family.

Here’s why their support has come as no surprise…

Last year Early Childhood Australia spokeswoman, Clare McHugh, delivered the highly disturbing claim that “Children are sexual beings”. That was just before they unleashed the Respectful Relationships  program onto toddlers - the program that teaches boys domestic violence is mostly all their fault and they can wear dresses if they want to break out of the oppressive pseudo-violent masculine stereotype.

Good Shepherd Australia New Zealand provide the Kaleidoscope Manual - a Safe Schools resource.

In one role play activity, participants are asked to imagine they are in a world where “having teeth is considered absolutely disgusting” in order to understand how same-sex attraction is perfectly normal, you know, just like having teeth.

The manual quotes research by Dr Alfred Kinsey. This is also where Clare from Early Childhood Australia got the quote: “Children are sexual beings.”

In case you’re wondering about Kinsey’s research and how he reached the conclusion that children (including newborns) are sexual beings, this video will tell you everything you need to know:


Australian of the Year nominee Catherine McGregor was invited to be an ambassador for Kaleidoscope, but when McGregor wrote an article entitled ‘I’m Transgender and I oppose Safe Schools,’ the invitation was revoked.

Yes, Save the Children are supporters of Safe Schools Coalition, as is Relationships Australia.

It’s no surprise that the organisations supporting Safe Schools also support same-sex marriage. After all, they are a package deal.

And the Australian Council of Social Services website, resplendent with LGBTQ rainbow adjustment to their logo, makes the false claim that gay marriage is a “human right” - a claim that has been proven false by both the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights. Both have held that there is no inequality where a state retains the traditional definition of marriage.

“The court confirmed that the protection of the traditional institution of marriage is a valid state interest—implicitly endorsing the view that relations between persons of the same sex are not identical to marriage between a man and a woman, and may be treated differently in law.”

You would think that, of all organisations, the Australian Council of Social Services should be alarmed about intentionally denying a child the right to their mother or father, to satisfy the whims of two men or two women, given their knowledge of the long term, negative impact faced by the infant victims of forced adoption.

Children like Millie Fontana, who was raised by two loving Lesbians. She is just one of countless adult children of gay 'parents' who have found their voice.

650 Australian Doctors, including 37 professors, show peer-reviewed articles that do find poorer outcomes for children raised by same-sex couples at

Amazingly, Sam Page, CEO of Early Childhood Australia, told BuzzFeed News: "What children need is loving parents who have the capacity to look after them. That doesn't have anything to do with the gender of the parent. I think it's unfortunate how children have been a football in the campaign."

Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.

Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

20 Responses

  1. I think it is crazy and totally disgusting Children do not need to be exposed to such rubbish Schools are not there to confuse the kids about their gender or sexuality

    • Michael

      What absolutely disgusting perverts and paedophiles Alfred Kinsey and his “researchers” including Kinsey’s co-author Wardell B. Pomeroy are ❗ When the “Kinsey Reports” were first published, did no-one in the “scientific community” really question how they obtained these “findings”? How did they gain access to these children and babies in the first place?

      • Agreed.
        Michael, you’re right about Kinsey, the self appointed “Sexologist”. The truth about him seems to be hushed up. I remember reading about his dubious studies years ago, – it should be common knowledge by now.

        I don’t want to sound paranoid, but another concern brushed under the carpet is the chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) in common use in plastics since the 1960’s and its effect as synthetic eostrogen.

        This could explain why so many people are pro lgbt, or identify as lgbtqi these days; It could be over-exposure to these chemicals that mimic eostrogen, in our modern environment.

        Everyone knows humans are causing wildlife destruction. Meanwhile, the same humans are destroying themselves. And they want us to believe we are born that way.

        • * oestrogen, estrogen. (spelt it rong)

  2. Good that this thing are expose at least here, the majority of people are not aware of this and main media is incapable or don’t want to pass on such thing. Our western society had become secular and is doing everything to undermine the moral and good value. A sign of the last days when only a few will stand the ground? Quite possible.

    • Michael

      Thanks for your comment. If the media told the truth about the LGBTIQA+ forbears, “marriage equality” would be over. Jesus told us that in the last days, that parents would betray their children, and people would rebel against their parents and have them put to death. By pushing “marriage equality”, Australian “social justice” groups are busy betraying children into the hands (and whatever else) of LGBTIQA+ organisations which will introduce them to sodomy while telling them they are born that way, and have no choice but to embrace their “innate sexuality”. The leaders of these groups are also “rebelling against their parents” by “putting to death” the objective truth that everyone has a male father and a female mother.

  3. I admire the courageous stand of this young woman Millie to overcome her feelings of “guilt” and stand up to be counted as a homophobe because she does not think that Ssm is beneficial to children.
    “It is all about equality for SS adults, ” she says, going onto say that they have equality already.
    She spoke about “the happiest day in my life”, when she met her biological father for the first time… and considers depriving children of their natural parents child abuse.
    She has presented her life experience being parented by lesbians.
    Millie I admire your stand on behalf of other children in a similar situation, in saying NO to SSM, as anything else except for traditional marriage is inadequate for childrens’ stability.

    • Michael

      Speaking as a man, it’s refreshing and encouraging to see the brave and intelligent young woman Mellie Fontana speaking against “same-sex marriage” from her experience of being raised by two women. The media like to give the impression that only grumpy old men are No voters; when covering the Coalition for Marriage’s Hobart meeting (which was refused by Wrest Point Casino taking the moral high ground (!), and given the run around by the University of Tasmania), the Mercury used a photo of Archbishop Julian Porteous, Kevin Andrews and Senator Cory Bernadi waiting to speak, but didn’t picture the female speakers Heidi McIvor or Politicalpostingmumma. Media equality, I presume.

      Mellie speaks eloquently of the craving she felt to know her male father. She knew as a child that when she was told, you have two mummies, this was simply not true. Every child knows by instinct that they have a male father and a female mother; one same-sex parent, and one opposite sex parent. This is literally written in the structure of the DNA of every cell of your body, except in the cells your body produces to enable you to become a mother or father as the case may be.

      Simply providing childcare doesn’t make you a mother. Caring for a child can’t make a woman become the child’s mother, just as caring for herself can’t make a woman become her own mother.

      • Michael,

        Your comment, “caring for a child can’t make a woman become the child’s mother,” but the Australian government authorities want registered nurses, child-care workers, teachers, welfare officers to become a legal carer for all children. Unfortunately, parents authority to determine the care, education and treatment of their child/children is been taken over by big brother who knows best. The LGBTIAQ party dictators love being a big brother to all Australians and they will not tolerate any other idea or opinion which goes against their agenda.

        • Michael

          Yes, in my “occupation” we are now required to have a “working with children and vulnerable people” registration, and report to superiors any “inappropriate” dealings with children we observe, or even think we observe, especially if apparently done by the child’s own parents.

  4. Another insidious tactic by the pro camp is the “love is love” theme.

    There are different kinds of love.
    Ancient Greek philosophers identified four forms of love: essentially, familial love (in Greek, storge), friendly love (philia), romantic love (eros), and divine love (agape).

    Remember that ad about engine oil, “Oils ain’t oils”?!

    The truth is love ain’t love.
    Not only is marriage being redefined but also the whole concept of love!

    • Michael

      The LGBTIQA+ party strongly believes that “love is love”, and that sodomy expresses love. The government might decide that Australians who claim to practise marriage independently of civil marriage in a natural sexual relationship without practising sodomy, have no legal right to live together, as they’re not expressing ‘love’.

    • Mikel,

      Thanks for your comment “love ain’t love,” but the LGBTIAQ party dictators idea that “love is love” and the opinion that people can’t choose who they love which means people can’t control how long this love will last nor the type of love they will experience. These ideas and opinions will lead to “cuffing marriage” which doesn’t discriminate whatsoever ever between sexualities nor genders and the defacto “cuffing marriage” are for sex workers with their clients. How will government authorities be able to discriminate against sex worker and deny them legal access to immigration and taxation benefits? Christians and married conservative people can reject all LGBTIAQ ideas and opinions because these are based on misleading theories which deny the scientific evidence as this causes dishonest behaviours and practices. Christians believe marriage is a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful “one flesh” union between husband and wife as they naturally can procreate, nurture and raise new-life (natural human reproduction). Whilst, the LGBTIAQ party dictators idea that marriage is non-procreative sexual activities will only be treated as an opinion about marriage which Christians and conservative married people will reject.

      • Michael

        Janine and Mikel,
        By assuming de facto cuffing marriage status, “sex workers” won’t have to pay income tax nor collect GST for the government, as paying the fee for “adult services” is simply a matter of giving some money to one’s spouse.

        If people can’t choose whom they love, they can’t choose what they love. The Tasmanian government doesn’t discriminate against people who love more than one car, and even encourages them to have more than one special car, by offering cheaper “special interest vehicle” registration. If you can have more than one car registration, why not more than one marriage registration? How long will the government be able to discriminate against people who love more than one spouse?

        If people can’t choose the people they love, they can’t choose the things they love. Shouldn’t someone who goes into a bakery and falls madly in love with a cake, be able to experience joy and gobble it up at once?

        • Michael,

          Thanks for your comment about the extreme ideas with self-determination such as a defacto “cuffing marriage” status. The LGBTIAQ party dictators come out with the most ridiculous ideas but they keep saying the same opinions over and over again and eventually people end up believing their lies as the truth. I do pray that the Hon. George Brandis will read my email I sent to him today because the LGBTIAQ and death-care madness has to stop before discrimination between a psychiatric patient and a psychiatrist is considered unfair because an activist group demands they should be treated as the same persons before the law as they’re both persons who are treating a mental illness.

          • Michael

            I too pray that Senator Brandis will heed your words of wisdom, as MPs need to realise that “eliminating discrimination” really means. Surely everyone can see that there’s no difference between a doctor and a patient, and two doctors. Patients, sorry, health consumers, have been unfairly discriminated against throughout ages, and now need to claim equality with doctors by becoming their own doctor.

            A doctor must accept a health consumer’s self-indentified gender.
            ∴ A doctor must accept a health consumer’s self-indentified illness.

            Assisted dying is a fundamental human right for the terminally ill.
            ∴ Assisted dying is a fundamental human right for those who self-identify as terminally ill.

            Australian courts must accept the accused’s self-indentified sexual orientation.
            ∴ Australian courts must accept the accused’s self-indentified innocence orientation.

            Any Australian public toilet must accept a person’s self-identified qualifications to enter it.
            ∴ Any Australian public university must accept a person’s self-identified qualifications to enter it.

            Legalising “same-sex marriage” will eliminate the discrimination between sexual health and sexually transmitted diseases, as the sexual behaviour resulting in the latter will be presented to school children as evidence of the former. The Australian government now treats the contents of the womb the same as the contents of the rectum, as both are flushed down the toilet. At the other end of the lifespan, the Victorian government believes there is no difference between killing and compassion. For the LGBTIQA+ party and its political appeasers, the only sexually transmitted disease is human life itself.

  5. Michael,

    Thanks for your comments because common sense has become not so common for those people who identify with the LGBTIAQ party dictators. Today, The Guardian reported about an Italian man who had infected more than 30 women with HIV between 14yrs-40yrs old, and also 3 of the women found their male partners and an infant had contracted the deadly disease. When will Australians wake up that there are serious harmful consequences for the whole of our society when people like this man have no control over their sexual behaviour, and especially when they can so easily meet online. In Rome, this man was sentence to 24 years in jail for “grievous incurable bodily harm” despite the prosecution demanding a life sentence for “wilful injury” and causing an “epidemic.” The man had convinced the women to have unprotected sex by claiming he was allergic or had just been teated for HIV. The Australian government should never encourage Australians to lie as it creates an immoral culture of deception, dishonesty and corruption.

  6. Forced and closed adoption is just as bad as gay adoption. Julia Gillard was so very right about the adoption system itself. I want to add as well that Christians should blame themselves for gay adoption because they NEVER spoke out about how adoption abused single mothers and their babies and now it has advanced to this. What is it your Christ said? It is also what you DON’T do, well none of you spoke out about the bigotry against single mothers and how the Church forced them to give their babies away (literally stole them from them) and made money off of doing so. Billions in fact.
    So because the abusive act of adoption was loved and still existed it was beyond easy for scuzbag gays to worm their way into it. It was also started by a disgusting gay, a butch named Georgia Tann but Christians ignore that fact also. Very sad the idiot adults in this world haven’t learned a damn thing from the Orphan Train mentality at aren’t here to fulfill adult desires. Whether the idiot adults are gay or straight.

    • Michael

      Thanks for posting the link to former PM Julia Gillard’s apology to victims of forced adoptions, both mothers and their children. It would have been helpful if you had told us what this link was for, instead of just posting the URL with no explanation.

      A genuine Christian would always oppose the forced removal of a child from its mother, regardless of the circumstances of its conception and birth. It’s grossly unfair to punish only the mother, because she certainly didn’t get pregnant by herself!

      You argue that:–
      The adoption industry is immoral and exploitative,
      ∴ Christians shouldn’t have children by adoption.

      This is faulty reasoning, just like saying:–
      The abortion industry is immoral and exploitative,
      ∴ Christians shouldn’t have children by birth.

      Adoption started when natural families took in orphans to provide them with a substitute for the family they’d lost. Natural adoptive parents are happy to be known as adoptive parents, but gay adoptive parents are allowed to change the child’s birth certificate to record two men or two women as the child’s legal parents. As AMF reported recently, Canadian “rainbow children” can have up to four legal parents, none of whom need be biologically related to the child.

      Natural adoption does its best to preserve the adopted child’s history, ancestry, identity, while providing the experience of growing up within a natural family. Natural adoption provides both a father and mother as male and female role models, and as a model of both sexes working together for a common purpose, which results in a better adjustment to the real world.

      Gay adoption “takes possession” of a child by changing its history, ancestry, identity, and birth certificate, to suit its legal parents’ idea of what a rainbow family should be.

      ➡ Natural adoption replicates the natural family.
      ➡ Gay adoption repudiates the natural family.

Leave a comment