It’s Just the Beginning

Tuesday marked the end of the Marriage Postal Survey that saw 12.6 million Aussies have their say about what marriage really means to us.

We have seen tens of thousands of Australians step forward and volunteer or donate to help educate friends and neighbours about the real consequences of redefining marriage. We’re so thankful to each and every one of you.

Next week, the ABS will reveal the final result but we all know it won’t end there.

If a ‘No’ result is announced, we all know ‘Yes’ activists won’t simply walk away. Bill Shorten has already promised that if Labor wins the next federal election, SSM will be legal within 100 days, regardless of what his fellow Australians want. And in the eyes of LGBTQ activists, their long march through the institutions won’t be complete until the Marriage Act is changed.

If a ‘Yes’ result is announced, we are in for the fight of our lives, to defend and protect religious freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and the rights of parents to be informed about and decide what their children are being taught at school.

The ‘Yes’ camp have claimed that there will be ‘no’ consequences whatsoever if marriage is redefined, but they are already bristling at the idea of amending the Dean Smith bill to offer adequate protections against the consequences they deny even exist!

One thing is certain, conservative Australians around the country have been galvanised by this campaign.

We’ve had to learn quickly how to take on this battle, without the wealthy supporters who have bankrolled the ‘Yes’ campaign, many of whom don’t even live in Australia!

This has been ‘the people’s campaign’. In a very short space of time, we have been encouraged and inspired by the thousands of Aussies who have knocked on doors, distributed flyers and learnt to find their way around the Coalition for Marriage app, enabling them to communicate with and encourage each other, despite suffering physical and verbal assaults from ‘Yes’ campaigners on a daily basis.

It doesn’t end here, whatever the result next week. And we’re ready.

Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

10 Responses

  1. Australians need to understand that the Christian churches can bless relationships such as “one flesh” marriage between one man and one woman as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life, but the Australian laws are about detection, prevention and criminalisation of harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public including children and society from harm. In 1857, The Australian parliament established a civil registered marriage practice in order to punish the harmful behaviour of adultery which lead to a legal divorce. The parliament wanted to punish marriage and family breakdown because it is a massive cost for all Australian governments (federal, state and local), society and children suffer the most. If the Australian parliament hadn’t forced Christian ministers to register all genuine church marriages from 1857 in the NSW Marriage Registry Office then there would have never been accurate records of legitimate marriages in order for the courts to have the legal power to punish the act of adultery in a legal divorce. The harmful act of adultery doesn’t exist without an accurate record of a “one flesh” marriage. The no fault divorce introduced in 1975 made the act of adultery and the breaking of the marriage oath between husband and wife were no longer punished by a law. Therefore, Australian laws no longer detects, prevents nor criminalises the harmful act of adultery nor a breaking of the marriage oath so there is no deterrent to a breakdown of a marriage and family in order to protect children nor society from these harmful behaviour and practice.

    The Australian parliament can establish a person-centred marriage such as a “cuffing marriage,” “Harlot marriage,” “bachelor marriage,” “same-sex marriage,” and “open marriage” in order to detect, prevent and criminalise the harmful, dangerous ideas such as the idea that people marry for the person and not for the sex. Also, the idea people can’t control who they fall in love with nor the time this love will last nor the type of love they will experience. Plus, the idea that a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony is a genuine marriage. These person-centred marriages are genderless, non-discriminative, non-procreative and non-exclusive which are like the state regulated legal prostitution practice which forces sex workers to register in order to prevent the spread of STDs including the drug-resistant STDs which are harmful to the public and society because they can cause infertility and a shorten life-cycle. A “one flesh” marriage can easily separate from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice in order for the Australian laws to be effective in detection, prevention and criminalisation of behaviours and practices which cause harm to the public and society such as the “Harlot marriage” and “cuffing marriage.”

    • Michael

      Janine,
      Australians also need to understand that it’s the removal of adultery from the Australian marriage law that makes a legal “same-sex marriage” possible. Since the family law reforms of the 1970s, the only way to obtain a legal divorce is to prove an “irretrievable breakdown”. Only a man and a woman can commit adultery, so a legal system that recognises adultery as grounds for divorce, can only register genuine marriages. But any number of people in any type of relationship can have an “irretrievable breakdown”.

      Australians need to understand that the campaign for “same-sex marriage” is only possible because the Australian government deleted sexual intercourse as a legal requirement for civil marriage in the family law reforms of 1975. This has removed the government’s ability to distinguish between a genuine marriage, and a sham marriage done to defraud social security or immigration authorities.

      Australians need to understand that marriage is a natural behaviour pattern and living arrangement between a man and a woman, not a creation of the government. The Australian Constitution gave parliament the power to register marriages in order to protect women and children from abuse, to safeguard inheritance, and provide a stable society to raise the next generation of taxpayers, without which the government cannot survive.

      Under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, it is unlawful to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, which means non-gay same-sex housemates would automatically have a de facto same-sex marriage, as would a mother and daughter who live together. There is no reason to deny “marriage equality” in these situations, because civil marriage is really nothing more than a property contract.

      If all love is equal, parents can marry their children, because parents love their children very dearly. The draft amemdent to the Marriage Act 1961 released by Senator Brandis in February replaces the words “a man and a woman” with “2 people”. The word ‘people’ includes ‘children’ in its meaning. For example, Tasmania’s Reproductive Health Act 2013 already says, “‘woman’ means female of any age”.

      Legalising same-sex marriage would give LGBTIQ activists greater access to school children to promote all sexual lifestyles and behaviour as equally healthy, when this is simply not true. Public health policy on sex education should be based on science. Frankly, with sexual intercourse, the vagina bleeds naturally the first time; with sodomy, the rectum bleeds unnaturally every time.

      Section 116 of the Australian Constitution ensures parliament cannot make a law requiring a religious observance. The Constitution’s marriage power does not extend to defining the doctrine, meaning and purpose of marriage for Christians or other religions. Genuine Christians, and like-minded people, are free to declare independence from the government’s fantasy marriage registry, and continue to practise marriage as a life-long, faithful, “one flesh” union of a man and a woman, based on natural sexual intercourse, able to procreate new life. No law is able to change human biology.

      In a “progressive society”, legislation should be based on science, not opinion. “Same-sex marriage” denies the self-evident truth that men and women are different. The human male and female are the two binary, complementary opposites, which come togther as one flesh to procreate new life. This alone creates a natural family, and stable natural families create a stable and prosperous nation. Natural families, prosperous nation; paper families, preposterous nation. Male and female together and perpetuate themselves in self-sufficient unity. Natural marriage is Male and female: neither can exist without the other; but neither one can become the other. Every cell of your body contains your DNA, one strand of which came from your male father, who gave you life; the other strand from your female mother who gave you birth. The binary reality of male and female is literally written all over you.

      ➡ Genuine science allows our observation of reality to control our thoughts and behaviour.
      :arrow Fake LGBTIQA+ science makes their thoughts and behaviour dictate their observations.

      How dare LGBTIQA+ activists get on TV and push themselves as “marriage campaigners”?! A man who sows his seed in another man’s excrement has nothing to do with marriage.

      • Michael

        ➡ Genuine science allows our observation of reality to control our thoughts and behaviour.
        ➡ Fake LGBTIQA+ science makes their thoughts and behaviour dictate their observations.

        (The second arrow didn’t come out the first time 🙁 )

  2. Michael and Janine, do not forget the damage to faithful sexual union as the basis of marriage that is implicit in the Human Rights (Sexual Conduct) Act No 179 of 1994. This act says that the sexual conduct of any two consenting adults in private must not be subject to any interference by or under any law anywhere in Australia. Adultery and even sexual acts that constitute incest are thereby protected. Incest was a very serious crime with up to 25 years jail. However because of the 1994 act in South Australia a few years ago a father and his daughter openly had sex as husband and wife and had a daughter, so the man is both the father and grandfather of the child. The penalty imposed was a 12 month good behaviour bond.

    • Thanks Michael and David. S for all your thoughtful comments on this site. Unfortunately, Australians moved away from the truth about marriage, adultery and divorce so we now have to wait for the result of the survey to see how far we have fallen in our times. George Brandis thinks that the Catholic Church can still preach against divorce, but what is marriage, adultery and divorce in a “Harlot marriage?”

    • Michael

      David S.,
      Thanks for the information. Clearly the father and daughter thought of their consenting incest itself as a “good behaviour bond”. I’m surprised that the Human Rights (Sexual Conduct) Act No 179 of 1994 specifically mentions two consenting adults, as this is clearly discriminatory. In the “gay law reform” days in Tasmania, those who are now “marriage equality activists” said, “what consenting adults do together is no-one else’s business”, without restricting this to any particular number of “consenting adults”.

  3. Vote ‘No’ lost, everything will change. Let’s hope Turnbull and his minions do not force churches to legalize same sex marriage. Communities will change and i fear the well being of my children. My heart is deeply saddened.

    Job well done Malcolm Turnbull the Pilatus who doesn’t know how to lead and make tough decisions on the wrong things.

    I really don’t want say this but i will say it, i hope god sends malcolm turnbull to hell and rot away slowly.

    • Ivan the terrible,

      God is always in control so Christians never lose with Christ, and the Australian civil registered marriage practice was only established in 1857 by the Australian parliament so they could legally punish adultery in a legal divorce. This was suppose to deter married couples from the temptation of adultery because it lead to a marriage and family breakdown ending in a divorce. The Australian government wanted to prevent marriage and family breakdown caused by adultery, separation, abuse, desertion, divorce and death. This causes a massive costs for taxpayers, society and children suffer the most. The no fault divorce introduced in 1975 no longer punished adultery nor the breakage of a marriage oath (contract) as the civil registered marriage was no longer based on faithful sexual intercourse nor a lifelong contract. The LGBTIAQ party dictators complained that it was a human right issue that same-sex partners who had a same-sex marriage overseas were being denied their civil right for a legal divorce in Australia. Therefore, the no fault divorce is now considered a reward rather than a punishment and something to be avoided at all costs.

      The “YES” voters have fooled themselves into believing that they have won the prize of “marriage” when all they have gained is a legal status of a “civil registered marriage” which is like a “nurse” has a professional status – “registered nurse.” Many Australians will nurse themselves and care for their families but this isn’t regulated (controlled) by the nursing regulations in Australia and they won’t receive any payment from the government for this service. Same-sex partners can only get access to a regulated (controlled) civil registered marriage practice which will be defined by the Marriage Act and they will be forced to purchase a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony and this will be the evidence of their “legitimate marriage.” Married couples have been identified within Australian laws such as marital rape and domestic and family violence. Also, The Family Court deals with the marriage and family breakdown of married couples in a legal divorce and custody of any children. The Australian federal parliament could introduce in the future lots of laws and regulations to control the lives of married couples so they can detect, prevent or criminalise harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public and society from harm caused by paper marriage and paper family. The government marriage benefits are really no different to the Victorian government offering $40 per week for good behaviour as a reward for those people who live in a detention centre. Australian laws and regulations are usually forced upon Australians so we have never had a choice about the law which regulates marital rape nor domestic and family violence. However, the Marriage Act can only regulate (control) married couples who abide by these laws. My husband and I never purchased our NSW Marriage certificate because we don’t believe this is our “one flesh” marriage nor do we believe in a no fault divorce, and the church minister registered our marriage in the NSW Marriage Registry Office as this is a requirement under the Marriage Act.

      The “NO” campaigners aren’t losers as they now have the freedom to separate from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice by identifying as an “independent marriage.” The civil registered marriage will likely change to “marriage is between any 2 people.” The word “people” includes not only children, parents and siblings but it also includes nurses, patients, doctors, teachers, students, sex workers, clients, nuns, priests and parishioners etc. A “Harlot marriage” between a sex worker and their client is genderless, non-discriminative, non-procreative and non-exclusive and it trumps a “same-sex marriage.” These people marry for the person and not for the sex, and they can have children. A “one flesh” marriage is the opposite of a “Harlot marriage” so it doesn’t need to be controlled by a deregulated civil registered marriage practice as it doesn’t harm the public nor society. I informed my 3 children that a deregulated civil registered marriage practice now mean we can pay a lot less money for any “one flesh” union (marriage) celebrations as the word “wedding” significantly increases the costs such as church, flowers, cake, cars, dresses invitations, photography and reception places. Also, we can save lots of money by not attending any civil registered marriages because we don’t believe in person-centred marriages such as “Harlot marriage,” “personhood marriage,” “bachelor marriage,” open marriage,” “same-sex marriage,” and “cuffing marriage.” The ABS census in the future will need to create a new category for “independent marriage” in order to collect information on all married couples who don’t identify with a deregulated civil registered marriage practice. The deregulated civil registered marriage practice doesn’t include a “one flesh” marriage – the consummation of a marriage (sexual intercourse) which can’t be annulled by the church nor the harm of adultery. Fortunately, my German forefather’s history and religion doesn’t require my family and extended family to participate in a deregulated civil registered marriage practice as they had home church weddings (celebrations) because they refused to get married in their King’s state church because he was blessing all of his immoral acts in it.

      It is really easy to explain to people why I have separated from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice and this is like becoming an “independent doctor” or “independent nurse” in order to separate from a legal voluntary assisted dying practice. I don’t believe in a person-centred marriage, paper marriage and paper family. I don’t believe in the idea that “people marry for the person and not for the sex” as the “Harlot marriage” is all about sex and money and never about children. Many Australians would never believe a “Harlot marriage” is a genuine marriage even though they’re included as “any 2 people” which no one can discriminate against as they’re people who can have children. Person-centred marriages are extremely different from the natural human behavioural practice of a “one flesh” marriage as this is a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful “one flesh” marriage (union) between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life (natural human reproduction). The “Harlot marriage” will come into conflict with state laws which registers sex workers and regulate the practice of legal prostitution. The “No” campaigners need to allow Australian laws to do their purpose which are detection, prevention and criminalisation of harmful behaviours between any 2 people in the practice of a deregulated civil registered marriage. The people with a “one flesh” marriage don’t need to be regulated (controlled) by the Marriage Act in order to make other people feel good about having a person-centred marriage. Likewise, the government doesn’t force females who have had a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) to register in a legal abortion practice to make other females feel good about a legal abortion. Plus, I don’t want any civil law nor regulation controlling my “one flesh” marriage when these would conflict with God’s word in the Bible which controls my sexual relationship.

      I feel sadden as there are a majority of communities around Australia which have changed against God and this is the reason for the result of the survey. I want my children to feel empowered to change their community and the world for the good of all people and not just a few. Malcolm Turnbull action was to do what Pontius Pilate did to Jesus and he gave the people what they wanted even though it wasn’t a good nor wise decision. I told my children about how laws and regulations are suppose to work since it is obvious the Victorian education system has failed them, and I mentioned that the “YES” voters got the prized meal of their choice but the government failed to tell them that this is before a public execution. A civil registered marriage is only good by the blessing of “one flesh” marriage by the church and God but once it is removed like God been removed from the world then it become corrupt as Hell.

      • Michael

        Janine,
        The fact that the majority of Australian communities have changed against God is not only the reason for the survey result, but the reason for having the survey in the first place. The Yes vote won when the LGBTIQA+ dictators were able to choose the question that was asked, which allowed them to take possession of the word Yes. I too am extremely saddened by the result, but also at people’s unwillingness to listen to the truth. I suspected the result when there was such opposition, vandalism, and “hand gesture equality” to my marriage sign. I was saddened too by the fact all the mainlanders and incomers to this area had no respect for the fact that I’ve lived here my entire life. The result has made me even more determined to continue telling the truth about marriage, as long as I have the breath of life in my body. As you point out, the Yes vote has actually set free genuine married couples from having to register their marriage with the government. Plus, the No campaign motivated many people who had never got involved in the political process or spoken out before. Of course, all the 4.8 million No voters are clearly on the wrong side of history, as the Nazi dictators said to the Allies and French resistance.

        That the Yes vote won, shouldn’t be surprising, as it has won before:–
        ➡ The Yes vote won on the original Good Friday, when their shouts of Crucify prevailed.
        ➡ The Yes vote won when the Sanhedrin condemned Stephen, when they screamed and plugged their ears to stop themselves hearing the truth.

        Have Australian federal MPs and Senators really considered “marriage equality” at all? In a progressive society, “any two people” can marry, regardless of their gender or sexuality. We can help eliminate the ongoing discrimination against sex workers and their clients by using the term “time-constrained couples”, as this will generate sympathy by presenting sex workers and clients as unfairly disadvantaged couples and marginalised individuals, who need help to overcome the entrenched whorophobia of the wider community.

        Surely “love is love” ?! To eliminate discrimination:–
        ➡ “Sex worker” becomes “adult therapist”
        ➡ “Client” becomes “adult therapy consumer”
        ➡ “Sex worker and client” become “time-constrained couple”
        ➡ “Pimp” becomes “adult therapy administrator”
        ➡ “Brothel” becomes “adult therapy centre”

        The relationship between sex worker and client fulfils all requirements for civil marriage registration. “Marriage equality” campaigners can convince MPs to end the time-based discrimination of the Marriage Act, used to stigmatise short-term unions and “cuffing marriage”. A sex worker and client do have a life-long union, because their marriage lasts for the life of their union. They can have a legal divorce, because upon payment of the fee for “adult services”, their relationship reaches the point of “irretrevable breakdown”. Irretrievable, that is, until next the next visit.

        By using and adult chat line, sex worker and client can even marry without meeting (marriage by proxy). A legal “same-sex marriage” means any sexual activity can consummate marriage. If oral sex can consummate marriage, so can aural sex. If a sex worker gives aural sex on a chat line, the client can take his own hand in marriage.

        Sex workers will start a campaign to achieve “career equality”, and finally eliminate discrimination in employment on the basis of sexuality, simply by eliminating the distinction between employment and sexuality. Your sexuality can’t be a barrier to your career, when your sexuality is your career. Prostitution will be presented to schoolchildren as the ultimate career, as it combines two of the greatest motivations in life, sex and money.

        Progressive churches will come on board with “adult theology”, citing Jesus’ teaching that prostitutes will enter the kingdom of heaven, and gleefully pointing out that Jesus is descended from a prostitute, Rahab, and also from Tamar who seduced Judah, her father-in-law, by posing as a prostitute. “Adult theology” will question the autheniticity of scriptures like Genesis 2:22-25 (creation of one-flesh marriage), Proverbs 5:1-20 (warning against adultery), and the Song of Songs (sexual pleasure for married couples), and claim these to be later redacted document of doubtful authorship, which are of no relevance to modern readers. “Adult theologians” will prune Ezekiel 23 of its negative portrayal of prostitutes Oholah and Olohibah, and instead present the explicit descriptions in this chapter as the correct guide to human sexual relationships and behaviour.

        • Michael,

          Your comment is so true that words are changing their meaning so we don’t know right from wrong especially when the church falsifies the Bible. The “YES” voters traded the truth about marriage which is a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful “one flesh” union between one man and woman as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life with male and female role models (natural human reproduction). This was traded for a lie that “marriage is between any 2 people” such as the “Harlot marriage” which leads to scientific experimentation of human reproduction. How can it be possible to pass down your faith to your children if the law forces Christians to go against their moral conscience? It would be impossible to be an example to your children by telling them you believe murder is immoral but you’re participating in a legal abortion practice because a pregnant woman has consented for it.

Leave a comment