MEDIA RELEASE: Plenty to fear from Labor’s “equality”.

Labor and Senator Wong are wrong: there is much to fear from “marriage equality”

“Senator Wong was wrong in her declaration to the Labor national conference that ‘there is nothing to fear from equality’”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australian Marriage Forum. “There is always something to fear when the self-interest of the powerful crushes the rights of the weak, and that is what so-called “marriage equality” does. “Marriage equality” is a selfish adult-centred movement that tramples on the rights and needs of the child, and that is an abuse of power:

  • In the name of adult “equality” it destroys the rights of children to have both a mother and a father in their life - which is a profound injustice.
  • In the name of “equal love” between two men it destroys the more primal love between a mother and baby – and that is an unloving act.
  • In the name of “anti-discrimination” it discriminates against certain children who will be denied their biological bonds of kinship and ancestry – inflicting a life-long identity-wound.
  • In the name of “tolerance” it treats all opponent of homosexual “marriage” with thuggish intolerance, and intends to silence future dissent with the big stick of anti-discrimination law – as we already see overseas.
  • In the name of “celebrating diversity” it intends to impose conformity on all school children to accept homosexual behaviour as normal and right – thereby trampling on parental rights to guide their child’s moral education.
  • In the name of “love without boundaries” it guarantees the further degeneration of gay marriage into group marriage, since – as US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts explained – the arguments for gay marriage have equal force in justifying "plural marriage”.

“There is always something to fear when our alternative government threatens radical damage to the foundation of society and to the wellbeing of children: proposing to enshrine within its first 100 days in power a statute which is untrue to nature, unjust to children, and unnecessary to same-sex couples who already enjoy full relationship equality under Australian law.

"And decent Labor MPs and Senators certainly have reason to fear what a decadent wreck their party has become: the National Conference has given notice that, by the 46th Parliament, any MP or Senator who refuses to support homosexual marriage and the unjust deprivation of a mother or father from the life of future children will be expelled from the Labor Party.

“Senator Wong said one true thing: that the issue of so-called marriage equality “should never have been a conscience vote”. Correct. Same-sex 'marriage' and the deliberate creation of motherless or fatherless families should be rejected as a matter of principled child-centred policy - not of conscience - and that is exactly what the Coalition does”, Dr van Gend said.

“All credit to the Coalition for not succumbing to this selfish mantra of “marriage equality” and instead sticking to marriage as nature made it: between a man and a woman, so that a child has the chance of a mum and a dad", Dr van Gend concluded.

Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

9 Responses

  1. Dear Dr. Gend,
    I agree completely with your position, and thank you for taking a public stand for the sake of the nation’s children. We pray that our prayers will be effective in protecting this nation from this evil deception.
    Since we now have a Labor State Govt., what steps are we able to take to protect our children from the Safe Schools programme?
    Yours faithfully,
    Shirley A. Jones

  2. I agree whole heartedly with Dr van Gend and thank him for his care, concern and dedicated work on this issue, we all must feel responsibility for as members of Australian society. We Australians must think of the child and the family and of the nation and reject the Labour/Wong/alternative-lifers selfishness. All of us who see this clearly must ask ourselves where have we been these last decades as the homosexuals’ determination has grown in our midst. Have we cared that our fellow human beings have been going down this track and not seen where it would come to? It is time now for the majority of family loving people to assert the truth that even many in the homosexual side are saying also. All Labour politicians and voters who disagree with Bill Shorten on same-sex “marriage”, stand up now and say “No” to this wrong and destructive lie in his desperate attempt to gain power.

  3. Excellent article David, and so succinctly written. There is nothing i could add to describe the madness of the labor party in passing such a motion.

    However, it is also somewhat of a complete paradox that on one hand this party wishes to “normalise” SSM on the basis that men and women are interchangeable (particularly as parents); but on the other hand, it also set quotas for 50% of its parliamentary members to be women by 2020 (or whenever). So it’s good for the country to be led by an equal mix of men and women, but not necessary for our children (who are the most vulnerable in society) to have the same benefit.

  4. Well said David, and rounded up nicely with an excellent comment from LEIGHTON………… which just leads me to add
    “Professing to be wise they became fools………..ROM. 1:22

  5. All the reasons that penny Wong uses to support homosexual marriage could also be used to support brother and sister marriage, Mother and son marriage even father and son marriage. They all love each other. They would all make excellent parents. But is it wright? Where dose it stop.

    • Very true. Once you remove reproductive capacity from marriage, it becomes meaningless and any combination is possible. I have asked the question around: why was marriage invented in the first place? And nobody could answer that question. I have searched to find out when monogamy became the rule in human society. Humanides have been around for 3 to 4 million years and around 50,000 years ago, diamorphism (significant physical differences in size and shape etc.) between men and woman was already greatly reduced, hinting at the formation of family units, but much stronger evidence indicates that marriage relation definitely took place only 18,000 years ago when humans became sedentary with the discovery of agriculture. Once humans had land and property, marriage was the only way they could transmit their inheritance to (both) their children. The reason is simple: in the wild a man can never be sure who his children are and has therefore no incentive to teach and care for them. And the woman benefit by committing to marriage because she ensures the best chance of survival for her own children. And of course the child belongs to both and is the ultimate beneficiary. I believe that marriage is probably the greatest invention made by humans. It has allowed society to become what we know today. Without marriage and being able to pass on your inheritance to your children – skills, intellectual, artistic, property etc. – there could not have been much progress. We see it in civilizations that are still nomadic. It is much harder to sustain. Marriage is, before anything else that can be associated with it, a commitment between a man and a woman that they will only have children together – that’s why it says “union to the exclusion of all others”, not to play tennis or watch Dynasty on TV. Everyone who gets married understands that. When you get married you swear not to go and sleep around and especially not to make children with someone else. That is the first thing that marriage promises. Everything else is ancillary. Same sex couple couples cannot make that promise. It is absurd. But the reason they want to get a “marriage license” is that it allows them to adopt children. They are already doing it overseas where it is allowed – and cheap – by obtaining eggs or sperms on Google and getting a baby manufactured in India or Thailand. But these countries are now closing the doors to unmarried couples, because they are starting to realize the moral and legal implications. This is why there has been a frantic move for the last year or so in Australia to force the government to pass a law allowing same sex marriage. They do not care at all about the right of the child. They just want to buy a child like a flat screen TV or a sports car. Children are not commodities. They will have to live their whole life never knowing who their real father or mother or surrogate mother really is. We cannot condemn children to be orphans by deliberate act. This should be a crime. The reason Bill Shorten changed his mind about it is the same reason he dumped Kevin Rudd and then Julia Gillard: he hopes it will win him the election. This is a very cynical move. That is unconscionable.

  6. Good Afternoon,

    As protests and rally’s are taking place to achieve this selfish act of sale sex marriage I believe it is crucial for a group such as this to organise a rally opposing same sex marriage.

    I wish you guys all the best in avcheiving the goal in stopping this terrible less then animalistic act in taking place.

  7. It seems to me that homosexual couples who want to have children resemble Cuckoo birds who have someone else produce and or hatch and or raise (depending on their sex) a child for them.

Leave a comment