Statement from Australian Marriage Forum President

Three months ago, when this postal vote process was announced, our Media Release said no public vote, no Parliament, no court had the authority to repeal nature and change the meaning of marriage. We said that marriage is based on an unchangeable truth: that only man and woman can create new life; only man and woman can give a child her mother and father, her biological identity and ancestry. No other relationship, however important, is Marriage.

But the unthinkable has happened with today's vote.

We accept that same-sex marriage will now become legal, but it will only be a legal fiction. It will forever remain untrue, unjust and unnecessary. Untrue to nature and timeless culture; unjust to those future children who will now be compelled, by an Act of Parliament, to miss out on their mother or father; unnecessary, since same-sex couples already have the same legal status and benefits as any other couple in Australian law.

A team of us flew down at 4am from Queensland to join the Coalition for Marriage in Sydney for today's announcement. We are dejected; we are ashamed at the triviality of our culture that puts the emotional demands of adults ahead of the more profound rights and needs of the child; we are apprehensive at the "Safe-Schools-on-Steroids" material that will now be forced on our kids and the intimidation that will be brought to bear on conscientious objectors.

But we all did our best, and the campaign moved over a million extra votes our way - from the baseline 28% support to 38%. And we will now start digging the next defensive trench to protect the rights of parents over the moral education of their children, and the rights of all of us to speak our mind and live according to what we believe to be true and right.

As I wrote in the Courier Mail article on the morning the result was announced.

"We have always said that same-sex couples are free to live as they choose and love whom they will. If the Yes vote prevails, LGBTI activists will have achieved the recognition of same-sex marriage, they will have gained official affirmation from society, and good luck to them - but they cannot have the minds of our children or the voices of our pastors. That line they cannot cross."

The Yes vote has prevailed. We press on, in defense of future children and present freedoms.


David van Gend


Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

79 Responses

  1. do you seriously care so much about the choices of other people that you have to have a little cry every time your country moves forward? you are all a bunch of babies. the only children being betrayed here are you.

    • Michael

      Do you seriously care so much about the choices of other people that you have to have a little cry every time someone says something you don’t agree with? What absolute chutzpah, expecting us to just shut up and go away now the Yes result has been announced, when the LGBTIQA+ dictators previously spent so much time and energy telling us this was an non-binding, non-compulsory survey.

      I’m glad you called us babies, as this shows the LGBTIQA+ contempt for natural sexual intercourse, and its natural product, babies. When Tasmanian LGBTIQA+ activists marched into the Hobart police station in the 1990s, with the media in tow, they were happy to risk 21 years in prison for “gross indeceny” and “unnatural sexual intercourse”. But they will not risk just one year in prison, under Tasmania’s Repoductive Health (Access to Terminations) Act 2013, to try to save the lives of babies whom they claim are “born gay”.

      If we’re “a bunch of babies” you must be our mother. And why ever not, as the legal fiction of “any two people marriage” will mean anyone can become anyone else’s legal parent. Just as sexual intercourse has no legal status in civil marriage law, so biological parents will have no legal status in parental and adoption law.

      Mummmy, please tell us children how two men or two women will consummate their marriage? How can man become another man’s wife? How can a woman become another woman’s husband? “Same-sex marriage” can’t even get its marital act together, as men lack the point of entry, while women lacks the means of entry. Same-sex couples can’t become one flesh. A “progressive society” would “move forward” by basing its laws on facts, not feelings.

      Crying no more makes you a child, than having sex makes you grown up. Your false belief that “love is love” (or “laugh is laugh” — see Nick’s enlightened contribution, below), has deceived you into thinking that “tears are tears”. Just as there are different kinds of love, and laughter, there are different kinds of grief and sadness. Children can only weep for themselves, but adults can also weep for others. We do not grieve for ourselves, but for the Yes voters deceived by the LGBTIQA+ party, with their legalised lying, falsified families, genderless genitals, plastic penises, vacuous vaginas, orphaned offspring, and pointless progress to meaningless marriage, just in time for their Christless Christmas.

      • Michael,

        The LGBTIAQ party dictators believe falsely that they have won this battle but they have gained access to an Australian law which is designed to protect the public and society from harmful behaviours and practices. Australians have witnessed the deregulation of Aged care and disability services which allowed poorly qualified people to gain access into the practice. This lead to a significant decrease In reward (income) but more responsibility for experienced and qualified nursing staff. These negative impacts have resulted in a decrease level of nursing care, abuse, neglect and many qualified nursing staff have left the industry over time as the reward for service was no longer appreciated. Why would a man and woman “one flesh” marriage want to identify with a falsified Marriage Act? The amendments to the Marriage Act won’t be protecting a “one flesh” union nor their family from the harm as adultery and the breakage of a marriage oath as these behaviour and practice are an acceptable in any “marriage between any 2 people” including a “Harlot marriage.” The Australian laws need to make sense or else people will follow their own laws and rule which mean Australia will become a lawless society.

        A civil registered marriage is the “Harlot marriage” which tempts people to register for the government marriage benefits by the lie that “only a legitimate marriage is real.” However, the real “one flesh” union is defined and regulated (controlled) by God’s word (The Bible) which is the opposite to the “Harlot marriage.” This man-made civil registered marriage has been created with the appearance of a real marriage but the lie is in the amended law that “marriage is between any 2 people.” The lies in the proposed amendments to the Marriage Act and no fault divorce makes genuine Christians sick like the sexual behaviours in prostitution. The “Harlot marriage” (civil registered marriage practice) makes it difficult for the sex worker (person) to leave this practice which is controlled by the state as it rewards with benefits, but God has warned his people not to store up treasures on this earth, but to put our complete faith in his word the Bible. God’s word demands that we put our complete faith in Christ who is the author and perfecter of our faith. Christ died for all of our sins so we would one day be his bride the church. Christians aren’t losers in a deregulated civil registered marriage practice but the world are the real losers as God has separated “one flesh” union (marriage) from a deregulated civil registered marriage, and when Christ returns God will separate himself from the world so they become as corrupt as Hell. Hell is a place where God including God’s goodness of “one flesh” union (marriage) is no longer present.

        • Michael

          Thanks for your comments. ‘Marriage’ has become like ‘Christmas’ and ‘Easter’, with all three being emptied of their true meaning. Many Australians celebrate ‘marriage’ as a social occasion, the same way as they celebrate ‘Christmas’ and ‘Easter’. Just as Australians spend vasts sums on their Christless Christmas and Crossless Easter, so they spend likewise on wasteful wedding ceremonies and redundant receptions. Wasteful and redundant, because the couples “already married” anyway. A civil wedding and reception have nothing to do with a genuine marriage, just as Santa Claus has nothing to do with a genuine Christmas. Santa Claus and civil weddings, both tempting cashed-up punters by gaily masquerading as the real thing. Christians should separate from both.

          Christians don’t need Santa Claus, Christmas trees, expensive presents, and gallons of grog to celebrate the truth of Christmas. Likewise, Christians don’t need to have expensive weddings, wedding dresses, suits, venues, caterers, photographers, and hundreds of hirelings whom we’ve never even met before, to make it all happen. Christians don’t need to waste their time and money attending such empty events either.

          Christians don’t even need a priest to marry them, as there is nothing in the Bible about a wedding ceremony conducted by a priest. However, there should be a public occasion, as Jesus showed by attending the wedding feast at Cana. But the “public” need only be two or three other people, so that “the matter will be established in the presence of two or three witnesses.” Just as no-one could be put to death on the testimony of only one witness, so no-one should make a marriage vow lasting until death, in front of only one witness.

          • Robin,

            The word “god” isn’t the same as “God” so it is obvious that you don’t even know the basics about the genuine Christian faith. Since you’re a person who believes in the sexuality and gender theories which makes “gender fluid” and people have no control over their sexual feelings, desires, lusts nor passion, then your understanding of wife and husband is very different to my “one flesh” union. This is evident on the ABS census as same-sex partners recorded they were in a husband and wife relationship which means this is totally separated from biological sex based on the complementary binary genders of male and female which can be measured and tested all over the world. The gender identity is really based on masculinity and femaninity The ABC is bias news towards progressive left agenda and they deliberately only report selective information which suits their opinion or story. The majority of scientific evidence supports vaccinations, but this hasn’t stopped the fake science with healthcare professionals promoting anti-vaccinations. I don’t believe in the fake science which support and protects same-sex marriage as it is an oxymoron like the “bachelor-married man.”

          • Michael,

            This is 500 years from the reformation, and I was baptised and confirmed as a Lutheran (my Dad’s family history came from West Germany and my mum’s family history came from East Germany). Martin Luther exposed the lie in the Catholic Church as indulgences was a false way of people paying their way to God. I was told a story at a Lutheran Church recently about a man who went to his local priest about a crime he was going to commit and they both agreed on an amount which was paid as an indulgence. The priest was travelling home and he was held up by this same man, and the priest said, “This is a sin.” The man replied, “Don’t worry, it has already been paid for.”

            There is no doubt that the government, church, lawyers and businesses have all established a “cash cow” wedding business which is misleading from the real truth in the Bible about God creating male (Adam) and female (Eve) and uniting them together as “one flesh” in order to fill the earth with people. Australians have got a dishonest civil registered marriage practice which will be deregulated by the removal of the criteria of “marriage is an exclusive union between a man and woman for life,” and this is to match the falsified no fault divorce.

            The Sydney Lawyer is exposing the “Harlot marriage” by offering Sarah and Nick Jensen a pro bono no fault divorce because they’re a Christian married couple who reject the idea “Marriage is between any 2 people.” Martin Luther had to flee for his life when the Catholic Church exposed their “cash cow” of indulgences. Genuine Christians need to understand that a falsified legitimate marriage is a “Harlot marriage,” and they will feel sick accessing any government marriage benefits by denying the truth about “one flesh” marriage defined and regulated by God’s word in the Bible. The Family Court in Australia has at least 3 years backlog of divorce cases, so people have moved on with their lives without a legal divorce been settled. Currently, there is a Australian law reform commission which is reviewing the Family Court, and the news recently reported that private arbitration may become an option which is more expensive for the couple but it can quickly deal with the divorce case so people can move on with their life more easily than the present situation. Therefore, genuine Christians need to be counter cultural as there are far too many marriages and families breaking down due to adultery, abuse, desertion, separation, divorce and death. This is a massive cost for governments, society and children suffer the most from separated biological parents. The government authorities constantly discuss domestic and family violence as well as consensual relationships but this means nothing when people have not been taught any self-control nor the truth about God’s love.

          • Michael

            Thanks for your comments and amusing story from the Lutheran church. I agree that Australian government and society are capitalising on people’s lack of self-control, and creating a cash cow wedding culture. If “love is love”, people can’t help falling in love, so they can’t help falling out of love either. The government encourages people to purchase faulty civil marriage registration, by saying this will protect and strengthen their relationship. This is just like the multi-million dollar global abortion industry, encouraging people to purchase contraceptive devices and medications which they know do not work as advertised. Couples who’ve been duped into purchasing a civil marriage registration will find that this doesn’t work as advertised either — especially as a man and a woman will now be treated by the courts as “any 2 people”.

      • In Australia, one in four children are exposed to domestic violence. How many of these children grow up in same-sex families?
        Think of the child…actions speak so much louder than words.

        • I don’t get your reasoning there Robin,
          One in four children are exposed to domestic violence, and you seem to think ssm is going to reduce that statistic?
          In that case, why not outlaw heterosexual marriage completely to reduce domestic violence?

          But we all know that is the purpose of this new law: to further denigrate marriage until it means nothing but a paper certificate.

          You ask, “How many of these children grow up in same-sex families?”

          The answer: – Many more than the current statistic from now on.

        • Robin,

          There is approximately 0.01% children identified as living in a same-sex household according to the ABS census, so this means there is only a 1 in 4 children exposed to domestic violence in this extremely small population of children. When same-sex partners have told me about their family situation they called themselves “Rainbow family,” not same-sex families as you’re suggesting.

          • Michael

            In my local community, people in same-sex relationships talk about their “rainbow families” too. It’s funny how commenters on this page who support “marriage equality” don’t seem to have had any interactions with the gay community! Robin’s phrase “same-sex families” would be bad for public relations, by making it obvious that babies and children can’t come from “any 2 people”. It’s really the church that’s the true rainbow family, for God told Noah after the flood that he would put “my bow” in the sky to show his promise to all life on the earth, that he would never again destroy the world with a global flood. Also, Revelation describes the multitude attending the marriage of Christ and his church, a marriage of difference, not sameness. This multitude comes from every nation, race, and language; reflecting the rainbow surrounding God’s throne, and the rainbow crowning the “mighty angel” of Rev. 10:1, who is surely Jesus Christ.

      • oh my god? how old are you? you sound like an absolute idiot. as your mother, i’m sending you to the naughty corner. don’t get out until i say so. and i’m sorry your mother probably hates you. unless she’s a homophobe too. okay bye hope you become a decent person in the near future.

        • that was just for michael, my disgusting child.

          • Michael

            Thanks for your comments, which clearly show that “love is love”. Thanks too for showing us the Yes campaign’s excuse for reason and argument. 😆

        • Michael

          Thanks for your comment — people who spout the casual blasphemy “oh my God” should take a moment to consider who their “god” really is. Why on earth would you try to make a distinction between adults and children by asking how old I am, as the LGBTIQA+ party wants to change the Marriage Act so that “any 2 people” can legally marry. “Any 2 people” can be adult and child. Surely you agree that any two consenting adults, two brothers, or a father and son, deserve the “marriage equality” of a civil marriage registration and legal divorce — or are you a homophobe?

          The true homophobes are those who won’t admit what their LGTBIQA+ friends actually do. Do you really think a same-sex couple just holds hands and says “I love you”? The LGTBIQA+ dictators have never explained to the Australian people what a man shoving his genital into another man’s mouth or anus, has to do with love or marriage. Call me your “disgusting child” if you want to, but tell us, which is more disgusting, the saying of it, or the doing of it? It was the LGTBIQA+ dictators who demanded decrciminalisation of sodomy with “gay law reform”, so it can’t be illegal to discuss legal activity. The word ‘gay’ is just a deceitfully polite way of saying it.

          Imagine if cigarette companies said they’re supporting young people of diverse respiratory orientation to come out with pride, stamp out tobaccophobia, and finally achieve breathing equality. They’d clearly be “decent people”, now wouldn’t they? Australians need to be warned about making harmful lifestyle and behavioural choices, especially when there is a powerful political elite lying to the population about the self-evident natural design and function of their own bodies.

          LGTBIQA+ couples testify against themselves, because they can’t have sex without using their reproductive organs. And they wouldn’t even have sexual desires in the first place, if it weren’t for reproductive hormones. Legalising “same-sex marriage” would give LGBTIQ activists greater access to school children to promote sexual behaviours such as anal and oral sex, fake genitals, analingus, fisting, sado-masochism, as equally normal and healthy, when this is simply not true. Do you want your son to develop anal cancer, and have wear nappies when he’s grown up? Do you want your daughter to become infertile, have green vaginal discharges, become faecally incontinent from a recto-vaginal fistula, or contract drug-resistant gonorrhoea of the throat, because her boyfriend believes “love is love”, and treats her equally as if she’s a gay man?

          Lastly, my mother didn’t hate me enough to allow me to torn apart by a high-powered medical suction device, or have my arms and legs ripped off without anaesthetic while I was still alive in her womb, or be drowned in a bucket of formaldehyde, or be left to cry myself to death in steel dish, or be pulled out legs first only to be stabbed in the base of the skull with scissors widening the hole to insert a suction catheter to vacuum my brains out. “My body, my choice” 👿 😈

          • Ok Michael. I hope you find happiness within yourself one day.

          • Michael

            Ok Lorraine,
            I have found happiness within myself, by coming out as a homophobe. I could easily have been a Yes voter, and come out as gay, and even become a LGBTIQA+ activist, because I experienced homosexuality as a child, and thus discovered that I was sexually attractive to other males. When I was nine, my best friend took all his clothes off, and made me hold his arousal. Later, a male teacher crept up behind me, pushed me up against steel railings, and firmly thrust and ground his pelvis against my 14-year-old backside. Had there been a Safe Schools program in those days, I would have been encouraged to embrace these assaults as positive experiences. I would have been emotionally manipulated into thinking this was my innate and unchangeable sexuality.

            I am a gaytheist, because I don’t believe in Gay. For as long as I can remember, I have had a natural replusion towards sodomy, and a natural reluvsion towards the molestation of young boys by older males. It’s only in recent years that I’ve been able to accept that my homophobic orientation is perfectly normal, healthy, and nothing to be ashamed of. I’m so grateful I can now come out and be proud as a homophobe.

            Love is love. It’s unfair to discriminate against me because of who I am. Homophobes have the exact same right to equality, diversity, inclusion, tolerance, compassion, and non-discrimination, as anyone else. I’m an out and proud homophobe — I was born this way. We homophobes need to fight for our human rights. It’s time to stop trying to be the someone, that someone else thinks you should be. Homophobes are the progressive gamechangers of society, breaking down barriers, and smashing political correctness. Some people are homophobes — get over it.

    • The biggest backward step ever taken in this beautiful Country

      • It is sad to see that that we only have 4 righteous men in this great Country’s Government who voted against this abomination.

    • Lorraine,

      The word “marry” now means “unite as one.” A “civil registered marriage” is a unity for government marriage benefits such as access to a no fault divorce, also they can have the status of “civil registered marriage,” plus they can purchase of a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony which is the evidence of their “civil registered marriage.” A “marriage between any 2 people” means they unite as one for the purpose of government welfare benefits. This is the same as a sex worker and their client unite as one (marry) for the benefit of a legal payment for sex which is passed from client to sex worker.

      If you believe in the idea that “marriage is between any 2 people” then you can’t discriminate against a “Harlot marriage” as a sex worker and their client are people and they meet the criteria of a civil registered marriage as they “marry” for the person (legal benefit) and or sex. A “Harlot marriage” meets the criteria of a legal divorce as a sex worker and their clients marriage Is irretrievably broken down when their love and commitment for the benefit and or sex is completed.

      A falsified Marriage Act is going to betray children from their biological parents because a “Harlot marriage” allows the sex worker and their client to have natural biological children and children with other people like same-sex partners. Therefore, these children won’t know who is biologically related to them and this means in the future they could have a sexual relationship with a relative without their knowledge. I went to school with a girl who got pregnant at 14 years old to her step-father, and she went on to have 12 children with 5 different partners. This girl has never worked outside the home and the Australian taxpayer has paid for her blended-step families housing costs and all living expenses. This girl’s mother and step-father were raising a house full of children (too many to count) and nobody knew which children were biologically related to each other or not. The community I grew up in was extremely immoral so nobody even asked if any of these children were having sex together as they lived like feral animals.

      • Michael

        “Same-sex marriage” means that “any two people” can marry. If “any two people” can marry, then “any two people” can become a child’s legal parents, with no biological connection. If “any two people” can become the legal parents of a child, who can’t give consent, then a fortiori, “any two people” can become the legal parents of an adult, who can give consent.

        “Same-sex marriage” lets “any two people” become the legal parents of a child they could never have had naturally. Therefore, “any two people” can become parent and child of each other, even more so if there is a possibility it could have happened naturally. For example, Arthur Daley often called Terry his minder, “Terrence my son” — he could have meant it literally, not just as as term of endearment. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, is legally married to a woman 25 years his senior. What if Madame et Monsieur, as consenting adults, had wished to legally become mother and son?

        The current Swedish royal family already has a legal precedent for consenting adults becoming parent and child. The family has a French surname, Bernadotte, because in 1810, King Carl XIII adopted one of Napoleon’s generals, Jean-Baptiste Jules Bernadotte, as his son and heir, who then succeeded his “father” in 1818.

        Two Swedish coincidences:–
        1) Sweden was the first country to decriminalise sodomy, in 1938.
        2) On his accession in 1973, the current Bernadotte King of Sweden, Carl XVI Gustav, deleted the phrase “by the grace of God” from all state rituals.

        • Michael,

          You have highlighted the insanity of the LGBTIAQ party dictators as they have no problem attacking the English language and western civilisation, nor do they care about the real scientific evidence or any Biblical truth. The only way to deal with such people who make a big deal with identities is to separate from their crazy ideas in the sexuality and gender theories. These maddening ideas will continue to attack religious freedoms which defends all other freedoms including freedom of speech.

  2. Congratulation David on the enormous effort and passion which you have invested in defending traditional marriage and family over the past 2 years.
    You have been a voice of strength and truth and inspired many of us to join you and the Coalition for Marriage to support that truth.
    While the voting outcome paints a very bleak picture for the future of marriage and family and our precious freedoms at this point in time, I believe we need to remain faithful to the mind of God who can use this present outcome to awaken the mind of humans to the consequences for our society and begin a turning of conscience towards the truth.
    I personally would like to thank you for all you have done for the NO campaign and for educating so many with your very excellent book.
    I look forward to supporting you and the Coalition for Marriage into the future . You have the hearts and minds of so many who will continue to fully uphold the truth of marriage and support you as we move into this regrettable new era.
    Kind Regards,

  3. Haha haha haa-haa.

    Haha haha haa-haa.

    (softer) Hahaha, hahaha

    (extremely loud) HAHAHAHA HAHAHA!!!

    • Nick, you seem to be having difficulty expressing your “feelings”. Please, don’t feel embarrassed or ashamed to seek help. If English is your second language, there are programs available to translate.

    • sam

      Nick this decision is not going to help you find the answers you are looking for. You will still be damned by mother nature and your never ending quest will continue. HAHAHAHA

    • Nick,

      The Australian laws are established to detect, prevent and criminalise harmful behaviours and practices in order to prevent the public and society from harm. The deregulated civil registered marriage practice will regulate (control) your “same-sex marriage” by the registration of your type of sexual relationship in a public record, but it is really like being tricked into a free meal of your choice without the government informing you about the execution which is to come next. I had no choice about my “one flesh marriage being registered in the NSW Marriage Registry Office but I had a choice not to purchase it as I didn’t believe this was my “one flesh” marriage nor did we want access to a no fault divorce nor did we want any government welfare benefits. A change to the Marriage Act will allow my husband and I the freedom to separate from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice by identifying as an “independent marriage.” I am so thankful to God that I have never been forced by the state to purchase a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony. The deregulated civil registered marriage practice will regulate all person-centred marriages which creates a paper marriage and paper family such as “Harlot marriage,” “cuffing marriage,” “heterosexual marriage,” “personhood marriage,” “same-sex marriage” and “open marriage.”

      The “Harlot marriage” trumps a “same-sex marriage” as it is genderless, non-discriminative, non-procreative, and non-exclusive. A same-sex marriage will be regulated by the laws such as marital rape and domestic and family violence, and the Family court will determine the outcome of a same-sex marriage breakup in a no fault divorce. The Australian parliament no longer demands to regulate (control) a “one flesh” marriage between husband and wife as their sexual intercourse and relationship is no longer considered to harm the public and society because adultery is acceptable in “person-centred marriages” and children are irrelevant in “person-centred marriages.” My children and 15 nieces and nephews will all benefit by not paying for the word “wedding” and by not attending person-centred wedding ceremonies. My family and I don’t need to waste our time nor money on civil registered marriages as people can change their mind about who they love and how long this love will last and the type of love they will experience. Nick your mind-set is completely opposite to mind-set so I wish you well with the Marriage Act and remember it can change to go against your mind-set sexual behaviour and practice of a same-sex marriage. Unfortunately, the lawyers might not give you what you wanted if you decide to get same-sex married then have a no fault divorce. The Australian laws (Marriage Act) can offer benefits or rewards to same-sex partners in order to regulate (control) harmful behaviours and practices which protect the public and society from harm. The Australian parliament and society must believe that same-sex partners have more harmful behaviours ands practices than “one flesh” married couples so the Marriage Act should change in order to regulate (control) them by registering same-sex partner relationships. The NSW State government forced sex workers to register in order to regulate a legal prostitution practice, and I’ll let the Australian laws protect the public and society from harm. I laugh at you because the LGBTIAQ party dictators have been fooled into believing the Marriage Act could never punish them like adultery was punished in a legal divorce. In Western Sydney they had 7 out of 12 “NO” electorates which are majority migrants. With Australian population changing significantly with an increased migrant population in the future and a falling fertility rate of Australians, it will make it easy for future governments to locate same-sex partners as they will have their details on public records. My great Aunt who is 96 years old informed me many years ago that you can never trust the Australian government as her parents were locked up in a concentration camp outside Melbourne in World War 1 and the only crime was their surname was German. You need to understand that the churches role and purpose is extremely different to the government’s role and purpose and the parliament create Australian law in order to protect the public and society from harm. Pleased don’t be fooled by the LGBTIAQ party dictators or else you’ll be tricked into giving your private sexual relationship as public knowledge for government authorities.

    • Nick,

      You should research some history into legal practices such as nursing, midwifery and medicine to give you an insight in way the law can change over time including the proposed legal assisted dying practice. A change of law can be the very thing that can cause executions. My long distant relative legally killed Jews under German law but after World War 2 he was executed because the Nuremberg Trials proved that this German law was false.

    • Michael

      How interesting that the comment with the least information gets the most replies. Thankyou for so ably representing the Yes with your fact-free demonstration that “laughter is laughter” 😆

      The Yes result has freed genuine married couples from any need to register the marriage with the government, as a genuine marriage does not consist of a wedding ceremony or certificate, unlike a “same-sex marriage”, which cannot ‘exist’ without them.

  4. Thank you David and your team for all of the blood, sweat and tears you poured in to protect our children and society. Your efforts have not been in vain, they have shown us all that we can stand and “fight” in a respectful way, against these forces. Forces that seem “hell bent” on taking us down the same road that caused “enlightened” communities of old to implode. What our society has just done gives a whole new meaning to the saying “Going to hell in a handbag”.

  5. I stand with you. We’ll said, and I appreciate the work you and your team did and do for Christian values upon which our society is founded, which we lament is being eroded step by step by a faithless and ignorant movement. God bless.

  6. Tom

    Thank you David for all your work. It is much appreciated.
    Kind regards,


  7. Thank you david and the acl for all your efforts on fighting for common sense and decency. I hope that as you mentioned the fight against safe schools continues and is succesful and also the fight for religious freedom.

  8. Dear David,
    Your book made the most comprehensive case for the long term consequences on our children and society in general when SSM is legalised. The Government deliberately omitted the impact of this law on Freedom of Speech / Freedom of conscience/ Freedom of Religion with all the ensuing effects as well as no information in other languages so that most people were kept ignorant. I was appalled by the AMA’s public statement in support of SSM on spurious so called evidence that all is well with children of SScouples as this was far from unanimous among doctors.
    I feel that my democratic right and freedom to express or have a different view has been annulled.
    Congratulations on your objective and thoughtful publication which shall remain as a living document and reference in future.

    As an aside, when I travelled overseas I met a lovely couple who thought you were a wonderful and caring General Practitioner in Toowoomba.

    KInd regards,

    Dr. Fedora Trinker

  9. Thank you David and Team for all your work. I can’t believe that the 7.8 million people who voted yes were fully aware of the results of same-sex marriage legalisation in other countries.
    As you have often said, there has been much dumbing-down of society. God give you good health, wisdom and courage as you continue your campaign.

  10. Just wanted to thank you for your awesome contribution and leadership.

    It was a David and Goliath battle – regrettably in this case Goliath won the battle – but I am confident he will loose the war.

    We were outgunned 100 to 1
    – Virtually all the corporations
    – Councils
    – media
    – entertainment industry

    All things considered; getting 40% to vote NO is not a bad outcome.

    In my interactions with the public (holding banner on side of the road) of those that responded about 80% gave me the thumbs up and about 20% the rude finger.

    I am disappointed but pleased to have contributed to supporting the natural family.

    I would have felt much worse if we had done nothing

  11. Don

    consecrate marriage can never happen till a child is borne. But a gay marriage can mess with the mind of that child some what. I hope none of my grand kids end up in that situation.

    • So Don

      My wife and my 38 year marriage is somehow meaningless to you because we have not been able to have children together ?
      The love and bond between us is nothing because I was poisoned during my service to Australia and cannot have children ?

      Where is your compassion to say such a vile thing ? What of all the children who we have adopted and supported, are they meaningless too ?

      I hope for your sake you think about your beliefs, if not your grandchildren will probably grow up to despise their doddering old hate filled bigot of a grandfather.

      Stop and think

      • Oh my, we’re again being lashed by the words “hate filled bigot”! Where have we heard this endlessly before? Please grow up Don.

      • Michael

        Don’t go too hard on Don. Many people have English as a second language. Many find it hard to express themselves in writing even if English is their first language. And even in this digital age, some people wisely have reservations about submitting comments to websites anyway.

        Thankyou for your service to Australia, which unfortunately resulted in your circumstances. No-one is saying your genuine, life-long faithful marriage is any the less because of this. Your and your wife have continued serving Australia by adopting children and raising them in a natural family, with a male father and female mother. I’m sure you have been better parents to your adopted children than many have been to their natural children. Your situation is very, very different from “any two people” marriage, With natural marriage, accidental infertility is a tragedy; with “any two people” marriage, deliberate infertility is a triumph.

        A childless couple has a different kind of pain. You might not have fathered a child, but neither have you had to experience the “impotence” of fatherhood, when, having shared the pleasures of procreation with his wife, a man must leave her to experience the pain of childbirth alone. You haven’t had to go through the pains, physical and emotional, of miscarriage; of stillbirth; of cot death; of a child’s death; nor of the premature death of an adult child.

        The LGBTIQA+ dictators have deceived Yes voters into thinking that “gay adoption” is the same as natural adoption. But natural adoptive parents are happy to be known as adoptive parents, explaining this to their children when they’re ready, and helping their children to identify their own biological parents, as well as ensuring they know the difference between birth and adoption. LGBTIQA+ “adoptive parents” demand to be legally recorded and actually regarded as the child’s legal parents, deliberately denying their history, ancestry, identity, and experience of growing up within a natural family.

        ➡ Natural adoption takes care of children;
        ➡ Gay adoption takes possession of children.

        • Where did you get the idea that “Gay adoption takes possession of the children”? Why do you say that?

          • Michael

            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. 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. Indeed, as AMF reported recently, Canadian “rainbow children” can have up to four legal parents, none of whom needs to 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.

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

  12. Thank you David and the AMF team for your valiant efforts these past months in speaking up for Marriage in the public square. Not all of us have the God-given gift to do this. My husband and I so much appreciate them. Thank you also on behalf of our children and 13 grandchildren, most of the latter too young to appreciate your work at present, but your work will be of benefit to them, in a way only God knows at present. AMF has been a great encouragement for us and no doubt many others to speak up for Marriage. We will continue on now to work for protection of our freedoms in the necessary areas. We trust now you may take a few quiet weeks rest. Kindest Regards, Angela and John King NSW

  13. Thankyou David for your wisdom, your sustained and continuing leadership in this important campaign and your deep insight into the nature of marriage and human life. Your book has been a joy to read.

  14. Thank you David for your tireless work in support of natural marriage. You are indeed a legend.
    Wednesday 15th Nov was indeed a very ‘black’ day for this nation. Our children will one day ask: why were the people so gullible to believe the SSM rhetoric by voting ‘yes’, and why were our politicians so naive and irresponsible to imagine they can change natural law by passing legislation ?

  15. David, Congratulations on a well fought battle. What frustrates me is the belief that the vast majority of “yes” voters did not realise
    the true scientific information regarding homosexuality and how it is acquired. Fear of litigation prevented printers and publishers from
    freely presenting genuine findings of valid research which negated the earlier studies portraying homosexuality as “A condition one is born with,
    (like left handedness) and we should not attempt to change them.” Professor Robert Spitzer, for 40 years professor of mental health at the university of Columbia was the recognised architect of that idea in 1973. 30 years later, he dramatically changed his mind when he was presented with hundreds of ex gays and lesbians. However, he had great difficulty in having his corrected thesis published. His corrected findings were never circularised.
    This failure to make known to the public the correct information about homosexuality seems to have dominated Western society.
    When will we ever learn?

  16. Michael

    The article cites the “triviality of our culture” as contributing to the survey result. Perhaps so many Australians voted Yes in support of “marriage equality” because they have already divorced marriage from sex, and sex from procreation. A nation which legally murders nearly 100,000 unborn babies every year, isn’t going to regard the procreative process or relationship as anything special.

    Many Australians think that having children is a lifestyle choice, rather than a natural result of being married. Many people leave their lifestyle choice to have children until it’s too late, and demand taxpayer-funded IVF programs to achieve their greatest desire, regardless of the number of ‘spare’ little ones they create and destroy in the process. Frankly, people are so fond of themselves, that they think they deserve to be having orgasms without having offspring. Having done so for 20 years, they then demand the right to have the children they chose to stop themselves from having, when the natural opportunity has passed.

    Many people demand taxpayer-funded lifestyle drugs and surgeries designed to stop the natural reproductive function of their sexual organs, regardless of the side effects, both on themselves, and on any children they choose to have in the future. We know that if a man drinks and smokes, his sperm count is reduced, and his remaining sperm are of lesser quality, even though alcohol and tobacco don’t specifically target sperm production. If a woman takes a drug designed to stop her natural menstrual cycle, this must negatively affect the quality of her remaining eggs once she goes off the drug. Surely this a major contributor to the number of children with severe allergies, and learning difficulties like autism.

    Many Australians don’t experience a genuine one-flesh marriage, because they don’t unite as one flesh. Couples think they’re really having sex, when they’re only masturbating on either side of a condom. And it’s this type of person who mocks virginal single people as being afraid of sex. Hello? It’s the people who put a barrier between themselves who are afraid of it ❗

    Many couples also practise deviant sexual behaviours which cause physical, mental, emotional and relationship damage. Many Australian couples practise “gay” oral/anal sexual activities, believing these to be normal and healthy. Many people keep spare genitals in their bedside table, and find these just as good or better than their spouse’s. It must do wonders for your relationship to say, you can never completely satisfy me, so I now need to masturbate with a plastic model of someone else’s genitals.

    Many Australians don’t know the difference between dating and courtship, and can’t tell the difference between a proposition and a proposal. By the time of their expensively vacuous wedding ceremony, many Australians are already veterans of numerous “one-night stands” (ugh, what a horrid phrase), which involves making a sexual bond with another person, then breaking it. Making and breaking sexual bonds in fornication greatly inhibits a person’s ability to ever form a life-long union. Surely we can overcome any remaining social stigma associated with “sleeping around” by granting “marriage equality” to the “two people” in a one-night stand, for a one-night stand is a de facto ‘cuffing’ marriage. A one-night stand can be presented as equal to a have a life-long union, because this type of marriage does indeed last for the life of the “two people’s” union.

    • Doug,

      Christians like myself believe the Bible is the word of God. A “one flesh” marriage is a public commitment to a lifelong, faithful ”’one flesh” union between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life as they have a male and female role model (natural human reproduction). The word “can” doesn’t mean “must” in regards to procreating new-life. There are other ways to form relationships including sexual relationships, but sexual intercourse between one man and one woman is the only way to naturally procreate new-life, and God’s word commands that “one flesh” union is within the marriage oath for life so children aren’t born out of wedlock and it is impossible to get a STD.

      I haven’t experienced a childless nor sexless marriage so I don’t know what it is like to be in either of these types of relationships. However, the civil registered marriage was originally established in order to punish adultery and a breakage of the marriage oath in a divorce because marriage and family breakdown are a massive cost for government, society and children suffer the most from the separation of their biological parents. The Family court couldn’t punish adultery in a legal divorce without the Christian church marriages been accurately recorded in a public marriage registry as a “legitimate marriage.” The introduction of the no fault divorce made adultery and breakage of a marriage oath as no longer a behaviour and practice to be punished by law, so divorcing couples have had to deal with this behaviour and practice as a private matter.

      The civil registered marriage practice has been turned into a “cat and dog registration with a local council” by married couples purchasing a legal state certificate for a public wedding ceremony in order to gain access to government marriage benefits. A deregulated civil registered marriage practice believes in the idea that “marriage is between any 2 people” including a sex worker and their client. This new amendment will come into conflict with the NSW regulated prostitution practice which allows clients to purchase sex as a benefit. The regulations requires sex workers to register in order that government authorities can detect the spread of STDs in the community in order to protect the public and society from harm. Therefore, sex workers have to give up some of their personal freedom in order for the government authorities to regulate (control ) the practice. This is no different to same-sex partners who wish to have the benefit of purchasing a legal state marriage certificate for a public wedding ceremony, they’ll be required to give up their personal freedom by registering their sexual relationship in a public marriage registry office. This means that the government authorities at any time in the future can monitor and or locate “same-sex married partners” so they can detect, prevent or criminalise harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public and society from harm including any harm to biologically unrelated children. The Royal Commission into institutional child sexual abuse showed evidence that all of these children were sexually abused by an unrelated adult and even unrelated child in the legal institute of a church, school, club etc. The majority of these cases were only reported as an adult and after many years (approximately 22 years). How will the Australian government authorities detect and prevent grooming and abuse including child sexual abuse when the law has placed children with unrelated adult/s and children in the legal institute of a family?

      • Doug,

        Sorry! put your name instead of mine.

    • David,

      Thanks for this forum! The gender and sexuality theories will falsify the Australian Marriage Act which means genuine Christians have no choice but to separate their “one flesh” union from the deregulated civil registered marriage practice by identifying as an “independent marriage.” The change of law will require married people to purchase a legal state marriage certificate for a public ceremony as their “legitimate marriage.” The Australian government authorities have never forced my husband or I to purchase our NSW marriage certificate because we have never believed this was our “one flesh marriage” nor did we want access to a no fault divorce as this doesn’t deal with the harm of adultery and the breaking of a marriage oath, and we didn’t want the status of “civil registered marriage” nor any government welfare benefits for husband-wife-children.

      • Janine,

        you do know you sound like an only child. You don’t wanna share your good fortune? You don’t want other people to experience what you experience? You want to decide who can join your marriage club and who doesn’t?

        Who does that?!? Who thinks like that? What kind of logic is that? What kind of discussions are you having?

        Live and let live Janine. You as a devout Christian should make sure to make everyone feel good about themselves, that’s what decent religious folk should be all about. I don’t think judging is what is required from you.

        • Robin,

          I come from a very large family of 19 brothers, sisters, brother in-laws, sister in-laws, parents, and father and mother in-laws, husband and 3 biological children plus 15 nieces and nephews. I come from a extremely large German family, with family gatherings of over 500 relatives, so I am definitely not an only child. It is impossible for other people to experience my family and extended family, but I would never want anyone to experience the immoral community that I grew up in as a child and teenager so I think I’ve seen it all. I don’t belong to a “marriage club,” as God created a marriage oath with a public commitment to a lifelong, faith “one flesh” union between husband and wife as they can naturally procreate, nurture and raise new-life with a male and female role model (natural human reproduction). This is a decision my husband and I decided to make together in order to support and protect our future children with God’s help. It is a natural human behavioural practice for the purpose of natural human reproduction which has existed from the beginning of mankind and womankind, and it has existed with or without the support and protection of the state and church. Also, it has existed prior to the establishment of the civil registered marriage practice in order to punish the harm of adultery and breaking the marriage oath in a legal divorce.

          I don’t belong to any “marriage club” as you suggest. Where in the Bible does it suggests that Christians are to make people feel good about themselves including the sin in their life including idolatry, dishonesty and worshipping oneself, adultery, coveting etc ? I can’t stop the Australian parliament establishing a public man-made marriage oath for “marriage between any 2 people.” A sex worker and their client definitely meet the criteria of “any 2 people can marry” in a deregulated civil registered marriage practice. Australians like yourself can’t discriminate nor judge a sex worker and their client from having their civil right to a “Harlot marriage.” Sex workers and their clients have their civil right to marry (become one) like same-sex partners in order to have the same legal government marriage benefits (marriage) like same-sex partners. A sex worker and their client can have children like “one flesh” between husband and wife, and they can have children with different people like same-sex partners.

          The amended Marriage Act will want to detect, prevent and criminalise harmful behaviour and practice caused by a marriage between any 2 people. Children might not know who they’re biologically related with so they could have a sexual relationship in the future with a close relative. You shouldn’t judge a “Harlot marriage” as they run rings around a “same-sex marriage” as sex workers and their client can marry (become one) several times a day which MPs will think is great for society when more people can marry. I don’t have to judge anybody because the “Harlot marriage” recorded in the Old and New Testament of the Bible as a warning to genuine Christians so they don’t become “one flesh” for money or for legal government marriage benefits. It appears I don’t want to join your club, but this has nothing to do with my “one flesh” union between husband and wife that naturally procreated our biological children. This natural human behavioural practice has been separated from a deregulated civil registered marriage practice because same-sex partners don’t practice this type of sexual relationship nor living arrangement. I will leave it to you to defend, support and protect a deregulated civil registered marriage practice which will regulate (control) the harmful behaviours and practices caused by “marriage between any 2 people.” God is the judge of the “Harlot marriage” which is recorded in the Book of Revelation, and maybe you can read it for yourself and stop judging a sex worker and their client who will marry (become one) for legal government marriage benefits (Harlot marriage). The Australian parliament won’t be able to discriminate a “Harlot marriage” from a “same-sex marriage” as they’re all people including sex worker who marry (become one) for the person including client, in order to gain access to legal government marriage benefits (marriage). I think it is you who is judging, and you don’t like it that a sex worker and their client can join your “marriage benefit club” when the Australian parliament amends the Marriage Act, and you thinks it’s not fair that “one flesh” unions will now have the freedom to become independent of the amended Marriage Act. STOP JUDGING CHRISTIANS WHO REJECT THE AMENDED MARRIAGE ACT BECAUSE THEY DON”T WANT ANY LEGAL GOVERNMENT MARRIAGE BENEFITS. WE DON”T NEED TO HAVE A LEGAL DIVORCE AS WE CAN IDENTIFY ON AN ABS CENSUS AS “SEPARATED BUT NOT DIVORCED,” or “INDEPENDENT MARRIAGE,” BECAUSE WE DON”T DEFEND, SUPPORT NOR PROTECT A DEREGULATED CIVIL REGISTERED MARRIAGE PRACTICE AS THIS IS ONLY A MAN-MADE MARRIAGE LIKE DISNEYLAND.

  17. Your right to religious freedom. Is this what you mean by religious freedom:

    • Robin,

      You highlighted an article where men claimed to identify as “Christian,” but they only sporadically attend church so they’ve admitted that God isn’t much in their life like the majority of Australians, so it isn’t surprising their type of abusive behaviour towards their wife and or children. Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer both attended Christian schools, but you don’t use them as a source for religious freedom. I don’t think you understand the meaning of religious freedom so you need to study this topic more in order to make a comment.

      • Michael

        Maybe Australians think “any 2 people” can call themselves married, because “any 1 person” can call themselves a Christian. Church attendance doesn’t necessarily correlate with how much people have God in their lives, as they might have a form of godliness while denying its power. If everyone who identified as Christian in the last census had voted No, the result would have been very different.

      • Dear Janine,

        allow me to stop you in your tracks: I am not gonna spend one second on studying a make believe story. Like I said before: you have every right to be religious just like I have every right to be non-religious.

        Would you say god is in the life of the pastors and what have you not? Allow me to reply: yes, god is very much into the life of religious clerics. And so are little come that people, with so much of god in their lives, have always abused children and still continue to abuse children?

        You do realise that your “god isn’t much in their life like the majority…” sounds absolutely demented? So people who do not attend church, beat their wives?
        Not sure if you have noticed but the position of women in the church is not the greatest. Was there ever a female pope? Isn’t a woman’s place in the kitchen with the children, devoted to her husband whether he hits her or not?

        Once again: you have every right to believe whatever you want. If you wanna believe in a monkey with a hat on, by all means, knock yourself out but don’t forget that the truth cannot be silenced:

        Don’t be a part of the cover up Robin.

        • I read that link above, “How Churches Enable Domestic Violence”, with interest. It is an important topic.
          I can see how abusive men can use the faith of their wives against them.

          I think Christ was a perfect gentleman towards women. And I’m sure many men only go to church to find a submissive wife, and then deviously take advantage of her faith (and probably vice versa).

          I don’t belong to a denominational church, and I think the churches need to address the issue of domestic violence. As for the Sarah Ryan story, I hope the attitudes of 18th century Irish men have changed.

          But that has got nothing to do with changing the meaning of marriage.

        • Michael

          I’ll leave the pleasure of refuting your comment to Janine, but you’re making a serious mistake if you think you can “stop her in her tracks” 😛

        • Robin,

          The word “god” isn’t the same as “God” so it is obvious that you don’t even know the basics about the genuine Christian faith. Since you’re a person who believes in the sexuality and gender theories which makes “gender fluid” and people have no control over their sexual feelings, desires, lusts nor passion, then your understanding of wife and husband is very different to my “one flesh” union between husband and wife. This is evident on the ABS census as same-sex partners recorded they were in a husband and wife relationship which means this is totally separated from biological sex based on the complementary binary genders of male and female which can be measured and tested all over the world.

          The gender identity is really based on masculinity and femininity as it is misleading and a dishonest practice to use the biological sex which is based on the binary genders of male and female. Therefore, your understanding of the identity of “female” is different to my understanding of the biological sex – female. The ABC is totally bias news towards progressive left agenda, and they deliberately only report selective information which suits their opinion or story. The majority of scientific evidence supports vaccinations, but this hasn’t stopped the fake science with healthcare professionals promoting anti-vaccinations, so you need to base your evidence on more scientific information for your argument to be more credible. You can believe in your own monkey in the sky, but I can swear on the Bible to tell the truth in court like millions of other people all around the world and over the centuries. I would prefer to be with the millions of people who have put their faith in God’s word the Bible, than to be on your side with only you who doesn’t make any sense with judging the Pope, priests, husbands and wives etc.

          You might not want to be educated like the people who have studied theology over the centuries, as there are heaps of information all over the world, but if you had at least understood the basics of theology you would have at least not been so ignorant and foolish to comment on a topic you know really nothing about. It is obvious in Australia that the identity of “Christian” is separated from a belief in the Bible, as the survey on same-marriage showed that many people didn’t know the basic Christian teaching the marriage is a marriage of difference as Christ’s bride is his church and not himself. The identity of “Christian” has been inherited from the family not from God’s word the Bible.

        • Michael

          You ask, “how come that people, with so much of god in their lives, have always abused children and still continue to abuse children?”. You answer your own question, because you can’t tell the difference between “god” and God, or have chosen to ignore it. Anyone who abuses a child is being their own god. Although the media loves the term “paedophile priest”, the word paedophilia means sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children. The sexual abuse of boys who’ve reached puberty is a form of pederastry, the same form of grooming homosexuality practised by the Ancient Greeks, and extolled by one of the speaker in Plato’s Symposium. The commission was timed so the LGBTIQA+ party could use the vile deeds of gay priests to turn public opinion against the Christian church. Surely the royal commission has shown why the church should never allow gay priests! As a homosexual orientation isn’t something a person is born with, men can easily hide this when they choose to pursue a career giving them easy access to boys and young men.

          All the horrific child sexual abuse was done by adults who weren’t related to the children they abused. Legalising civil marriage between “any two people” will normalise the placing of children with unrelated adults, in same-sex relationships. The child sexual abuse revealed by the royal commission happened in a time when homosexuality and same-sex relationships were forbidden both by religious doctrine and the morals of secular society. How much more abuse can we expect the next royal commission to uncover, when the institutions of society enforce the celebration these relationships and their sexual behaviours, as normal and healthy?

          In your own words, “Don’t be part of the cover up”.

        • Michael


          You ask, “how come that people, with so much of god in their lives, have always abused children and still continue to abuse children?”. You answer your own question, because you can’t tell the difference between “god” and God, or have chosen to ignore it. Anyone who abuses a child is being their own god. Although the media loves the term “paedophile priest”, the word paedophilia means sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children. The sexual abuse of boys who’ve reached puberty is a form of pederastry, the same form of grooming homosexuality practised by the Ancient Greeks, and extolled by one of the speaker in Plato’s Symposium. The royal commission into child sexual abuse was timed so the LGBTIQA+ party could use the vile deeds of gay priests to turn public opinion against the Christian church. As a homosexual orientation isn’t something a person is born with, men can easily hide this when they choose to pursue a career giving them easy access to boys and young men. Surely the royal commission has shown why the church should never allow gay priests!

          All the horrific child sexual abuse was done by adults who weren’t related to the children they abused. Legalising civil marriage between “any two people” will normalise the placing of children with unrelated adults, in same-sex relationships. The child sexual abuse revealed by the royal commission happened in a time when homosexuality and same-sex relationships were forbidden both by religious doctrine and the morals of secular society. How much more abuse can we expect the next royal commission to uncover, when the institutions of society enforce the celebration these relationships and their sexual behaviours, as normal and healthy?

          In your own words, “Don’t be part of the cover up”.

    • Michael

      What about the self-appointed LGBTIQA+ “religious freedom” to mock and blaspheme Christianity at every opportunity? As you so strongly believe in freedom, would you let an LGBTIQA+ mardi gras take place outside your home, with rainbow leathermen in bondage costumes shouting their desires in front of your children? As you seem to enjoy finding articles on the web, why don’t you go ahead and google “Folsom Street Fair”?

      • If you wanna believe Michael and mock gay people, go ahead. If people don’t want to believe and mock you, that is also their right.
        As for parties on the street: not sure what planet you live on but when I turn the telly on, that’s exactly what is going on most of the time. Sexual desire being flaunted left, right and center.
        As for gay people having their party on the streets: I have explained my children what goes on in the world. The good, the bad, the ugly. I have taught my children that the good, bad and ugly come in all shapes and forms and that they should never consider only one aspect of a person because all people are so much more than their sexuality or the image they’re portraying of themselves.
        Don’t get all defensive Michael: the articles are true. It is shocking that you don’t even touch the content of the articles. As if your hatred of gay people is far bigger than your concern for the wellbeing of people in a domestic setting, children included. There is no use in hiding figures, reality is what it is. Don’t hide behind your religion and close yourself off to the atrocities that are happening out there.
        Needless to say I am not a religious person but I will protect your right to believe in whatever you want Michael. I would expect religion to turn someone into a better human being but all too often, the opposite is true. It tends to make people feel morally superior and I really don’t know why.
        As long as no laws are broken, you should just live and let live Michael. And try to be a decent human being by accepting everyone. I think the world is becoming far too aggressive; that in itself is one of the biggest threats to our children, not the 5% of the population that is gay and wants to have the same rights to express their love for one another as you and me.

        • Michael

          You accuse me of “mocking gay people”. Please explain, what is a “gay person”? Being male or female is an objective fact. A person’s biological sex is known by observation, for example, every time a baby is born. A person’s biological sex can also be established by a blood test or DNA test. By contrast, being LGBTIQA+ is a subjective feeling. There is no scienific test that can establish a person’s sexuality, as this is a totally subjective “identity” existing only in the person’s self-revealed feelings. An unconscious person’s biological sex can still be observed or tested, but how can anyone tell an unconscious person’s sexuality?

          Your opening statement is ambiguous. Does it mean “If you (Michael) want to believe”, or “If you (others) want to believe Michael”? I am of course saddened to see the Lord Jesus Christ and his church mocked and blasphemed by “gay pride”, not for myself, but for those involved. The LGBTIQA+ party hinders its own people from knowing the spritual truth about salvation in Jesus Christ, by denying the physical truth about the self-evident design and functions of their own bodies. I’m also glad in a way, that LGBTIQA+ dictators exercise “their right” to mock Christianity, because this beautifully refutes Christians who believe in “marriage equality”.

          Yes, “sexual desire is being flauted left, right and centre”, but you would know my oppositon to that too, from reading other comments. Consider, the only reason humans have sexual desire, is because of reproductive hormones. No-one could ever have sex of any kind, if it weren’t for reproductive organs.

          I live firmly on planet earth, where humans are born male or female, which is an objectively observable and testable phenomenon. On planet earth, marriage is a natural human sexual behaviour pattern and living arrangement between one man and one woman, who consummate their marriage through natural sexual intercourse, which alone can procreate a natural family, providing their children with their history, heritage, identity, and natural experience of growing up in a natural family. A man and a woman in a life-long genuine one-flesh marriage will never have any sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) nor be confronted with an “unwanted pregnancy”. If you’ve taught your children about “the good, bad and ugly”, you would have educated them about the best way to keep themselves free from STDs and other conditions contracted through promiscuous lifestyles (or deathstyles), including LGBTIQA+. A genuine married couple with an exclusive sexual relationship will never see HIV/AIDS, HPV, syphilis, gonorrhoea, chlamydia, herpes, genital warts, anal warts, anal cancer, throat cancer, breast cancer, or meningococcal disease, to name just a few.

          As you say, “people are so much more than their sexuality”. Please inform the LGBTIQA+ dictators, because they have named themselves and their global political/spiritual movement after their sexuality, sexual lusts, and sexual behaviours. They also want to use this sexuality to recruit children and vulnerable, awkward teenagers into their identity, when they are still too naive and emotionally immature to realise how they’re being manipulated.

          How can it be ‘shocking’ that I “don’t even touch the content of the articles”, when you yourself fail to do so? And your comment shows no evidence of having read the AMF article at the top of this page, which is the only reason you’re able to comment here in the first place.

          You accuse me of “hatred of gay people”, without the slightest evidence. How do you distinguish between “hatred of gay people”, and non-hating medically-based opposition to harmful and dangerous sexual behaviour? Oh, that’s right, you don’t discriminate, do you?!

          I have never “closed myself off to the atrocities happening out there”, having described several legal abortion procedures in reply to Lorraine’s comment, up there somewhere. If people were really “born gay”, the LGBTIQA+ dictators would demand:–

          ➡ Life equality, and
          ➡ Baby law reform,

          to protect unborn ‘gay’ Australians from having their arms and legs ripped off without anaesthetic while they are still alive. This describes what happens in a totally legal “dilation and evacuation” abortion procedure.

          All the alleged “moral superiority” seems to come from your comments. You whinge “there is no use hiding figures”, while artificially inflating the number of ‘gays’ to 5% of the population.

          As for “hiding behind your religion”, what hypocrisy, from someone hiding behind the name of “Name*”. Were I “hiding behind my religion”, I would never have commented on AMF. It’s the LGBTIQA+ party which hides behind its sexuality-based religion. Spare us the platitudes about “live and let live”; I have personally experienced the hatred and vitriol of Yes campaigners vandalising and stealing my property. Those who say “love is love”, do not “live and let live”.

          Anyone can exress love by saying, “I love you”. Some of the medical problems caused by certain sexual “expressions of love” have already been outlined in this and other comments, by myself and others. Yet love isn’t a requirement for civil marriage registration and legal divorce.

          Apparently, you believe that “any two people” can marry, however this is not and never will be a genuine marriage. “Any two people” can only have a civil marriage registration and legal divorce. “Any two people” marriage means so much more than “same-sex marriage”, as “any two people” can be non-gay same-sex flatmates, siblings, daughter and mother, doctor and patient, teacher and student, tradesman and apprentice, ruckman and rover, magistrate and accused, or prostitute and client.

          As for “accepting everyone”, I accept that everyone is created in the image of God, and that everyone needs to kneel before the Lord Jesus Christ, and repent of their sins; which is the only way to obtain eternal life, and a place at the wedding feast of Christ and his church, the last and ultimate marriage, which is a union of difference, not sameness.

        • Robin,

          Your comment “live and let live” isn’t in the DNA of the LGBTIAQ identities, and the Australian federal parliament is going to allow same-sex partners to express their commitment and love for government marriage benefits just like you, but there is a catch because they have to register their sexual relationship on a public marriage registry so that government authorities can detect, prevent and criminalise any harmful behaviours and practices in order to protect the public and society from harm. The law can allow same-sex partners a right to choose any public wedding ceremony of their choice but in years to come future government authorities could use this public marriage registry against them by executing or punishing them for falsification of the Marriage Act, Marriage Registry and marriage certificate. My German forefathers lived in Australia for about 50 years with no problems before Australian government authorities used public records to intern them in a concentration camp outside Melbourne, and a long distant relative was executed post World War 2 for legally killing Jews under German Law because the Nuremberg trials showed evidence that the German law that made the Jews non-people was a false law.

          No one is hating people who want to identify as LGBTIAQ, but they can all change their mind so they can also change the nature of their marriage. There are lots of people in America who were married as a husband and wife , then later had children together. Then they changed their mind about their lifelong commitment and they got a divorce so they could marry their same-sex partner. However, tomorrow they could change their mind and identify as “bisexual.” The “Gay” identity is subjective information in a patient’s medical record because they can change their mind. There is no scientific measure nor test a person’s “gayness” or sexual orientation nor gender identity. A person doesn’t have to inform any healthcare professional their identity of being “gay” or “transgender” as medical care and nursing treatment is based on their biological sex which is based on the binary genders of male and female which can be scientifically measured and tested all around the world, and this is recorded as objective truth.

          I guess you have taught your children to accept everyone’s behaviour including the “Thugs of Melbourne” and the murderers, the sex workers, and the Christians etc. The ABS census 2016, only showed evidence that 46 000 people identified that they lived in a same-sex household which in about 0.36% of all households, with approximately 0.01% of children identified as living in a same-sex household. The recent survey on a change to the marriage law identified around 5 million people indicated “NO,” and some people who had identified as living in a same-sex relationship had told voters that they were voting “NO.” All Australians witnessed the aggression from the LGBTIAQ party dictators in the postal survey, and now Australians are witnessing their aggression against religious freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and parental freedom from sexuality and gender theories in education of their children. The idea of “live and let live” is a delusional fantasy for the LGBTIAQ party dictators as they want to force their beliefs in the sexuality and gender theories on all Australians including your children. You claim to tell your children the truth, so is it true that marriage is between a husband and a wife or is it that people can identify as a wife of someone, a wife of something and or a wife of some animal? This isn’t the same practice of behaviour but you need to understand the truth in order to discriminate against the differences.

        • Michael

          You say, “As long as no laws are broken, you should just live and let live”. Changing the law to let “any two people” marry won’t allow Australians to “live and let live”. People can be free to “live and let live” only if laws are based on facts, not feelings. When laws are based on people’s feelings, we end up with more laws to stop their feelings being hurt.

          Being male or female is a fact, one that is determined from the moment of conception. Being LGBTIQA+ is a feeling, so shouldn’t form a basis for marriage law. Legislation should be based on observation.

          Australian laws were designed to preserve our freedoms by detecting, deterring and punishing harm. Australian marriage law was based on the fact that a man and a woman voluntarily enter a life-long, exclusive contract, which naturally produces children. This natural behaviour practise came long before the Australian constitution, but the constitution gave the government a marriage power to minimise the harm caused to society by adultery, and the harm done to women and children by abusive or neglectful husbands.

          Australian marriage law will now be based on a fantasy that “any two people” can marry, which is a total nonsense, and “any two people” can’t be the husband and wife of each other. “Any two people” can’t make a natural family. This law change will mean further laws will change so LGBTIQA+ snowflakes won’t have their feeling hurt by the truth.

          The LGBTIQA+ dictators already have their Safe Schools programs, so they can teach their feelings as facts to the children they choose to be incapable of having naturally. As the “any two people” able to marry will also include sex worker and client, the Scarlet Alliance will be able to teach schoolchildren about the positive benefits of prostitution, both personally, and for society. If we have “marriage equality” for the formerly criminal behaviour now identify themselves as LGBTIQA+, we must have “marriage equality” for the formerly criminal behaviour of prostitution. The relationship between sex worker and client, “harlot marriage”, fulfills all requirements for civil marriage registration and legal divorce. It is a civil contract, entered voluntarily, whose terms both parties agree to in advance. It is a life-long union, because it lasts for the life of their union, before achieving a mutually-agreed “irretrievable breakdown” for legal divorce.

          LGBTIQA+ activists were able to take a formerly derogatory term ‘queer’, and turn it into a positive identity. Sex workers can do the same with the word ‘harlot’. Discrimination against sex worker and client will finally be eliminated by a new nation-wide schools program, called “Happy Harlots”.

  18. Joe

    Thanks for summing up the thoughts of millions so clearly. We fight on for children and for Australia – we owe it to our ancestors and to the generations to come. God bless Dr Van Gend!

  19. I feel so so sorry for so many of you and your way of thinking.

    Poor people

    • A Big GAY,

      You feel for Christians for there way of thinking because they don’t believe in the sexuality and gender theories for themselves. These theories are only subjective information as people can change their mind. I don’t know what you mean by “poor people,” but I would prefer to use logic and reason, which is unlike the LGBTIAQ party dictator’s statements such as “love is love, ” and people can’t control who they fall in love with nor the time this love will last nor the type of love they would experience.

    • Michael

      A Big Gay,
      I feel so sorry for so you and your way of thinking, as it has destroyed your ability to give reasons for what you believe. Yes voters need to understand that discrimination is essential, because without it, Australians can’t tell the difference between truth and lies.

      No Yes voter commenting above has been able to provide any evidence to support “same-sex marriage”. These comments simply combine LGBTIQA+ propaganda with smarmy personal remarks. (See comments by Lorraine, Robin, and “Name”, above).

      I feel so sorry for you, if you believe you were “born that way” to engage in sexual behaviour and lifestyle choices which spread STDs, increase your likelihood of domestic violence, and shorten your lifespan. And LGBTIQA+ mobsters happily use the happy synonym ‘gay’ to describe this unhappiness.

      Australians are indeed “poor people”, because the LGBTIQA+ party demands taxpayer funding to treat the cost of their STDs. Why should Australian taxpayers fork out $1,200 per patient per month for PReP, to spare “gay” men the cost of condoms, or absolve them from any need for partner minimisation and self-control? Why should Australians have to pay for IVF, surrogacy, adoption services, and falsified legal documents, so that two “gay” men can pretend they’ve made a baby all by themselves?

      Australians are also “poor people”, because the LGBTIQA+ dictators have taken away their ability to think for themselves. The phrase “love is love” is just as informative and helpful as the phrase “syzygy is syzygy”; both say nothing.

      If “love is love”, Aussies can mate with their mates. The Australian state governments will be poorer financially, as two blokes buying and selling a car on the roadside can avoid paying any tranfer of registration fees, as they will automatically have a de facto marriage between “any two people”.

      I’m glad you called us poor, for Jesus Christ said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” He himself was the poorest of all, for he was rejected, mocked, spat on, punched, beaten, whipped, scourged, tortured and crucified, when his own people voted Yes against him. The fact that he died is shown by the Romans soldiers, who didn’t break his legs when taking him down from the cross, contrary to their habit if victims were still alive. Plus, the “blood and water” flowing from his side shows the separation of the blood corpulses from the serum, which is empirical proof of bodily death. The fact of his resurrection from the dead is shown by his appearing to over 500 eyewitnesses, some of whom put their fingers into the nail holes in his hands and feet, and put their hand into the gash in his side. All this is recorded in the Bible, by far the most accurate and trustworthy document of all time.

      Courts all over the world accepted the Bible as the ultimate standard of truth. Witnesses swore on the Bible to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, because this is what the Bible does in everything, whether theology, cosmology, philosophy, law, education, medicine, history and science.

      Even if you don’t believe God’s Word, the Bible, science shows that your biological sex, male or female, is determined from the moment of conception. If you are a man, it is impossible to be yourself, and not-be male. If you are a woman, it is impossible to be yourself, and not-be female. Your DNA consists of two interwoven strands, one of which came from your male father, who gave you life; the other strand from your female mother who gave you birth. This is literally written all over you — in every cell of your body, except for the cells your body produces to enable you to become a mother or father as the case may be.

      The only reason humans have sexual desire is because of their reproductive hormones. The only reason humans can have sex is because of their reproductive organs. Only a male husband and a female wife can consummate their marriage, because the wife gives her husband the point of entry, while the husband gives his wife the means. “Same-sex marriage” is a total nonsense, as two men or two women can’t even get their (marital) act together.

  20. Don’t feel sorry for them, Big Gay. As you can see from this website and the comments on this page, these people are the most fanatical of the fanatics. Despite the fact that they failed to prevail in the survey, despite all the scandalous, hateful and bigoted lies they told about gay people, and despite the “silent majority” failing to show, they continue on in their obsessive, fanatical; and yes, deluded; quest against the inevitable.

    It doesn’t matter what these fanatics say about you, gay people. It doesn’t matter what horrible things they say about your families and your children, and it doesn’t matter that their bigotry devalues your loving relationships to mere “friendship”. It doesn’t matter, because the tide of history has turned against them. They are now the outsiders, the frothing radicals, the loudmouthed malcontents. They are now the marginalised ones. What they think doesn’t matter, because nobody outside their tiny little universe cares what they think anymore. They are irrelevant.

    • Michael

      Thanks for your comment, as you provide another demonstration of a Yes voter’s inability to construct an argument using logic and reason, or come to a conclusion based on evidence. Apparently, Yes voters don’t care what we think, because they no longer know how to think. You claim to have read this website and the comments on this page, but you haven’t been able to refute a single statement from the opening article, or from any comment on this page.

      Your comment simply exudes the “love is love” kind of love: according to you, we are the most fanatical fanatics, telling scandalous, hateful and bigoted lies; obsessive, fanatical (again), deluded, horrible, devaluing bigots (again); outsiders, frothing radicals, and loudmouthed irrelevant malcontents living in a tiny little universe. Um, you forgot to call us homophobes!

      You say what we think doesn’t matter, but it must matter to you, or you wouldn’t have bothered making a comment in the first place. In your own words, “As you can see from the comments on this page” the only ones to say “horrible things about people’s families and children” were Yes voters, for example, “your mother must hate you” (said Lorraine to Michael), and “you sound like an only child” (said Robin to Janine).

      If you had read the article at the top of this page, you would know that we have acknowledged the survey result. Yet, Australia is a democracy, not a sodomocracy, so the 4.8 million No voters aren’t just going to go away. When a political party wins an election, the losing party forms the opposition. People who voted for the opposition expect them to continue speaking out against the government, and to keep on presenting their positive policies for the future, to encourage swinging voters to realise the error of their ways.

      As for the “silent majority” failing to show, consider this: there are over 7,000,000,000 people in the world today. Where did they come from, and how were they born? If a baby can’t be born from its mother’s mouth or anus, it certainly can’t be born from its father’s! It’s just crazy to call all sexual relationships by the same word “marriage”, because they are not the same. Population comes from copulation. No law can change the fact that only a man and woman can have a baby, without which there would be no “tide of history” for you to pretend to be riding.

      A man has no more right to sow his bodily seed in another man’s excrement, and call it “marriage”, than he has to sow vegetable seeds in a rubbish tip, and call it “farming”. Call me ‘horrible’, ‘scandalous’, or ‘fanatical’ if you want to , but if sodomy is a moral and legal activity, it can’t be immoral or illegal to discuss it.

      The fact you posted a comment shows your belief that the human brain has a natural design and function which should be respected. Likewise, a man’s body and a woman’s body have a complementary natural design, which benefits society by procreating new life. Australian law should respect and protect this truth. Australian law should be based on facts, not feelings. Marriage is union of two different things, not two of the same thing.

    • Thomas,

      Your ideas are foolish because the deregulated civil registered marriage practice has set “one flesh” unions free from this practice. This allows genuine Christians the opportunity to follow God’s word in the Bible which defines and regulates a “one flesh” union, and we can register our “one flesh” union in a Christian church, and this can be celebrated in home wedding celebrations without the expense of the “cash cow” word “wedding.” We are like farmers who are truly free from many laws in Australia as they don’t have to register their vehicles, dogs nor cats because their land is legally private property, and they make their own decisions on safety risks in order to protect themselves and their family/others from any potential harm. There is nothing in a deregulated civil registered marriage practice that can make any Australian believe in the idea “marriage is between any 2 people.” You’re the one who is in a total delusional fantasy believing that 48.9% of all eligible voters in Australia is a majority, as you ignore the ABS survey results which clearly showed approximately 30% voted “No” to any change of law, and 20% were undecided and or didn’t vote “YES” by returning their survey to support the change of law. However, statistics support whatever the government authorities want to believe. If the majority of Australians wanted a magic pill to give them the perfect death, this practice wouldn’t make it a moral practice, and at what point would the Australian parliament want to support and protect Australians from their own madness?

      You might want to continue to live in your bubble of Disneyland as that place is clearly regulated by government laws. This is no difference to your civil registered marriage is regulated (controlled) by the Australian government authorities in order to protect society and the public from any harm, and they will definitely want to prevent any harm caused by the scientific experimentation of human reproduction which places children with unrelated adults and children in a legal institute of a family (paper marriage and paper family) like the “Handmade Tales.” Therefore, your civil registered marriage must be legally placed on a public marriage registry in order that government authorities have an accurate document of your sexual relationship. This then allows the court a legal right to punish you and or your spouse in the future if any harmful behaviours and practices are cause to the Australian public and society.

      Farmers are a minority group in Australia but no Australian would believe they’re not an important industry in Australia. A “one flesh” marriage between husband and wife is the only sexual relationship which makes it impossible to contract a STD as well as no child is born outside this “one flesh” union. After 30 years of LGBTIAQ lobbying the Australian public for change to the Marriage Act with an the idea that “marriage is between any 2 people” has failed to get more than 50% of eligible voters to indicate “YES” in a public survey. So with your cup less than half full there is only one way and this is down to the bottom. The deregulation of the Aged Care and Nursing Home practice removed the criteria of qualified registered nurses and this has been a disaster as future clients don’t now want to enter these facilities due to the fear of poor care and treatment as a result of injury, illnesses, diseases, accidents and any preventable death. Likewise, the deregulation of the civil registered marriage practice removes the criteria of a “marriage is an exclusive union between a man and woman for life,” so the word “marry” now means “to become one” and the word “civil registered marriage” now means “to become one for legal government marriage benefits,” and this is like “any 2 people who can marry” includes a sex worker and their client who both have a civil right to a “Harlot marriage” and a no fault divorce. The ABS census in the future can only measure the amount of people who marry for legal government marriage benefits like a “Harlot marriage.”

      I am not attempting to personally offend you, but your ideas are crazy for me to practice., This is no different to the female patient who want to get into bed with the men because she believes they’re her husband. I don’t discriminate against this patient because of her being a female, but her delirium has created a false idea, and there is potential harm which will result to her and the public and society if registered nurses and midwives and or medical doctors are unable to discriminate safety from harm. However, your crazy idea means no one can discriminate safety from harm so I’m prepared to live freely on the farm by not identifying my “one flesh” union with the “marriage for benefits club.” Remember your idea that “marriage is between any 2 people” is only regulating (controlling) 48.9% of eligible voters who voted “YES.” This isn’t a practice which is supported by 100% of Australians so it will fail because it isn’t based on facts but ideas and this will change with time.

      • Michael

        Thanks for giving the ABS figures on the “majority” vote, as the LGBTIQA+ party has tried to redefine that word too. I appreciate your farming analogy, as farmers know better than other Australians, the necessity for male and female to come together for reproduction or pollination to occur. I worked on one property once, which owned so much of the surrounding area, that the nearest town and its streets seemed were right in the middle of it. So much so, that the farmer’s laws overruled the Australian laws on many occasions 😛

        Unlike farmers, the government doesn’t make or produce anything, so the Australia’s biggest welfare recipient is the government itself. The work done by public servants, though important, doesn’t generate the income used to pay their wages; unlike farmers, whose work must generate their income, otherwise the whole nation suffers. Unlike the government, farmers must generate their own income. Farmers, and indeed their children, are far more likely to be self-reliant, self-sufficient, and self-controlled, than the average Australian. All Australians must recognise and protect the independent farming minority, from whose participation in society everyone benefits, and without whom the nation would simply die out. Likewise, Australians need to recognise the significant minority of Australians who practise marriage independently, as their contribution to the health and wellbeing of this nation is essential to its survival.

        If the government were to say, you can’t have a genuine marriage without a civil marriage, this would be like Microsoft saying that you can’t use a computer without using its Windows operating system, which is simply not true. Paying for a civil marriage registration doesn’t give buyers a genuine marriage, just like paying for Microsoft Windows doesn’t give buyers access to the softare’s source code. “In the beginning”, all computer software was Free Software; the source code (which is compiled into machine-readable executable code) was freely shared. Then, some people decided they could make more money by selling executable binaries only, blocking access to the source code, and presenting this as beneficial to society…!

    • Michael

      Another thought on your “silent majority failing to show” line. Right up until the result was announced, the Yes campaign kept calling it a non-binding, non-compulsory survey. When the survey was announced, they fought tooth and nail to stop it from going ahead, launching two separate High Court actions in a bid to block it altogether. And before that, they used their numbers in parliament to stop the original plan for a compulsory plebiscite run by the Australian Electoral Commission at the ballot box. Why? Because they were afraid that after all the time, money they’ve spent over the years, not to mention the free and positive media coverage, they still wouldn’t get an absolute majority of Australians to agree with them.

      Suppose a majority of survey respondents had voted for “maths equality”, so that their fellow Australians who believe that 2 + 2 = 5 could achieve civil mathematics registration. Suppose the Yes campaign said this would help vulnerable young people coming to terms with their numerical orientation, and stamp out the quintophobia of mathematical conservatives who believe that 2 + 2 = 4. Clearly, this would give “maths equality” activists further access to the legal, educational, and political systems, to promote their false and dangerous false ideas. However, people with (the now uncommon) common sense would be free to declare their independence from the government’s civil mathematics registry, and do all their maths independently, while continuing to speak up for the truth.

  21. It is sad to see that that we only have 4 righteous men in this great Country’s Government who voted against this abomination. The remainder of our elected politicians lied to their voters about having protection clauses for free speech and religeous objection included in the legislation as it was rushed through Parliament. We Christians need to be vigilant and prepared to be incarcerated as we will now be targeted by these bigots who hate everything God stands for. We now live in the time that the Scriptures call “The Great Falling Away”, or “Apostacia”.

    • Michael

      Like many Australians, I too am appalled and disgusted that only four MPs voted against this bill in the House. Where were MPs such as Tony Abbott, George Christensen, and Kevin Andrews (who spoke at Coalition for Marriage events), whom people would have expected to vote No? 😯 😡 😈

      The brave four were Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Vic), Keith Pitt (Hughes, Vic), David Littleproud (Maranoa, Vic), and Bob Katter (Kennedy, Qld). However, Hansard shows that David Littleproud didn’t speak on this bill; and Messrs Broadbent and Pitt spoke only once each.

      Russell Broadbent MP (McMillan) made a statement to the House on 4/12, but didn’t speak further during debate on the bill:–

      There’s a lot of consternation in my community at the moment because, even though the vote for same-sex marriage in my electorate was 61 per cent and about 40 per cent voted no, I, their federal member, will be voting no in this debate. I represent all the people in my electorate. There’s a lot of fear going on in my electorate and across Australia about our changing community. Whether it be concerns about this latest change, with same-sex marriage, whether it be the scourge of ice that is raging around regional communities—and I know in the cities as well, for you who represent the cities—whether it is the allergies we are seeing come out in this generation of children that we’ve never seen before, whether it is breast cancer, which seems to be touching every family, there is a part of my community that says: ‘What is happening? This is not what we’re used to and not what we’re a part of.’

      Keith Pitt MP (Hughes) said during his only speech on 5/12:–

      I’m aware of the opportunity to abstain from the vote, but I’m one of those in this place who believe you should always have the courage of your convictions. I look forward to seeing the bill in its final form so I can make an informed decision, an informed choice, on the amendments or otherwise.

      Bob Katter MP (Kennedy) spoke much more effectively, for example, on 6/12:–

      If you want to make a young lad between the age of nine or 10 and 15 go to school wearing a dress, you’ll seriously mess with his head. If you are looking for reasons why, there are distinguishing factors of the incredible race of people, as I call us in my book—and I think we are. We always get there in the end, but, jeez, we run off the rails badly at times. If you analyse why this country continuously has the highest male juvenile suicide rates in the world—why is that?—there is something going wrong here. We have an extraordinary incidence of homosexual behaviour in Australia compared with other nations, and I think the people who have been speaking for this bill would agree with me on that.

      The speaker before last said, ‘Oh, it won’t be held against you. There’ll be no discrimination against people exercising their right to have a view on this conduct.’ That’s what he said. Well, go and ask the doctors who don’t want to do abortions in hospitals how well they’re travelling—those that you can find who would speak up on this issue. The Bishop of Tasmania was criminally prosecuted for saying, ‘It’s wrong to do that.’ Well, doesn’t he have a right to a moral position? I’m not going around advocating that people who advocate homosexual behaviour should be put in jail, but the opposition is advocating the opposite. The intolerance there is magnificent!
      You talk about equality. They wanted equality in the giving of blood. They said, ‘We as homosexuals have a right to give blood,’ so they did, and I think 72 children were injected with AIDS from the blood that was given. It was hushed up. It was amazing to me that it never got any publicity at all. I actually had to ring up to verify whether the newspaper report I’d read was correct. There were 724 AIDS cases in this country, and no-one ever brought up the fact all of those AIDS cases, apart from the poor little children who got it through blood transfusion—whatever figure it was—were either intravenous drug users or men participating in homosexual behaviour. There were only two out of 724 cases that claim they weren’t, and the report noted that they were living with an at-risk person—in other words, a homosexual person. So there was no such thing as AIDS in this country except within that narrow group of intravenous drug users and people participating in that sort of behaviour.

      Another speech by Bob Katter on 7/12 provoked displays of tolerance from MPs who believe that “love is love”:–

      Mr KATTER (Kennedy) 7/12 (17:03): We have seen proposal after proposal after proposal here to protect religious freedom and every single one of them has been rejected. If you are objectively assessing what is going on here, you must view with a grave degree of suspicion the fact that every single attempt to protect religious freedom has been rejected. I don’t apologise to anyone for using the word ‘mob’, because I have seen it throughout my lifetime: once you get a stampede on, it’s a brave man that stands in front of it.

      Honourable members interjecting—-

      Mr KATTER: I’m not being allowed to speak either, Mr Speaker—apparently that’s inappropriate for anyone from our side! There is a consistent pattern of behaviour; even the most harmless of resolutions proposed is now being rejected. Please excuse me, because we Christians are a little paranoid. We have a history of being picked on in a very big way, and we get a little bit paranoid, so please excuse me for being a little bit paranoid and extremely worried today. When I went along and addressed the thousand people, the little lady, who I don’t think has ever been in public life, said, ‘I don’t want my son wearing a dress.’ What mobilised her was the simple exercise of a right to say—

      Mr Tim Wilson: I have a kilt.

      Mr Stephen Jones: I have a dressing gown.

      Mr KATTER: I’ll take the interjections. I don’t know where they’re coming from, but they’re saying, ‘Men wear dresses all the time.’ You must live in a different world than I live in, I can assure you.

      An honourable member: They’re called priests!

      Mr KATTER: They are told that they have to go to school dressed up as a girl. A priest is not dressed up as a girl; he wears a surplice and soutane, and he’s dressed up as a priest to identify him as a priest. So don’t insult my intelligence and the intelligence of anyone here today by making such a stupid statement. I repeat for the third time: every single effort to protect religious freedom has been denigrated today. I would like to ask the Christians in Australia to remember that not one single time did this parliament protect them today -— not once.

      Bob Katter summed up on 7/12, by saying:–

      Why do they use that name [the word ‘gay’]? ‘Because it’s a lovely name. We think we’ll call ourselves a lovely name.’ They take the most beautiful word in the English language and take it for themselves. I think you’ve got a damned hide to be perfectly honest with you. I think you’ve got a damned hide and an inflated opinion of yourself, as well. And the rest of the world would agree with what I have just said.

      Why is there this big thing about marriage? Whether you want it or whether you don’t, you’re already legally married if you’re living together. That’s the law in Australia. So why did we turn the whole parliament of Australia upside down for 12 months? Because they want to take our name, the name we give to a man and a wife coming together to protect the future generations with children, for themselves. They took the world ‘gay’ off us, and now they’re taking the world ‘marriage’ off us. And when we ask for religious freedoms in this place from a bunch of bludgerigars over here, who have no conscience at all except for the endorsement of the Labor Party as their conscience and their compass, not one of them stood up for religious freedom in this place.

      That is a message that I will remind voters about at the next election, because there’s still a damn lot of people in this country that do believe that we should love our neighbour—the Christian principle. There are still people in this country that believe that and believe they have the right to have a moral opinion. Obviously, these people here, attempting to intimidate the parliament, don’t believe we should have that right. I have seen you before, because you were out there running around with your Mao Zedong books, back in the sixties. I’ve seen you before! So try your intimidation on, and enjoy yourself down here, but I’ll see you back in the land of the people, and you won’t be quite so popular there, I can tell you.

    • Michael

      I would have added this postscript to my previous comment, but was wary of going over the unstated word limit (~2,000) and losing the lot.

      You say, “We now live in the time that the Scriptures call “The Great Falling Away””. Unfortunately, some Christians use such sayings as an excuse to continue doing nothing, as Bill Muehlenberg explains in a recent article on exactly how Christians should not respond to the LGBTIQA+ agenda and “the tsunami of evil engulfing us”.

      Don’t forget that even after decades of activism and positive media coverage of all things “gay”, the Yes campaign still couldn’t manage to win a majority of eligible votes: 7,817,247 Yes votes from 16,006,180 eligible voters is only 48.84% — some majority!

      Christians need to declare their independence from the Australian government’s fully deregulated civil marriage registry, with its marriage of any “two people”. A legal, fictional “two people” marriage cannot exist without a wedding ceremony and paper certificate. A genuine, factual “one flesh” marriage of a man and a woman, exists independently of these things.

      The Australian government and wider society need to acknowledge and respect the essential contribution an independent marriage practise makes to the life and health of this nation. A genuine one-flesh marriage of a man and a woman is the only sexual relationship which makes it impossible to 1) contract a sexually transmitted disease; and 2) have children born out of wedlock. The governent and society need to acknowledge and respect the essential contribution an independent marriage practise makes to the life and health of this nation, just as they do for the farming community, whose hard work and self-reliance keep the country going.

      As for being vigilant, Bernard Gaynor says in his latest e-mail to supporters:–

      It’s time to transform conservative Australia from a rabble suffering defeat after defeat into an army. And not just any army: we must be able to do much more than reactively counter the radical and revolutionary political attacks on our society. We need to go on the attack and shape politics to retake ground and restore our failing civilisation.
      Be proud that our nation still stops to remember the miraculous birth of a child 2,000 years ago whose teaching and life has shaped our society and given it hope, meaning and redemption.

      • Michael,

        Thanks for your comments because people need to read the truth.

Leave a comment