Book review: Stealing from a child

Stop the press!

I mean, quite literally, stop the press (or the printer).

This is what happened to the book that many have now called the manifesto for the ‘no campaign’ to ‘same-sex’ marriage (SSM). Commercial printer, Opus Group, made the decision to stop printing Stealing from a child “due to its subject matter and content”. They made the call two days out from the book launch despite having received the manuscript three weeks prior.

The company should be embarrassed at this decision, based on the concern of offence, made in a freethinking, plural society. Fortunately, copies were pre-printed with almost 4,000 sold in the first month. A 1,000 more will see it deemed a best seller in Australia.

Frankly, Stealing from a child is a compelling argument against SSM. The book, broken into four parts, flows logically and the many arguments and points are well reasoned and researched. The concerns raised are hard to ignore and perhaps that’s why it was censored by the printer and also poorly covered by the biased mainstream media. A review in such a short piece will not do it justice; however, I will do my best and focus on key arguments.


The book starts not with a preface, but the aptly named ‘indictment’. In it, author David van Gend lays the charge that if laws are changed to allow same sex couples to ‘marry’, it will have consequences far beyond those of the individuals involved. The second and third order effects will include the:

  • “redefinition of parenting, marriage and family for all of us”;
  • “breaking of a child’s bonds of kinship and identity” (Stolen Generation anyone?);
  • “usurping of parental authority over their child’s education”;
  • “erosion of liberties such as free speech, conscience and religion”.

And it will “serve the century-long ideological quest to deconstruct the natural family and subjugate it to the authority of the State”.

Mr Van Gend states that it’s wrong to believe LGBT activists are only after ‘marriage equality’. They want to “capture legal high ground from where the entire rainbow agenda can be implemented”.

Observing what’s occurring in a society today, with the farcical ‘Safe Schools’ program as a prime example, it appears these charges are correct.

Part One: Stealing a child’s birthright

Part one of the book addresses the family and the impact SSM will have on it, particularly children. Mr van Gend states that, of all the consequences, “forcing children to miss out on either their mother or father, while telling them it doesn’t matter” is by far the worst of all. He recognizes that this tragic situation already occurs in society (e.g. death, divorce, desertion of a parent). However, this is not the ideal and no one enters a relationship planning this for his or her child. Legalising SSM would “impose this deprivation in a premeditated way on any child created within that institution”. The question has to be asked: is this fair and just for the child?

Some may say that same-sex couples can already obtain children through adoption, surrogacy or IVF. This is a true statement, however, currently these are state level issues and the passing of a federal law (“laws with teeth” as van Gend puts it) will negate any states disallowing same-sex adoption and surrogacy in future. Then there is the dilemma of “gay men needing surrogate wombs” in order for them to exercise their right to marry and have a family. This brings with it concerns of vulnerable women being exploited for their womb.

We move forward to hear the voices of people raised in what they acknowledge are loving same-sex households. Yet all of them were left yearning for that bond and affection with their missing mother or father. It does make you ask the question: where is the equality for the child in all of this?

We also hear from gay men speaking out against SSM, and probably my favourite part of the book, ‘Social Science Speaks Out’. Mr van Gend assesses the scientific evidence of children from SSM and disrupted families and it does not look good for SSM supporters. The major studies used to support SSM are critically analysed, with the intentions, credibility and integrity of many of organisations responsible for these ‘studies’ laid open for all to see. Journalists, in particular, should read this chapter before quoting from studies ‘supporting’ SSM.

By the end of part 1 it is clear that there is a lot more to the SSM debate than two people simply tying the knot and living happily ever after.

Part Two: Stealing Childhood

In part two, Mr van Gend lays bare a difficult truth, stating that “gay marriage means gay sex education and parents will have no say”. The Marxist roots of the government funded ‘Safe Schools’ program are unmasked and the detail of what is taught is exposed. It is confronting to read what children as young as 5 and 6 are being taught in the name of ‘anti-bullying’ measures (i.e. ‘penis tucking’, ‘chest binding’, ‘imagine yourself without a penis’, etc).  As a parent, this is the most eye-opening chapter of the book with the material used in the ‘Safe Schools’ program comparable to that used by a predator attempting to groom a child. It is as absurd as it is wrong.

The arguments used to justify ‘Safe Schools’ and SSM are debunked with reasoned analysis and evidence, including the thorny issues of depression, self-harm and suicide. The ‘born that way’ myth in particular cops a hammering, with the reasons for homosexual orientation still unknown.

All is not as straight forward as LGBT activists like to make it out. Not that you would hear this from our politically correct mainstream media.

Part Three: Repealing nature

Part three looks at the “abolition of male and female” and the rise of androgyny in the western world (hello Malcolm McGregor!), the “mutations of marriage” and what we can expect in future (e.g. “monogamish” relationships and polygamy), and the “children of the state” where the government has the authority to define our personal relationships and lives (anyone heard of state-sanctioned gender neutral language recently?).

Part Four: Pillaging the village

Part 4 delves into SSM and how it will inevitably lead to the “silencing of the shepherds”. Mr van Gend states it succinctly:

“They say it takes a village to raise a child. That means, in order to raise tomorrow’s child according to the values of the LGBT revolution, it will be necessary to purge the village of reactionary moral leaders”.

Examples are given for what has occurred to pastors, priests, rabbis and religious organisations in countries where SSM has been already implemented.

The “bigots, bakers, and the thought police” are given a run and examples of how anti-discrimination and anti-vilification laws, as well as media bias, are used to demonise, censor and punish anyone who opposes SSM based on principled objections.

I’ll finish with one final observation. The first and last words of the book are pertinent. The book starts with a quote from libertarian, Brendan O’Neill, who recognizes the danger SSM poses. The first word of his quote is ‘coercion’. It pretty much sums up the pro-SSM campaign: get on board, or you will be left behind, branded a bigot and may even your job.

We have already seen the effects of this ‘diversity’ movement sweeping through major corporations and even the ADF.

The last word of the book is ‘child’. They will bear the consequences of SSM and the choice we make as society to give “priority to children’s rights or to homosexual adults claims”. After reading this book, I am convinced we must choose the child.

Stealing from a child is a ripper read. There is so much more to it than can be detailed here. Regardless of what side of the debate you sit on, this book will challenge you.



Title: Stealing from a child  *  Author: David van Gend  *  Rating: 5 stars

The book can be ordered for $29.95 at

Author: Tim Robinson

Tim Robinson is a married father of two, a public servant, rugby league tragic and a lover of asking the tough questions about life. He is concerned about the lack of 'diversity of thought' and the 'cultural marxist' agenda sweeping through major corporations, government departments and the media.

Share This Post On

Pin It on Pinterest


Share This

Share this post with your friends!