This page contains a complete list of all blog entries, starting with the most recent posts.
Two days ago it was Wednesday.
And on Wednesdays in New South Wales the ‘Thought Police’ throw open the Garry ‘Herpes’ Burns file and rubber stamp whatever it is that has been thrust in there recently.
No one really knows why. It’s just the way things have been done for so long now that it’s become an ingrained habit.
Generations of ‘Conciliation Officers’ have ambled into the lift and pressed the button that says ‘The Entire Floor Filled with Garry Burns’ Complaints’ and then moseyed on out and stamped away with gay abandon for a good hour or so before going on to attend the International Whatever Woke Day it is morning tea.
Hence the reason I’m writing this. The Thought Police kindly informed me on Wednesday that they’ve proudly rubber-stamped Burns’ 37th and latest complaint against me.
I have no idea how much the Department of Burns that oversees the Burns Act 1977 (NSW) has cost but the savings on rubber stamps alone would probably fund a transition to a zero carbon economy for the entire nation.
Indeed, there are probably small Pacific islands sinking under the waves right now just from the carbon emissions produced by the Thought Police’s rubber stamps. These islands are slowly disappearing from view as I type. And it’s all because some factory in China is open 24/7, crammed full of Corona Virus infected children working night and day filling boxes with neat little rubber stamps all destined for the Temple of Approved Speech in Sydney.
Alas, we could have a clean, green future but Woke World would rather fund the Bureaucracy of Burns. Won’t someone please get Greta onto this mob.
I must admit that it’s probably good for some.
Connie Santiago in particular.
Connie’s spent the better part of a decade receiving Burns’ complaints, furrowing her brows and then eagerly stamping ‘approved’ across the front of them. Without Burns, I reckon poor old Connie would probably have to do something useful for a living. Like get a real job.
But waddaya know.
Burns is keeping Connie busy doing something so insidiously and farcically inane that her only possible purpose can be to make others feel better about themselves because they’re not her. For instance, it’s likely even the producers of Married At First Sight breathe a little easier each night, soothing themselves in the knowledge that they haven’t stooped so low as to do Connie’s job.
Personally, I don’t know how Connie does it. I’d rather lick the insides of that cruise ship quarantined off Japan than work for the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board.
Normal people would’ve tried to escape or sucked cane toads until it was all over but Connie seems to like this job. I’m guessing she thinks that she’s making society a better place by poking her huffy and official New South Wales government nose into my views in Queensland and turning up to the odd Mardi Gras event on the taxpayer dime.
For the young people reading this: please don’t be like Connie. Do something useful. Anything.
Just don’t sign up for the ‘Thought Police’. Before you know it you will be hunting Christians and resolving disputes between gay men who think transgender ‘women’ are ugly and proudly telling people that Garry Burns is your ‘client’.
Anyway, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Connie. I’m sure any day now that she’ll be eligible for long service leave and New South Wales will have to employ someone else for three months just to rubber stamp Burns’ complaints as they spill out of the fax machine.
Or, it could just do a Homer Simpson and get a typing bird to automatically hit ‘approve’ on any and all complaints.
Just in case you are wondering if the Commonwealth government’s proposed Religious Discrimination Bill will do anything at all to end this insanity, I have some sad news for you: the Commissar of the New South Wales Thought Police overseeing this little operation is Annabelle Bennett.
And Annabelle – the same Annabelle orchestrating the latest hunt for me – was one of the key members of the Ruddock Religious Freedom Review. And the Religious Discrimination Bill is one of key recommendations of the Ruddock Religious Freedom Review.
In other words, the Thought Police designed the Religious Discrimination Bill.
If I just destroyed your confidence in the entire system, spare a thought for me. I’ve been making my lost and lonely way in this world, entirely bereft of hope, for approximately 2,000 days now.
So. What it is that has got Burns’ knickers in a knot this time?
Well, that would be the views of Queenslanders, expressed in Queensland, about what happens in Brisbane City Council libraries.
Specifically, Burns is all frothy at the mouth because I shared a petition launched by the Australian Christian Lobby on the Brisbane City Council website opposing ‘Drag Queen Story Time’.
Obviously, this means that the Thought Police in New South Wales have donned their capes, jumped into the #loveislove wagon and raced northwards again, tut tutting away as fast as they can.
This is the 37th time they’ve decided that there isn’t enough going on in New South Wales to keep themselves busy and they’ve hot-footed it up over the border to interrogate me.
Given Burns and his bureaucratic cronies have a 100% failure rate so far, maybe this time will be their lucky break.
I doubt it though.
For those who would like to see the complaint, I have uploaded it in all its glory here.
I now have until 8 April 2020 to explain myself to anti-Christian, communist, totalitarian overlords from another state that I don’t even live in, let alone get to vote in.
I’m inclined to simply give them the finger this time.
I’m far more interested in what will happen in the New South Wales parliament where an inquiry has now been launched into the Thought Police. It’s about bloody time.
Finally, just in case your name is Garry Burns and you are obsessively going over every dot and jot in this article, I note that you seem a tad upset because some people believe that there is a drug problem at the end of the rainbow.
Really? I wonder how on earth they ever came to that conclusion? It just beats me.
Perhaps they read one of the umpteen reports that have found people involved in this lifestyle snort far more cocaine than the average Australian.
Or, perhaps, they just might have picked it up off your very website. Who knows?
Do you remember this little article you published way back in 2011. Do you?
Burns added that acon discredited the gay community and was concerned that the mainstream media may fear reporting on acon’s outrageous conduct for fear of being branded homophobic.
“Acon gets away with this because many in the media are too scared to touch them because they’ll be branded homophobic,” said Burns.
“Well have no such fear because I’m gay and I’m prepared to criticise acon.”
Burns said the publication of a ‘how to take illegal drugs guide’ was catastrophic for the gay community.
“The publication of this guide is not a disaster,” he said. “Not finding a parking space in the city is a disaster. This is a catastrophe. Acon is condoning and encouraging the use of substances that harm and kill people – and the public is funding it.
“I can only hope the new NSW Government, when it is elected in March, shuts this organisation down,” Burns concluded.
Oops. Who would have thought that one of the peak gay groups in New South Wales issued guidelines on how to take drugs?
Alas, despite Burns’ huffing, ACON is still here, funded by both Liberal and Labor governments.
And ACON argues that it needs to put out such ‘safety guidelines’ given all the drugs ingested, snorted, injected and taken anally at ‘family friendly’ events like the Mardi Gras.
I guess it’s no surprise why this happens either.
If I knew that Burns was batting on the same team as me, I’d want to scull a schooner of LSD too…
To the casual observer, the general tenor of media commentary about the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill has been that Christians want this law so that they can be bigots, while the LGBT community and ‘progressive’ society oppose it because it will plunge Australia back into the dark ages.
Personally, I think that this media promoted line is a lie. A big load of tosh.
Christians want the freedom to be Christian, not more anti-discrimination law. So it is wrong to pretend that Christians are marching up and down the streets clamouring for this law.
Now it is true that LGBT groups oppose this law. God only knows why. After all, it will place ‘religious freedom’ in the hands of the Thought Police at the HQ of Acceptable Speech in Canberra.
Normally, suggesting that this mob be placed in charge of ‘religious freedom’ would prompt LGBT activists to march naked down Oxford Street in celebration.
Indeed, just 6 months ago a collective group of LGBT groups (it was like a rainbow of rainbows) united to issue a press release calling for religious-based anti-discrimination laws. In their wisdom, the Super Rainbow Collective felt that such laws were needed to protect Islam – so long as those same laws did not protect Christianity.
Why gay and lesbians lobby groups think it is a good idea to protect Islam over Christianity is beyond me. But it does bring to mind that famous saying that those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.
And now the government’s Religious Discrimination Bill will do basically everything that the LGBT activists demanded (read here to understand the Muslim-only job advertisements that this law will allow).
Unsurprisingly, the professional whingers and perpetually unsatisfied are still not happy.
Why? It’s a perception thing.
And the perception in LGBT World is that this bill won’t empower the Human Rights Commission and will instead empower Christians. Thankfully, this means that we were spared the parade of wild, undressed hordes skipping down Oxford Street in celebration of this bill.
Not so thankfully, it also means that we still got a naked march down Oxford Street. But this time it was a protest against the Religious Discrimination Bill during the ‘apolitical’ and ‘family friendly’ Mardi Gras.
It is yet another sign that we live in times of anarchy, chaos and confusion.
Christian groups are generally supporting this law because of a ‘perception’ that it will save the next Israel Folau, when it will in fact become a guillotine to be used against any and all Christians. And LGBT groups have panicked themselves into a cold sweat because they cannot bear the thought that Christians could be free, when this law will in fact destroy freedom for Christians in Australia.
It’s almost as if no one involved in this debate has comprehended the proposed law at all.
Fortunately, we now have You Tube videos of deranged people fighting over trolley loads of toilet paper to distract us from this madness.
Finding useful contributions to this debate is difficult to say the least.
Which is why it was a great joy to read an article commenting on this bill that actually makes sense.
Last week, Dara MacDonald wrote in The Australian the best piece on this insane idea penned to date, stating:
This law, at least in part, originated because state and federal anti-discrimination laws systemically infringe freedom of speech (and particularly expression of religious ideas).
Instead of abolishing laws that violate basic freedoms, the government has decided that it is going to fix the problem of illiberal, convoluted anti-discrimination laws by enacting yet another illiberal, convoluted anti-discrimination law.
Doing the same thing over and again but expecting a different result was Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity. History will repeat itself and, just like the notorious section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, it soon will become a bureaucratic goliath that no government can or wants to control.
The article is now available for free at the IPA website. Do yourself a favour and read it.
In other words, as I have said from the moment this bill was proposed, we do not need more anti-discrimination law to be free. If we want freedom, we need to repeal the existing state and federal anti-discrimination laws. And then, just to make sure, we should bulldoze the Temples of Wokedom into the ground and sow salt over the debris so that nothing ever grows in those locations again.
And if that doesn’t make sense to you and you are Christian and you still think this proposed law is a good idea, watch the video below. The Religious Discrimination Bill, if passed, will put these guys in charge of your freedom. Good luck with that…
Early this year the Australian Financial Review reported that Australia’s new $50 bazillion submarine program was already late and that the there was no proof that the truckload of cash already spent on it had achieved anything useful at all:
The navy’s submarine program is officially running nine months late and the Defence Department is unable to show that spending of $400 million on design work has been “fully effective”, the auditor-general has found.
You’d think, then, that the Navy would have better things to do than organising morning teas for International Women’s Day and basically turning this arm of the services into some kind of perpetual and bureaucratic version of the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.
But you’d be wrong.
Below are two signals that someone in the Navy was paid to write, others were paid to send out and the rest of them were paid to read. And, on top of that, your money continues to be spent paying for the waste of time that these signals drone on about, including coming up with an acronym for the Navy’s Diversity and Inclusion Council.
This just happens to be ‘NDIC’.
Personally, I couldn’t think of a better word myself to describe this organisation.
Normally you’d hear about this kind of thing in some satirical comedy. Or maybe even watching re-runs of Monty Python.
I suppose this is to be expected when you set up a committee with a ‘Diverse Sex, Sexuality and Gender Advisor’ to meet regularly with the Deputy Chief of Navy to discuss capability and strategy and how many ships the Chinese have.
If you don’t feel safe, there’s a good reason for that…
A few weeks ago, the Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner sent this letter to a conservative concerned about ‘Drag Queen Story Time’ being held in Brisbane City Council Libraries:
Strangely enough, Adrian Schrinner sent another letter about the same topic which turned up on the Facebook page of one of the ‘drag queens’ who featured at the last ‘Drag Queen Story Time’.
See if you can spot the difference…
The New South Wales government, on behalf of the New South Wales taxpayer, is considering coughing up and covering the legal costs of serial litigant and anti-free speech campaigner, Garry Burns.
Burns, the ever-offended homosexual complainer-in-chief, is infamous for many things other than just expecting the hardworking people of New South Wales to bail him out.
For instance, Burns likens himself to herpes. And he’s also lodged 37 complaints against me under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). I’d prefer it if Burns just stuck to his fascination with the former, rather than continuing with the latter.
In 2018, the High Court of Australia ruled against Burns and in favour of me and Tess Corbett in relation to the question of whether the New South Wales Civil and Administrative could even hear his complaints – specifically including a complaint that Burns had lodged against me about a comment that he himself left on my Facebook page.
I said it couldn’t and it turns out that I was correct.
The High Court found that it was unconstitutional for the tribunal to exercise any jurisdiction over Burns’ complaints, which means that the only mob to have broken the laws of the land in this farcical seven year saga are the ‘Thought Police’ working in the anti-discrimination industry.
They trampled all over the biggest one of ‘em all.
Those who were not so correct included the Attorney Generals of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia and, of course, Mr Burns. Don’t ask how much the taxpayers of pretty much every Australian state spent on that fun-filled exercise (I’ve been told by one, more expert in this field than I, that the bill would have topped $1 million) but it did leave Burns with court costs of about $80,000.
And now Burns is hoping that New South Wales will transform itself into his own personal GayTM machine and solve his problem.
Late last year, Burns asked the state of New South Wales to cover the costs of his failed litigation.
And this year the New South Wales parliament was informed that this request was being considered, after questions were by Mark Latham.
Specifically, the Minister for Education and Early Childhood Learning, representing the Attorney General and Minister for Prevention of Domestic Violence, informed the parliament that:
Mr Burns’ request for an ex gratia payment in respect of costs that were ordered against him in High Court proceedings is currently under consideration by the Department of Communities and Justice.
Now, while this would help me out, given Burns has not paid me a cracker yet, I do feel that this proposed deal is less than fair on the other people living in New South Wales.
I also didn’t realise that it would take so long to laugh Burns out of the office. But there we go.
Greater minds than mine working in the ever-efficient bureaucracy of the New South Wales government are still mulling this request. Which means that they might say yes.
Taxpayers of New South Wales, over to you. After all, unlike me, you actually get to vote on what happens down there…
Yesterday, Mark Latham introduced a bill into New South Wales parliament that will start to clean up the mess that is the New South Wales anti-discrimination industry.
And it’s not a moment too soon. Two days before Mark Latham spoke in parliament, the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board took to its Facebook page to tout for anonymous complaints.
The festering mess that now urgently needs disinfecting has been created because the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board has lost all touch with common sense. Instead, it has simply become an activist organisation that sucks at the taxpayers’ teat while processing the complaints of other activists.
Mark’s bill, if it is passed, will:
- prevent the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board from policing the speech of people who live outside New South Wales and who express their views someplace else;
- put an end to the absurd practice of dragging brain-damaged people through tribunals and courts for the views they express; and
- finally force the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board to reject complaints that are vexatious.
It is hard to fathom, in particular, why legislation should be needed to force the President to reject vexatious complaints. That it is needed says a great deal about the lunacy that reigns supreme in the anti-discrimination industry across Australia.
Mark’s speech about this bill can be read in full here.
And I do highly recommend that you read his speech. It was brilliant. More importantly, for those who are interested in freedom of speech, it outlines exactly how much of a threat bodies like the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board pose to the freedom of ordinary Australians unless they are reigned in.
Here is a key excerpt:
The Act allows complaints to be lodged without cost. NCAT determines complaints referred to it as part of a no-cost jurisdiction. The complaint may result in a penalty of up to $100,000 issued by NCAT payable to the complainant. If complainants have legal prowess they can represent themselves, and indeed make a tidy profit. Given these provisions, the vetting of initial complaints lodged with the Anti-Discrimination Board is vital. Once a complaint is in the system the matter can drag on for years and inevitably end up at NCAT with the possibility of substantial financial penalties, plus legal costs for respondents not able to defend themselves at the board or at NCAT. Respondents can feel harassed and stressed by such a lengthy period of legalism, especially if they are also subject to media publicity due to the action. These things can become a nightmare.
Unfortunately, the threshold for the acceptance of complaints at the Anti-Discrimination Board is minimal. Under Section 89 it requires complaints to be lodged in writing and they need not demonstrate a prima facie case. Section 89B (2) limits the president’s powers to decline complaints to matters more than 12 months old; those outside the scope of the Act; where someone has falsely lodged a complaint on behalf of someone else; and in vilification cases where the person making the complaint does not have the characteristic allegedly being vilified. The president may decline in these circumstances; there is no requirement, as per the practice in most other States and Territories, that the president must decline the complaint. Clearly, these provisions are open to abuse. There is next to no restriction on lodging complaints. It is free for political activists to target their opponents and use the Anti-Discrimination Board and NCAT as political weapons, tying them up in legal disputes and costs but at no cost to the complainant. This is a form of “lawfare”, one of the worst trends in modern politics.
Activists are using the legal system to try to score the political points they cannot achieve by democratic means, or even worse, they are using the legal system to try to destroy their opponents financially to break them with the cost of using lawyers and going through tribunals to defend themselves. This is not justice; it is a lawyer’s picnic.
In the four decades since the Anti-Discrimination Act was legislated the political environment has changed substantially. We now live in an era of heightened political activism, much of it driven by the intense polarised and at times obsessive nature of social media, and tactics such as “de-platforming” and “cancelling culture” have become common. The board and NCAT should not be pawns in this game at taxpayers’ expense; therefore requiring under the provisions of this bill amendments to the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act.
Mark went on to outline in detail the complaints against me, as well as those lodged against Israel Folau and John Sunol, a brain-damaged man from Newcastle.
Personally, I believe that the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board’s handling of those latter complaints is beyond the realms of belief. It makes my farcical saga pale into insignificance. Australians, when they hear what has happened to John Sunol, are rightly shocked.
Once again, I cannot encourage you enough to read the rest of Mark’s speech – click here to do so.
Most importantly, this bill will now be subject to an inquiry which will necessarily need to hear evidence about the farcical failure that the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board has become.
I’ve been calling for such an inquiry since mid-2018, when the President of the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board decided to continue referring complaints against me to the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal, despite rulings in the New South Wales Court of Appeal and High Court of Australia that it was unconstitutional for the Tribunal to even hear the complaints against me.
More than 7,000 Australians have signed my petition calling for an inquiry, which is significant considering how little media attention has been given to this issue.
Since 2014 I’ve had to travel to Sydney more times than I can remember to defend myself. Finally, it seems that sometime soon I’ll be heading back to Sydney. But this time I won’t be in the hot seat.
It will be the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board facing the music…
Can you spot the problem?
It’s in the circled area…
Can someone please tell me why the ‘Implementation Advisory Group’, responsible for reviewing Church governance in Australia, is meeting in the Masonic Centre?
Actually, don’t bother. It all makes sense to me now…especially as the Australian Catholics Bishops Conference has ‘approved’ Freemasonry.
Brisbane Lord Mayor, Adrian Schrinner, has kicked off election year by defending the Brisbane City Council’s drag queen story time program.
I’m not sure who’s vote he is after because the inner-city Left will almost certainly back the other mob: they’re now promising to prevent people from even being able to lodge petitions against drag queen story time.
Schrinner says he’s happy that the drag queens have ‘Blue Cards’ and that children who attend these events are accompanied by their parents.
Meanwhile, in other news, it was revealed late last year that a number of drag queens involved in these ‘educational programs’ in the United States have been convicted of sex offences. Thankfully, I’m sure drag queens in Australia are completely different than the ones they have overseas…
And given the adults in the room at Brisbane City Council seem completely lacking in all common sense, I might as well report that an actual drag queen has blown the lid on drag queen story time, stating that parents should not take their children to these events:
A drag queen performs in a night club for adults. There is a lot of filth that goes on. A lot of sexual stuff that goes on. And backstage there is a lot of nudity, sex and drugs. Okay? So I don’t think this is an avenue you would want your child to explore.
The very fact that an actual drag queen makes more sense than Brisbane’s Lord Mayor is a depressing statement about the state of insanity into which we have been thrust.
And now we all get to choose to vote for the guys that host drag queen story time, or the other guys who want to stop any criticism of it all.
It’s not much of a choice…
If you played “What insane display of wokedom will occur on Australia Day Bingo” on 26 January and drew the card with “Someone will get arrested for wearing the Australian flag”, then congratulations. You just won the jackpot.
Come down and collect you prize.
See for yourself below:
Melbourne bloke arrested – apparently for wearing an Australian flag on Australia Day https://t.co/ATmWAILZKQ
— Michael Smith News (@mpsmithnews) January 26, 2020
Now it is true that the man who was arrested has, in the past, been more than a trouble maker. Some have described him in colloquial Aussie fashion as a “bit of a dickhead”.
I tend to agree.
After all, donning an Aussie flag and parading around the centre of Melbourne screams bogan more than patriot, to say nothing of the fact that it also demonstrates that this man thumbs his nose at the protocols regarding the use of the Australian National Flag.
While this man is often at counter-Antifa protests, I get the impression that he and those he confronts both furiously agree that violence and threats and thuggery are an acceptable way of imposing their views on society. This man has certainly not been afraid to threaten others in the past.
While the phrase gets thrown around with gay abandon, this man is probably deserving of being labelled a ‘far right activist’. He admits that he started out in the neo-Nazi movement. In more recent times he’s admitted to lying about meeting conservative politicians in order to gain media attention and to hurt the Liberal Party during the last election campaign.
All in all, whatever side he is on, it’s not mine.
But all of that is also irrelevant.
He was wearing an Australian flag. And then he was arrested because the ‘Invasion Day’ protest was approaching.
And this is the problem: if the shoe was on the other foot and a lone Aboriginal trouble-maker was waiting to confront the Australia Day parade, does anyone really believe that the police would have shown consistency and arrested that person?
We all know the answer to that: no.
Instead he would have been protected. And then interviewed by the ABC.
And the most ironic part of it all? The very law that the Victorian police used to order this man to move on and then arrest him for failing to do so was criticised by Liberty Victoria for the ‘distressingly broad’ impact it would have on Aboriginal people:
Such powers are inevitably ‘prone to be applied in a discriminatory and disproportionate way against some of our most vulnerable community members, including people who are homeless, young people, Aboriginal people and people experiencing mental health issues’.
Strangely, Liberty Victoria has not had a single word to say about the way this law was used against a lone man draped in a flag counter-protesting the ‘Invasion Day’ march.
Nor have they said anything about the fact that this same law states that the Victorian police have no powers to move a person on if they are merely demonstrating or ‘speaking, bearing or otherwise identifying with a banner, placard or sign or otherwise behaving in a way that is apparently intended to publicise the person’s view about a particular issue.”
So it seems that the Victorian police broke the law to arrest a man on Australia Day. For wearing an Australian flag.
In a separate incident, Avi Yemeni was also arrested in Melbourne by the Victorian police on Australia Day, as you can see below:
He intends to fight the Victorian police. I’ll be watching with interest and I certainly hope that he wins.
There are really only three things that you need to know about the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill.
Firstly, it places ‘religious freedom’ in the hands of the Australian Human Rights Commission.
Secondly, it then lets these secular militant overlords decide what our religious views are and whether they are doctrinally correct in order to determine if any one of us is ‘protected’.
And, thirdly, it opens the door to ‘positive’ religious discrimination.
For anyone with any common sense, these three things should give you a massive case of the Hibbidy Jibbadies. If you believe in freedom, then the best thing that you can do is run as far as you can, as fast as you can, from this bill.
No good will come from it. Ever. Full Stop.
Let’s go through each of these points in more detail so that even those who are a bit slower on the uptake can still uptake the consequences.
Point One: We have a problem expressing mainstream Christian views on issues such as marriage in Australia precisely because of organisations such as the Australian Human Rights Commission and its sister agencies in each of the states and territories.
So only a numpty could possibly think that it is a good idea to give the very same government bureaucracies that are the cause of our problems the power to protect ‘religious freedom’.
Why have I been in court since 2014 due to the complaints of a vexatious homosexual activist? Well, I have the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board to thank for that.
Why was the Archbishop of Hobart dragged into litigation at the behest of a man who thinks that he’s a woman? News Flash: that was the work of Equal Opportunity Tasmania.
Why can’t Israel Folau play rugby for Australia anymore? That’s easy. Rugby Australia basically took the various state and federal anti-discrimination acts and turned them into a workplace code of conduct.
Christians who support this bill might as well start building their own guillotine on the lawns of the Commonwealth parliament. Because that is what they will end up with when ‘religious freedom’ is handed over to the woke, secular militants who believe that it’s their moral duty to use the coercive power of the state to impose Groupthink on Australian society.
Let’s not forget that Gillian Triggs was running the Australian Human Rights Commission when she lamented that she didn’t have the power to monitor the conversations around our dinner tables. Or that this organisation is so morally bankrupt that it huffily demanded that the government pay $350,000 to a murderer held in immigration detention.
Put another way, the biggest problem with these various government ‘human rights’ agencies is not a legal one but a cultural one: no one works in these organisations unless they already hate traditional Christian morality. After that, it doesn’t matter what the law says. The result will always be to the detriment of Christianity, regardless of how bad (or worse) the legal fine print is.
If it still hasn’t sunk in, just ask yourself this question: how many people working in the anti-discrimination industry think that marriage is a union between a man and a woman?
We all know the answer to that: zero. A big, fat one of ‘em.
And now the ‘conservative’ government wants us to believe that an industry that thrives by sucking funds off the taxpayer to virtue signal how offensive everything about Christianity is will protect our religious freedom from the attacks that it is rubber-stamping against us. Yeah right.
Point Two: Once you get past the cultural problems, the legal issues raise their ugly heads.
Section 11(1) of the proposed bill states:
A religious body does not discriminate against a person under this Act by engaging, in good faith, in conduct that a person of the same religion as the religious body could reasonably consider to be in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of that religion.
So this bill does not protect Catholic schools by allowing them to hire Catholic teachers, as we have all been lead to believe.
Instead, under this Act to protect ‘religious freedom’ a Catholic school will only be able to hire a Catholic teacher if:
- the hiring was done in ‘good faith’ – a very subjective term that undid Andrew Bolt when he faced complaints under the Race Discrimination Act, and
- other Catholics agree that this hiring was in accordance with Catholic teaching.
And it’s further complicated by the fact that section 11(5)(a) says that a religious body is only protected if it adheres to the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a religion.
So if a Catholic school wants to hire a Catholic teacher it must also prove to Woke World that it is a Catholic school that follows the doctrine of the Catholic church.
That is a lot of words and the one thing I have learnt over the past six years in court is that the more words there are, the more likely you are to have a problem.
And this is where it gets really tricky.
Who can’t find a trendy lesbian ‘Catholic’ nun or a Father James Martin these days to state that it is the teaching of the Catholic Church to celebrate everything rainbow?
— The Tablet (@The_Tablet) August 29, 2018
Throw that little problem into the court room and all of a sudden I don’t think anyone can really say, hand on heart, that this bill will make it easier for Catholic schools to hire Catholic teachers.
Indeed, I’m going to bet that it is rather more likely that once this bill is made into law that there will follow a judgement that says Jesus taught us to love our neighbour and so, as a result, it is not the doctrine of the Catholic Church to discriminate against gay teachers and that, consequently, Catholic schools that don’t want them are not actually Catholic and therefore not protected under the Religious Discrimination Act.
You might scoff and think that this is fanciful.
But this bill clearly intends to give the anti-discrimination industry the power to determine what is and what is not Catholic doctrine, which normally is solely a question for the actual Catholic Church. It is bad in principle and will be just as bad in practice.
And while the social justice warriors like to think that they are infallible, the safe money would be betting that they stuff this up in a big way, either by accident or, more likely, through malicious design.
Given this bill will also thrust upon us another highly paid, taxpayer-funded activist – the Religious Freedom Commissioner – the likelihood that we’ll have an imam or lesbian Uniting Church ‘priestess’ overseeing the whole shebang makes this almost a foregone conclusion.
The Race Discrimination Act has given us Tim Whatisface and the Australian Human Rights Commission Act has given us Gillian Triggs. So we’d all better bunker down now and make preparations for Waleed Aly or that annoying Anglican bleeding heart with his inane and fatuous billboards to be made the Religious Discrimination Commissioner.
— Bernard Gaynor (@BernardGaynor) January 18, 2020
This is the very opposite of what ‘draining the swamp’ is.
Point Three: the Religious Discrimination Bill, in order to fight ‘religious discrimination’ will allow ‘positive’ ‘religious discrimination’.
In other words, if this bill becomes law we will see job advertisements in Australia stating that in order to apply you must be from a non-Christian background so that woke big businesses and government departments can ‘rectify’ ‘historical’ discrimination in Australian society.
And don’t just take my words for it. Read the ‘conservative’ government’s own explanatory notes for clause 12 of this bill. Paragraph 264 of this document states in black and white writing:
For example, employment programs to assist members of a particular religious group who have been historically underrepresented in the workforce to enter the workforce could constitute a measure under this subparagraph.
So brace yourself for Qantas or Coles or the Australian Defence Force to put out job advertisements asking for people to enter the ‘Religious Diversity Employment Pathway’ – so long as they are Muslim. Or Satanists. Or anything other than Christian.
Indeed, this is already happening under state laws, as this job advertisement from the AFL makes crystal clear:
And if you lucky enough to be a Christian with a job, you should also instinctively know what comes next: workplace surveys that pry into your religious beliefs so that company executives can issue glossy annual reports trumpeting how they’ve identified that Christians are ‘over-represented’ in company middle management.
After that comes the five year program ‘targeting talent’ from ‘diverse religious communities’, complete with promotion quotas.
You know it’s true.
The Sex Discrimination Act is responsible for female employment pathways and associated quotas.
The Race Discrimination Act has spawned the indigenous recruitment corporate plan and associated quotas.
Both of these laws contain special measures provisions. And so does the Religious Discrimination Bill.
So it’ll take a couple of nano-seconds after this bill becomes law before woke workplaces create the ‘token Muslim’ job in every section of the workforce. And, oh yeah, the voluntary-but-compulsory-if-you-want-to-be-promoted morning teas to celebrate Satanic Inclusion Day.
I’m not even joking about that last part.
The first ‘religion’ protected under the Australian Capital Territory’s religious vilification laws was a Satanic cult. It follows the teachings of Aleister Crowley, who is infamous for promoting child sacrifice. He even has devoted followers in jail for running a paedophile ring.
I know the Catholic Church has had its own problems in this area but I would just like to point out that the crimes committed by a minority of clergy are not because of the Church’s teaching, but in complete contradiction of that teaching.
The same cannot be said of Colin Batley’s sex cult, which read from Crowley’s text at the start of its orgies with children.
And just to make it clear, only two days ago the Noosa Temple of Satan issued a statement boasting that Satanists would aggressively take all legal action possible to ensure that they could benefit from the Religious Discrimination Bill too.
No doubt, the secular militants will as well, just as they have been doing so in America to try and prevent shops from selling ‘Jesus candy’ at Christmas time. After all, the Religious Discrimination Bill protects those without religion as well.
No doubt, there are many people with good intent working to promote this bill. But if this law is ever enacted we will be beset with disaster.
I will not join the chorus of conservatives or Christians lining up to clamour for the Religious Discrimination Bill. I will not put myself in a position where, in two or three years when this law comes back to bite us hard, my words ‘supporting’ this law are thrown back in my face.
I do not support this law. I never will.
It is so badly flawed in principle that no amount of amendment of the fine print can improve it.
The only sensible answer to the problems we have today is to repeal existing anti-discrimination law. And, then, the buildings that house the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Anti-Discrimination Board of New South Wales and all the other temples of woke activism should be bulldozed into the ground.
Unfortunately, we are instead being asked to support more of the very thing that is being used to limit our freedom.
You have until 31 January to oppose this insanity. Please do so – and you can do so by signing my short submission below:
I do not support the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill.
- give more power to the anti-discrimination industry – the very industry that is the cause of the oppression of Christians in Australia today;
- create a new layer of taxpayer-funded, rent-seeking, woke, activist bureaucrats who believe that the coercive power of the state should be used to impose a new moral worldview on Australians – this is the very opposite of ‘draining the swamp’;
- empower this bureaucracy to determine the doctrinal teachings of organisations such as the Catholic Church and to assess whether individual Australians are actually Catholic – normally a task that is the sole responsibility of the Catholic Church – an idea so bad in principle that nothing good can come from its practical implementation;
- ensure the return of jobs advertisements open solely to applicants of ‘approved’ religious belief – an idea that ordinary Australians vehemently oppose; and
- protect ‘religions’ that ordinary Australians find abhorrent, including Satanic cults, and create the circumstances for endless, divisive litigation that only results in the further limits of freedom, especially for Christian Australians.
I urge that this bill be scrapped.
I further urge that the real problem limiting freedom in Australia be addressed. The solution to the religious freedom problem facing Australia can only be found by repealing existing anti-discrimination laws and the abolition of agencies such as the Australian Human Rights Commission.
It is these laws and agencies that have enabled aggressive, vexatious and anti-Christian activists to increasingly drag Christian Australians through pointless and expensive litigation at great cost to numerous individuals and at greater cost to a previously harmonious society.
Scrap the Religious Discrimination Bill
Read the petition
Mrs Wendy L.
Mar 31, 2020
Mrs Lynette W.
Mar 15, 2020
Ms Julie G.
Mar 10, 2020
Mrs Sybil S.
Mar 07, 2020
Mr Troy H.
Feb 28, 2020
Mrs Katie L.
Feb 26, 2020
Mr Damien R.
Feb 24, 2020
Ms Helen V.
Feb 23, 2020
Mr Josh M.
Feb 22, 2020
Dr. P A M.
Feb 22, 2020
Ms Annette M.
Feb 22, 2020
Mrs Rita L.
Feb 21, 2020
Ms Lucy C.
Feb 21, 2020
Mr Glenn M.
Feb 21, 2020
Mr Raymond W.
Feb 18, 2020
Ms Kathleen M.
Feb 17, 2020
Mr Davide F.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr John G.
Feb 16, 2020
Ms Lorna C.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr Malcolm B.
Feb 16, 2020
Ms MICHELLE M.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr Gerry K.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr Stephen R.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr Shane P.
Feb 16, 2020
Mrs Narelle C.
Gold Coast City
Feb 16, 2020
Mrs Judith G.
Feb 16, 2020
Mr Robert L.
Feb 15, 2020
Mr Xavier D.
Feb 15, 2020
Mr Wayne K.
Feb 15, 2020
Ms Kata C.
Feb 14, 2020
Mrs Sonya M.
Feb 14, 2020
Ms Reese C.
Feb 14, 2020
Mrs Mary G.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr william .
Feb 14, 2020
Ms LORRAINE W.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr Luke D.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr Philip B.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr David F.
Feb 14, 2020
Ms Craig P.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr Martin V.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr Rodney E.
Feb 14, 2020
Mrs Margaret L.
Feb 14, 2020
Mrs Carol S.
Feb 14, 2020
Ms Jenn W.
Feb 14, 2020
Mr Mark S.
Feb 12, 2020
Mrs Tarnya S.
Feb 11, 2020
Ms philip r.
Feb 11, 2020
Mrs Juliana K.
Feb 10, 2020
Mr Robert M.
Feb 08, 2020
Ms karen H.
Feb 08, 2020