And tens of thousands of Australians were duped into believing them, to feel sorry for them... its all about love... right? Everyone has the right to marry the person they love... (another lie)
Well it didn't take long before the gays and their radical LW PC Prog allies and activists moved their agenda on. just as they have elsewhere. Even though they told us all we were worried about nothing.
So this is just one of a great many articles on one individual being abused privately and publicly for his belief. They said it wouldn't happen but it is happening just as it happened overseas... and it no doubt will continue to happen.Freedom of speech supports Israel Folau’s love of God
The Australian
12:00AM April 23, 2018
Jennifer Oriel
Israel Folau is a Christian — not the PC kind. He is the embodiment of modern Christianity; young, black and evangelical. The furore over Folau’s decision to cite the Bible in response to a question about God reveals the unreasonable nature of Australian secularism. It raises the question of whether religious freedom is valued or even understood as a substantive right.
Does faith have a future in Australian life, or will Christians be resigned to the closet?
There is no freedom of religion unless there is freedom to exercise it. The question put to Folau on Instagram was explicitly religious and demanded an answer from Biblical scripture.
The user asked: “What was gods (sic) plan for gay people?” Folau replied that unless they repent of their sins, the plan is hell.
The response was blunt and God’s judgment on homosexuality is hotly debated in Christian circles. Jesus confirmed the union between a man and woman as the natural order, but did not address explicitly the subject of homosexuality.
In response to public anger about the Instagram exchange, Folau wrote a commentary for PlayersVoice entitled “I’m a Sinner Too”. He explained his understanding of God’s view on homosexuality was drawn from the Bible: “Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practise homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor the drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6: 9-10). In short, Australia is the land of the damned and Parliament House is Satan’s throne.
Folau has been subjected to abuse, slander and threats of unemployment for paraphrasing scripture, despite the fact he was asked about it.
Some journalists have suggested that sponsors withdraw funding to punish his dissent. One sponsor confirmed in this newspaper that it would withdraw support, saying: “SOS (Hydration) supports inclusiveness and welfare of all athletes.”
Others have emphasised a golden opportunity for Rugby Australia to enact vengeance; Folau’s contract is up for renewal. The most curious opinion is that Folau should not profess Christian beliefs on social media even when asked about Christian beliefs on social media.
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, former rugby player Tim Horan offered support for Folau’s freedom of speech, but “not on social media”. Instead, he contended that such views are better confined to a backyard barbecue because: “You are paid for by Rugby Australia … via sponsors and I think you have an obligation to those sponsors.” It is a flawed argument. The basis of free speech as a right and principle of Western civilisation is the exercise of speech to empower the flourishing of public reason.
Taylors Wines led the pack of Rugby Australia sponsors with a live and let live attitude by supporting diversity of belief and freedom of speech. Folau’s teammate Nick Phipps celebrated diversity of belief and said: “We’re a super diverse group, everyone has got their own different views and beliefs and Iz is a very Christian man.”
But some sponsors jumped on the PC bandwagon to condemn Folau. The worst of them hid behind a shield of anonymity while attacking him in the press — a coward’s punch.
A perfect storm is brewing over religious freedom and Folau has dived into the eye of that storm. The unfinished business of the Turnbull government is to legislate protection for religious freedom following the legalisation of same-sex marriage. While the census indicated Australians are losing their religion, the volume of submissions to the national Religious Freedom Review was unprecedented. More than 16,000 public submissions were received, forcing the government to postpone the reporting date to May. At the core of the debate is whether the state will use discrimination law to extend its authority over religious individuals and organisations, or strengthen provisions to protect religious freedom and belief.
The former scenario is not unlikely. Despite assurances, the Liberal Party did not protect freedom of speech and religious belief in the same-sex marriage bill. Religious protections were limited to ministers or marriage celebrants and relevant bodies capable of demonstrating conformity to anti-discrimination law. The continuing lack of protection for religious freedom and belief leaves people of diverse faiths vulnerable to litigious activists and opportunists. And it constitutes a geopolitical problem for Australia in a region where Christians are commonly persecuted.
In a column for the ABC, academic Katharine Gelber demonstrated inadvertently why greater protections could be needed. She argued that Folau’s comments “might constitute vilification” in various jurisdictions. A complaint could be lodged, Gelber suggested, because he made the comment on social media. While the complaint would likely fail because it doesn’t constitute incitement of hatred (that is, it isn’t vilification), Folau’s comments “are still of concern … they disseminate prejudice by a person in a position of moral authority”.
Criticisms of Folau as prejudiced or too outspoken fail the test of reason. He didn’t stop play and shout out “hell to gays” in the middle of a match. He responded to an explicit question about the word of God on the question of homosexuality. And he responded by referring to the Bible. If you ask what God’s plan is, be prepared for the answer.
Those who oppose Folau’s right to cite scripture are advocating censorship of the Bible.
It’s not quite as dramatic as book burning, but the principle is the same.
You might not believe in the Bible. You might not believe in God. You might think that Christians should praise God only in private and religious belief should be purged from public life. You might believe in queer ideology and refuse to brook criticism of it. But consider that a gay person’s right to love openly is no more important than a Christian’s right to love God openly. Question whether Christians should have to hide their love in the closet vacated by gays. Ask yourself whether the history of state atheism enforced by totalitarian regimes is the future you want for Australia.
Allowing SSM was just the thin edge of the wedge...
