Jane,

Your description of Christian leaders as "sickening, deceptive,anti-gay, dishonest" I think speaks more of the hurt you have experienced rather than any clear-cut case of actual deception which you seem desperate to present.

To label Jim Wallace's comments as racist surely shows a lack of understanding regarding Islam, which is indeed not a race of people at all, but rather a worldview. I could say the same regarding saying someone is anti-gay simply because they hold to the traditional version of marriage. Perhaps you should be a bit more careful when judging others like this.

In regard to ACCESS ministries you seem to think all Christian chaplains as simply too stupid to be able to balance aq professional job with appropriateness of conversation. It is true that Christians are called to share the gospel, but if a Christian teacher in a public school can hold this line, then surely a Chaplain can as well.

Thank you for sharing your perspective though, and I hope you find what you are really searching for.

Many decades ago in a galaxy far away in another country young Steven attended Camps Bay Primary School. This being South Africa in the 1950s we had a bible reading at “assembly” every morning. We also had “scripture” classes twice a weekly and regular hymn singing. The only hymn I can remember is “Onward Christian Soldiers.”

And what effect did this have on us Jewish boys and girls?

Nothing. De nada. Not a thing. It was just one more idiocy of school life. The moment we got into the playground or left school we forgot all about it. It made even less impression on us than history and geography.

Nor were our parents upset at the thought of their little darlings blaring out “Onward Christian Soldiers.” In fact I do not ever remember it coming up in discussion. No one cared.

What of the Christian children? Did scripture classes and regular hymn singing affect them.

So far as I can see the answer is no. I know for a fact most of them did not attend church or Sunday school because I used to play with them on Sunday mornings. Those few whose parents used to drag them off to religious services were upset at missing out on the fun.

So is this all a bit of drama about nothing?

I suspect it is.

I am a fan of the TV series hustle. See:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379632/

As they demonstrate, you can only con someone who is willing to be conned. I suspect the kids who are conned by the chaplains are the ones who want to be conned or whose parents want them to be conned.

I partly agree with you, stevenlmeyer, that there is evidence of overreaction, but I'm not convinced the problem perceived is quite as benign as you present.

>>So is this all a bit of drama about nothing?<<

I too experienced the "church school" environment of the fifties, where we were trundled round the corner to the church itself at the drop of the proverbial hat. I recall we even "celebrated" Ascension Day, with all the earnestness that nine-year-olds bring to such mysteries. All of which affected me not in the slightest. I didn't feel indoctrinated, merely inconvenienced or - for example at Harvest Festival - entertained.

But I am detecting an underlying evangelical zeal these days that was conspicuously absent back then. I suspect that because it was all part of the CofE fabric, no-one really thought it necessary to create soldiers for God, or whatever. Nowadays, with the constant background fear generated by those who believe Islam to be ready to murder us all in our beds, there seems to be a "catch 'em young" philosophy that I used to associated with hard-nosed Jesuits.

It also seems to be most evident in Queensland, for some reason...

Jane, I’m just staggered that you are staggered. It is not lies and deceit, it’s Marketing.

Jane thanks for this, well put.

I've not read Jim Wallace's tweet so I can't comment on it but the spin, lies and deception around the christian response to the RE issue has been somewhat telling. As a former christian it's not how I believed that servant's of the truth should behave. Not overly surprising, once you start to accept that the lies are happening they volume becomes somewhat overwhelming.

Nick_ whilst it may seem a convenient to claim "speaks more of the hurt you have experienced" that's a cop out to try and avoid the truth in what Jane has written. Another one of those lies christains are so fond of to avoid dealing with some hard truth's.

I put a challenge on one of the RE thread's some time back, I've forgotten the wording but basically it was a request for christains to make a clear statement that they really believed that the focus of RE was on cultural value's, biblical literacy etc rather than an attempt to evangalise children. No responses that I've seen.

Supporters of the RE programs have been portraying the program's as being harmless telling of a few bible stories, a desire to help children understand the context of the bible in western culture etc. None seem to be fessing up to what is said quite openly in churches, chaplaincy and RE are about trying to win kid's to Christ.

R0ber

what a wonderful and wonderfully written article. no place for patronising here, either - it just won't wash! and on whether religious instruction is benign or not - for many who underwent religious instruction at school, atheism or agnosticism was the outcome, although others took 'fundamentalist' paths. the issue here, is, though, should the federal government fund chaplains? the answer is no. the australian constitution was written (s. 116) to ensure there was no 'established' church and funding the teaching of religion in schools is a clear breach. let's hope the australian high court is capable of seeing it that way. again, thank you for such a concise and telling piece.

The wife of a Baptist preacher who lived several miles from us was very interested in having our children play with her children. She was very friendly and would pick up our kids to bring them over to her house.

Since I am Jewish, there was absolutely no attempt to push her religion and there were plenty of children in the church I asked her why our children were such desirable playmates for hers that she went out of her way to see that they could be together. I think she was honest about her reason. My children are all blue-eyed blonds, and her husband's congregation was all black.

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution says:

"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth."

Since the chaplains are funded by the government and required to subscribe to certain religious beliefs there is a religious test for public office and therefore a violation of the Australian Constitution.

I think the whole chaplaincy thing should be rejected as it's just the governmnet doing stuff on the cheap. Surely our kids are worth some properly paid qualified counsellors?

How else will kids be trained in feminist doctrine if not via trained female consellors, schooled in man hating via a previous relationship or parental trauma, drawn to the conselling profession to heal themselves by proxy?

I think it's every kids right to have someone so personally damaged and with an axe to grind attending their psychological needs, not some wise 70yo guy who has held together a stable marriage for 50 years, has some weird belief system involving symbols of fish on the back of his car, and now thinks he can save kids with kindness and a few fairy stories.

I don't really know why they have to dress like Charlie Chaplin, but I don't think it really matters that much.

I am sympathic to Jane as she writes

'Chaplaincy organisations have never concealed their agenda to fulfil Jesus’s Great Commission of ‘making disciples of all men'

At the end of the day many fundie secularist conceal their agenda of seeing young kids sexualised, led into promiscurity and become earth worshppers rather than worshipping the One who made the earth. The fruit of the fundie secularist in many ways has created the need for Chaplains in the school and most Principals (even many grudingtly) now admit to this. I to would prefer Chaplaincy Services to not be ashamed of the the only hope for mankind (the gospel). The Greens are certainly up front with their faith despite the obvious destruction of families attached to their dogmas.

runner
That is an appallingly ignorant comment. While I don't think for one minute you truly belief that secularism is about hiding an agenda for sexualisation of children, you betray a dishonesty not worthy of someone who constantly claims the moral high ground. What makes you think you are better than anyone else. That is self-righteous in the extreme.

Using the same reasoning, does that mean the Catholic and other Churches were formed purely on a hidden agenda to provide an authoritative legitimacy to enable child sexual abuse. Actions speak louder than words. Many US CEOs involved in sexualised marketing to children are Chrisitan or Jewish.

There are many atheists and non-Christians for example who support people like Melinda Tankard Reist on issues around sexualising children. It is not a religious issue but a social one.

What is wrong with protecting the earth? If we could talk to Jesus do you think he would be calling for continual environmental rape of the earth's forests, soils etc. There are no earth worshippers, that is in your mind to diminish the aims of environmental protection. If you feel the need to make dishonest statements to support your view don't you think you should revisit these issues from a more rational perpective.

Why do you continually make environmental protection out to be a bad thing which is odd given according to you God created the earth. Surely we should respect and honour that earth and protect it from being constantly brutalised and placed as second priority on almost every business case for environmental vandalism.

I don't hold out much hope for any rational discourse with you on the topic of sexualisation or environment.

Nick, I wish you could step outside yourself and see how patronising your comment appears. Your commentsimply adds strength to Jane's argument.

You assume because of Jane's background she can't look at religion clearly. In fact, Jane's 'inside knowledge' gives her a far clearer and insightful perspective than most.

Your patronising tone continues in relation to Jim Wallace's tweet. It was, indeed, racist and revealed the true 'us and them' mentality of zealots like Wallace.

Your advice that Jane should be more careful when judging others is the height of hypocrisy! You appear to belong to the class of Christians who judge incessantly. They judge gays, unmarried women, women who seek abortions, sex workers, people who enjoy pornography, people who seek the right to die with dignity, Muslims, Jews, atheists - in fact anyone who doesn't buy in to their own narrow world view.

Then, putting *your* words into Jane's mouth, you suggest (wrongly) that she calls chaplains stupid. Chaplains, unlike teachers, are chosen specifically *because* they have a particular religious conviction. Their role is not religiously neutral and they aren't trained for years to keep their personal beliefs separate from their professional life. It is clear that Access and SUQ see their role in schools as evangelistic. It would be 'stupid' to believe otherwise.

You condescending tone continues as you hope Jane will find what she is 'really searching for' - as if *you* know, and she doesn't! I know Jane only slightly but I think she has found what she's looking for. Jane has found confidence in her own considerable intellect, and the freedom that comes from making life decisions based on reason rather than dogma. She has distanced herself from men, like you, who presume to know, not only what she *really* thinks, but what she *should* think. Instead, she has gained the support and admiration of people who value her talent and don't assume that, because of her past, her view of the present is clouded.

It is you, Nick, not Jane, who needs to remove the plank from thine own eye.

I might emphasize that School Chaplains should be qualified family counselors, they are not Religious Education teachers.

There role is to assist children with social and family problems that affect their learning time at school; to give assistance in a child’s social growth. Our Church supports a School Chaplin whose role is largely playing sport during lunch hour with children singled out by teachers for bullying, or who has been bullied, or who is struggling with some trauma. NO religious instruction given; just encouragement and role modeling of good relationships.

And does the chaplain then, Philo, encourage those children to come on the 'fun' school camps his organisation hosts - where Education Department guidelines aren't enforced? Or perhaps, like some chaplains we've heard of, does he invite the kids to his home after school hours beyond the supervision of either the school or their parents? Maybe he just encourages them to go to trojan-horse Christian programmes like Shine and Strength? There are more ways to skin a cat, Philo, and we know from what parents and teachers are telling us, that chaplains and chaplaincy providers are masters at cat-skinning.

Chrys Stevenson,
Not ONE child from that school attends any programmes run by our Church. Beside any child who attends organised programmes i.e. Youth Camps etc must have the approval of the parents. The Parents / guardian act on the behalf of the child and if they approve the child is not forced against their will.

Chrys Stevenson,

What would you rather?

a) kids singing kumbaya at a church camp and playing with their flute in an unconventional manner at band camp.

b) Being influenced by man hating feminist counsellors, drawn to the job solely because of some abuse by their parents or a violent boyfriend, trying to heal themselves by indoctrinating kids with man hating victim mentalities and pushing prozac?

Femi-nazi Prozac Pushers?!?

ROFL

Houellebecq,

I think you know the answer to your question to Chrys.

Pelican

You have obviously not been to young kids discos where mums living out mis spent pasts dress their eight year olds as tarts and dance to some dubious music. Then again like many parents maybe you have been but are blinded to what message this sends to kids. It actually adds to the need of role models such as Chaplains.

It is all very well to try to be anti any influence from religious, atheist or political views etc; but they happen in the classroom by passionate teachers anyway. I found that myself by going through State Schools. However the constant attempt to remove religious influences from State Schools only fuels parents resolve to send their precious children to Private or Church schools.

runner
There is no dispute about the increase sexualisation of children in the media and through raunch culture. But what has this got to do with a secular agenda? Secularism is about tolerance and acceptance of varying world views within the legal framework. Secularism does not push sexualisation of children as you claimed early on.

Role models come in manys shapes and forms including possibly some Chaplains, however it comes down to personal integrity and just because someone is in a role of Chaplain does not necessarily mean they will be a good role model especially if their primary aim is conversion over respect for other worldviews among the children they have contact.

'especially if their primary aim is conversion over respect for other worldviews among the children they have contact.'

I don't think I encountered a teacher who wasn't a greenie or a communist when going through school. I didn't turn out either a greenie or a communist.

I think it's good having chaplains. Chaplins even better. Imagine the high spirits brought about by a team of Chaplins.

Seriously, the social workers of the world are clearly in more need of social work and counselling than the general population. They should have to go through some sort of psychological testing. They're all as mad as hatters.

'How does that make you feel'. Hahaha. 'It's just a chemical imbalance'. Hahahha. 'Did daddy touch you in the 'right way'. Hahaha.

I'm with Charlie Sheen on this one. Bi-winning! Oh no mommy didn't love me I'm such a victim! Who wants that lot near our kids.

Much rather a church-going gramps with too much time on his hands. Old people should be encouraged back into the community. They are mostly harmless. Mostly harmless is a victory I'm telling ya. Who wants the prozac pushers added into the lefty tree hugging union loving teachers already there.

Do you really want kids to think they're a victim their whole lives?

Houellebecq,

It sounds like you would rather give $1000 to the Salvos than $20 to Gillards dishonest tax. How refreshing.

Nicely said, Jane, and a real contrast to the appalling whiffle put out by Lance Lawton on the same day. Comparisons like this illustrate very clearly that the hordes leaving Christianity behind them are made up of the best and brightest, while those that remain are increasingly inarticulate, incompetent and prone to outbreaks of real or simulated outrage as the only weapon left to them.

This is an excellent article raising important issues.

Philo states "It is all very well to try to be anti any influence from religious, atheist or political views etc; but they happen in the classroom by passionate teachers anyway."
But those teachers are not employed because of their views, political religious or otherwise. They are employed because they are qualified teachers. On the other hand, Chaplains are employed because they are religious. However, despite the religious nature of their qualifications they supposedly are not their to preach to the children. This is where the lie comes in that the article is talking about..
Philo goes on to suggest that the animosity toward religion in public schools drive people into the religious private sector. Well that is fine. If people want their children preached to at school then send them to a religious school. But we should be able to expect that our children are not being preached to at a public school.
Like many of the posters to this forum I too have a great suspicion of social workers and psychologists and warn my daughter to steer clear of them. However, that is a separate issue. Just because we have some people pushing their agenda's in schools does not mean we should open he door too all nut cases out there, religious or otherwise.

Well I disagree Houlley, Chaplains are not the only way schools can provide support to kids. There are already social workers and school counsellors for that role who might be Christians, Communists, Capitalists, Greenies or chess players - or not - but they are employed to perform a particular job.

There may be many Chaplains who are honest about their approach to counselling and provide supports without using their position to garner support for their religious persuasion. But there are jobs and training avaliable to those who seek counselling roles in their own right.

The fact is everybody one meets in life including teachers will have a point of view, some may role model those views more than others and it is all part of the maturing process. However, government sanctioned and taxpayer paid proselytising is a whole different kettle of fish.

Utlimately children grow and make their own decisions and their choices will depend on many influences, strength of character and personal beliefs. While it is not possible to agree on every tax imposed by governments it is easy to do so when it comes to government funded projects that do not serve the wider community equally and fairly. By all means offer Sunday School and counselling services within the Church.

runner
It is entirely possible that somebody might donate to the Salvos and believe in the Carbon Tax. The two are not mutually exclusive.

'There may be many Chaplains who are honest about their approach to counselling and provide supports without using their position to garner support for their religious persuasion. '

God I hope not. What's the point of believeing sinners will go to hell and not trying to pevent this. Bloody neglegent if they didn't try to convert people. I find that terribly dissapointing they would neglect to bring the lord into a troubled souls life.

You seem to think that god is irresistable. I beg to differ.

'But there are jobs and training avaliable to those who seek counselling roles in their own right.'

So if they went through the motions of training, and still promoted god, would it be ok? I think the costs would go up massively.

I think you're selling the training of life wisdom too short. Old people are a wonderful resource rarely used. It's a win-win. Cut price counselling, from more worldly people.

WOuld you really want some 24yo chick who's suffered abuse, still sorting herself out and digesting it all, handling the crisis of a 18yo suicidal young guy. Just because she went to TAFE?

Or would you rather a 60yo god botherer father figure, with a wealth of life expereince, with no formal qualifications?

Everyone has an alterior motive. So it's self healing by using young people as some sort of a proxy, or selling god. Much of a muchness really. I lean to the older age of the god botherer volunteer, and the cheaper rates.

Houellie,

The point is that government guidelines preclude chaplains from trying to convert children.

However, your point about elderly people is pertinent...the trouble with our society is that everyone is compartmentalised into their own spheres, so that the only people in mainstream society are those of working age and those who escape the daycare institutions. "School" children and the elderly are shut away in special institutionalised settings as far as can be achieved....interesting....

Congratulations Jane. The truth has set you free!

Jon J you have nailed it.

Well said Jane. I have no problem with the church attending schools to teach the word of the bible. I am not a Christian but I do believe that the bible is a cultural teaching tool that children can benefit from. What I don't agree with is the "brainwashing" of young minds by any cultural group.

Houellebecq, maybe the demographic's have changed but from what I'd seen in the past it mostly was young people doing the chaplaincy stuff. Ones close enough to the kid's age to relate to them but with less life experience than the feminist social worker you are stiring the pot with.

There were older people doing some of the RE stuff but I think that the chaplain's did as much of that as they could fit in.

There may be a little of the wise old head but I suspect that a fair portion of the older people doing RE would be more in the group of those who'd been so immersed in the church for many years that they did not understand the outside world.

I don't know if any of our resident fundies teach RE but try and picture one of them in front of the class rather than a Morgan Freeman type.

R0bert

Houellebecq

'Being influenced by man hating feminist counsellors, drawn to the job solely because of some abuse by their parents or a violent boyfriend, trying to heal themselves by indoctrinating kids with man hating victim mentalities and pushing prozac?'

How many other stereotypes do you live your life by without actually seeing the people? Some of these 'feminist counsellors' have prevented kids from killing themselves. The hate in your words is overwhelming.

Supernova "The hate in your words is overwhelming."

Save your stress for something that matters. Houellebecq is just an amateur troll that makes 90's Usenet trolls look like rocket scientists. He really doesn't even rate as a devil's advocate or genuine contrarian (too much hard work involved). He just lays bait and waits for you to bite. A rebel without a pause - it crosses his mind and voila! its spattered on your screen. Press your ear against his and you can hear the ocean.

Huellebecq. As Ammonite pointed out - "Femi-nazi Prozac Pushers". Come on, do you really believe all counsellors are "man-hating feminists"?
Really?
This disqualifies you from participation in this argument just like me claiming seriously that all chaplains are child-abusing, death-cult worshipping monsters would justify dismissing me. Just in case... I am not claiming that all chaplains are child-abusing, death-cult worshipping monsters. Honest.

Philo. I agree that chaplains SHOULD be qualified counsellors. The problem is that they are not. All they HAVE to be is religious. This doesn't hold enough of a guarantee for a large chunk of the population who have watched in horror as revelations of abuse by Christian priests came one after the other for years.
One persons perception of the nature of one chaplain in one school does not an argument make. I'm sure your chaplain never does anything wrong but others have. How much time have you spent with him in the school environment? Or are you just a parent with nothing but second hand knowledge?

stevenlmeyer. The one thing you neglected is that some kids are more vulnerable than others. You were well enough adjusted to balance it all, some aren't. Some kids are circumstancially or inherently easier targets for zealots whether religious or not. This is all about them.

david f. The irony is beautiful. Thank you.

runner. Why is a non Christian more likely to be a good person than a Christian. Historically, religion in general and Christianity in particular have been the justification for more suffering, bigotry and cruelty than just about anything else in human history.
Watch an American kiddy beauty pageant and then ask the parents if they are Christians before you talk about sexualisation. Not subscribing to one narrowly defined mythological belief structure does not mean amorality

pt 2 (sorry, too much to say...)

More generally,

Yes, by technical measure this is unconstitutional and it is being challenged legally.

To all of you who say that it's a good thing to have a religious chaplain, ask yourselves how you would feel if the Church of Scientology took an interest and started posting chaplains. They have just as much a legal right to place people as Access.

I don't have a problem with religious chaplains provided they are qualified to do the job they are hired for. This means counsellors, teachers, psychologists and social workers. These are real human beings with just as varied a world view and personal history; The difference is that they all spend years training to do the job without personal bias. None are perfect but all are more qualified than any current chaplain I have yet heard of.

I do have a problem with chaplains having to be religious. This is unconstitutional.

School is for the kids to learn how to function in the real world, not the next. If they are to be taught religion at school, it should be comparative not indoctrination. They should learn to think before they are told to believe.

Finally, I am fed up to the back teeth of all of these self-righteous, ignorant fools blustering that this is an attack on Christianity by the evil secularist hordes. It used to be funny but now it's a joke repeated too many times. We don't care what you believe - that's up to you. This is the whole point of a free society. But for you to DEMAND that our children are indoctrinated into your chosen faith is like a toddler demanding all the toys. Grow up, open you eyes and look around. Think for yourself and actually consider the other viewpoint.

Of course, none of this is relevant to the original article, which was about ACL and Access lying through their godly Christian teeth about bigotry in one case and illegal activities on the other

Thankyou Jane for your article. It resonates with my own experience of the fundamentalist mindset. Best wishes on your personal journey.

Perhaps my greatest disappointment in the recent controversies (SRI, chaplains, Jim Wallace tweet) is the visceral hostility of Christian leaders to the secular state. Previous generations understood that their individual freedom of worship depended on the restraint and tolerance of everyone else. By extension, if your sect asks for special favour from the state, you can't complain when it gives greater favour to others. Christians supported the secular state, and only expected the state to guarantee their freedom of worship, not to endorse their particular beliefs. The creation of Victoria's secular state school system is an especially enlightened example. But our current Christian leadership doesn't even notice they are seeking to erode this precious freedom. Their only argument seems to be that "Australia is a Christian country, so we are special", which isn't even true - Australia is a free country. They just make stuff up.

Where are the tolerant, truthful and reasonable Christian leaders? This should be easy - secularism is a direct consequence of the golen rule. By allowing the ACL and ACCESS ministries to represent Christianity in the public square, the brand is being trashed.

david f,

While I agree with your sentiments - that the imposition of Christian chaplains in schools goes against the religious tolerance enshrined in our constitution, I don't think you have really proven your argument that it is unconstitutional in its own right.

This bugged me for some time, so I consulted a couple of legal dictionaries (both in print and online), and no satisfactory definition of 'office' was forthcoming. 'Public office' was similarly evasive. I suspect I was looking in all the wrong places.

At any rate, I think ACCESS Ministries and other organisations, as well as state governments, work their way around this by contracting agencies to supply chaplains, rather than employing chaplains in their own right. The agencies may impose 'religious tests', but the governments do not (though they are, of course, selective in the agencies they contract). It is no longer the case that all people who work in schools are employees of the education department. I once worked in a school with a permanent, full-time police officer (an employee of the Police Service, not Ed QLD), a full-time youth health nurse (an employee of QLD Health) and a sort of social workery person who was also employed by an external agency but based at the school. We had a chaplain, too; I think he was employed by the P&C (again, not a government agency), along with the tuckshop convenor.

Lest anyone mistake this for support for chaplains in public schools, I assure you that I offer no such support. I also agree that (at risk of sounding like Darryl Kerrigan from 'The Castle') this process flies in the face of the 'vibe' of the constitution. If we support freedom of religion, as our constitution suggests, then the placement of chaplains representing a narrow range of denominations of a single faith in our schools must work against that.

Sorry. It's late. I'm not making much sense. If you've got this far through my post, good on you.

Lol Poopsicle! You're not a fan of Houellebecq then? :)

"...‘standing up for Christian values’ which I, like many of my former friends, felt were under attack in Australia. Precisely what values were in danger of being quashed by godless atheists is now lost to me but I do remember feeling that we Christians were part of a small, embattled subculture, significantly under-represented in the public arena"
Author- Jane Douglas.

Oh, well said Jane! How I wish I had spoken as well when trying to answer some of the posts written on this forum in the past :)

I would imagine that a former wife of a fundamentalist pastor, and a former Christian, would know what they are talking about on a subject such as this.
More power to you, and good luck.
Cheers,
Suze.

Poopsicle,Warthog, supernova,

Long time listeners first time callers?

It's nice to be appreciated. Even by the first time posters. Welcome to the forum, I only hope you all stay a while since you obviously have been following my work for some time.

' just like me claiming seriously that all chaplains are child-abusing, death-cult worshipping monsters would justify dismissing me.'

Yay. Parody finally appreciated. Someone with some comprehension skills, though lacking a funny bone. Anyway, good to see you understand my point.

I think though in general people seem more distressed at my depiction of religious people as mostly harmless than my depiction of counsellors using the same hyperbolic manner used to fear monger about SRE and chaplains.

Houellie,

From where I'm sitting, poopsicle sounds a tad Beelzebubblish - don't you think?

Pelican you write regaqrding my comments
'While I don't think for one minute you truly belief that secularism is about hiding an agenda for sexualisation of children, you betray a dishonesty not worthy of someone who constantly claims the moral high ground. What makes you think you are better than anyone else. That is self-righteous in the extreme.'

It is clear that sexualisation of children is the fruit of secularism. All you need to do is to walk/drive to Woolies and open your eyes. You also seem to constantly miss the point that I have no righteousness of my own. My only righteousness comes from Christ. I am no better than anyone else but that should not stop me from pointing out the obvious that you seem obvlious to. Houllie seems to see things much clearer than yourself. Does that make him self righteous?

'Houllie seems to see things much clearer than yourself. Does that make him self righteous?'

Well runner the good lord has blessed me with such abilities. I see things much clearer every day. So in that sense, it's not really about rights, it's about my obligation to use these god given talents. Perhaps with our patience and leadership, pelican will one day be able to extricate herself from the clouded fog she appears to be in. With gods will of course.

BTW I will be giving to the Salvos, and not just via the traditoinal method of purchasing company tax free Sanatarium products. That Barren Julia will have to wait in line.

r0bert,

Really? I had the Chaplins as Obi Wan looking characters, or to be racially cool, that guy from Karate Kid that made the kid paint his fense and wax his car. That's always been my experience.

poirot,

Well, I'm not going to waste energy with such speculation. It would interefere with my Zen.

Hah! I think I got Poe'd! Got caught out because I had a similar argument thrown at me in earnest recently. Ignorance quickly drains my sense of humour. Ignorant bigotry makes me want to kill.

For the record...First time listener, first time poster.

"Ignorant bigotry makes me want to kill."
Welcome Warthog, and it is great to see a new poster with similar views to my own :)

Houellebecq <"Well runner the good lord has blessed me with such abilities. I see things much clearer every day. So in that sense, it's not really about rights, it's about my obligation to use these god given talents."
Lol Houellebecq! Glad to see you using your obvious talents for the good of mankind :)

@runner: It is clear that sexualisation of children is the fruit of secularism. ... You also seem to constantly miss the point that I have no righteousness of my own. My only righteousness comes from Christ.

Runner, you remind me of a quote I read elsewhere recently: its not God I dislike, its his fan club I can't stand.

rstuart

I really would be concerned if I had your approval.

runner,

Would you be concerned if you had anyone's approval??

You also seem to constantly miss the point that all your righteousness is your own.

I've not read all the posts here, but they seem to fall into 2 groups roughly:
The christians, who are still trying to hide the facts of the dishonest behaviours exposed, and still hold out the prospect of the writer coming to her senses and coming back to the church she left in obvious disgust (good luck), and
The non-christians, who are either glad the hypocrisy of the religious has been exposed (as long as it didn't extend to exposing their hypocrisy), or don't understand what all the fuss is about.
For me, the fuss is about the exposure these charlatans get in public schools, and it's of great importance. It not only lends them great legitimacy, it gives them an opportunity to make their arguements known, so that these arguements will be in peoples' memory at some time in the future. And if the memory is laid down early, it is all the more difficult to expose it and act against it. It's the difference between getting a good training in ethics, and hearing a lot of nonsense about miracles and rising from the dead. At times of stress, people need the former, not the latter, to fall back on.
Tax-payers' money must not be used by essentially dishonest people to pray upon others when they are vulnerable, getting them to accept a world-view which is harmful to their best interests.
The sooner all untrained, unskilled charlatans are out of our publicly funded institutions, including hospitals and prisons, and replaced by caring, well-trained professionals who will actually serve the public interest, the better.

Jane

You suggested that Jim Wallace's Anzac Day suggestion that gay marriage and Islam were not what Australians fought for was 'anti-gay and racist'. However neither gay marriage nor Islam are unambiguously good things - see 'Explaining Prohibitions on Gay Marriage to Children' and 'Bringing Balanced Understanding of Islam into Australian Schools'

http://cpds.apana.org.au/Teams/Articles/child_abuse.htm#6_11_10
http://cpds.apana.org.au/Teams/Articles/Babes.htm#12_7_10

You also suggested that Access Ministries was not being straight forward in relation to whether religious education programs in schools might be intended to create disciples. The reality is that anyone who believes that this is not the goal would have to be stupid (see 'Are Politicians Idiots?)

http://cpds.apana.org.au/Teams/Articles/values_in_schools.htm#13_5_11

However the political reality is that this pretence is unavoidable, because of general ignorance of the importance of widespread adherence to Christianity within the community to the maintenance of Australia's liberal institutions (including the notion of a secular state) - see 'Get God out of the Classroom: Good luck with that!)

http://cpds.apana.org.au/Teams/Articles/values_in_schools.htm#12_4_11

camo,
The role of Chaplains is not teaching religion. That is done by RE teachers. The role of Chaplains is to deal with children with problems and to model good character.

Philo,

That may be the role of chaplains as set out in official guidelines, However, reading Evonne Paddison's speech, one is given an insight into ACCESS ministry's aim.

"School ministry is happening in both state and church schools.....As I said, I'm involved in ACCESS ministries, how many times can I plug this? And we provide CRE teachers and chaplains in schools.....To minister to schools is cross cultural, and much of our thinking about minisry and schools has had the goal that our students will be contacted, converted and discipled in order to lift them up with the local church....the chaplain has every opportunity to be a facilitator and foster a youth church congregation. And I believe it is in this incarnational and relational way fresh expressions of student oongregations can be developed and provide the opportunity of discipling our youth."

And further on:

" I'm actually convinced that a great model for discipleship and for chaplaincy would be to have a chaplain curate in a local school with a view of starting a new congregation in a fresh expression."