Pacific Islanders were once conquered and oppressed by the white man and his [misunderstanding of] religion. Now the author seeks to re-conquer them with the white man's irreligion.

In this game, they are the ball!

Folau is the religious equivalent of a flat earther and indoctrinated from birth to believe his religious claptrap. Richard Bramston tells a story, where he invites a highly placed flat earth official for a ride in one of his low orbit rocket ships.

Anyhow the ride is accepted and the invitee is glued to a porthole. Upon landing, Sir Richards enquires, and here I paraphrase, "what do you believe know"? Given the Flat earther had witnessed with his own eyeballs a round earth.

The flat earther apparently replied," the graphics were incredibly lifelike as were the special effects". And then walked away, his brainwashed from birth belief system unchanged.

Folau needs to read a bit and with regard to the work of world-class geneticist Alan Sanders and his peer-reviewed research that has discovered at least two confirmed genes that exist only in the gay population and at least three other probables?

. If He believes in a just and merciful God, and that his God created man in his own image. Then he has no choice but accept that that includes all the genetic variations.

To do any other means, he is no better than the brainwashed from birth flat earther and able to completely discount incontrovertible evidence of God's handiwork!
Alan B.

One can only conclude that what the secular bigots have always claim is a fairy tale, they now believe otherwise how could one be offended? The 'rationalist' are to irrational to see the contradiction in their bigotry.

It's always the people most ignorant of Christianity who criticise it the most.

Runner, you are blind to your own bigotry re ‘your’ Christianity’.

“In general, the more seriously Christianity is taken, the less pleasant it becomes. (This is equally true of all three Mid-Eastern religions.) Of course sub sects of Christians differ. At one extreme you  have the Unitarians, who believe that if God existed, He would be a force for community betterment. At the other extreme you have the Catholics at their worst, tearing people slowly limb from limb.

Christianity has a long and dismal history of oddball sects and heresies which often have fought bloody wars. Aryans, Cathars, Protestants, Mormons, Tai Pings, Moonies, Snake Handlers, Evangelicals. I have seen conservatives criticizing the Chinese for suppressing Christianity. The Chinese have their reasons. From 1850 to 1864 the Tai Pings, a truly screwy off-brand Christianity whose leader thought he was the little brother of Jesus, caused what may have been the bloodiest civil war in history. When leaders think they are on Whatsapp with God, they will do what they think He tells them. And if God says to smite Iran, smite Iran they will.

Grotesque torture as a  means of social control  was not limited to Mexico or Catholics. The history of Europe is a monstrous tapestry of barbarism by those three awful Mid-Eastern religions warring, butchering, burning heretics, the rack, strappado, The Jews behaved much less badly because ,lacking a country and an army, they had to. When they acquired these things, they began behaving like Christians and Moslems.”

So much for the virtues of Christianity!
Go figure.

yep Galen certainly the Catholic church's history is only surpassed by the god deniers such as Stalin, Mao and the current day baby murderers. I suspect you are blinded by your bigotry and selective version of history. And back to Israel's post!

They are all out there, and quite a few of them are on this subject as well. Fortunately we know who they are and they are more to be pitied than railed against.
David

Obviously Max Wallis, the author of this little piece of hateful bigotry against Christians, would not wish the real truth to escape. But it has. Here is a list of alternatives to the Christian way, he proposes by default:

Quote:
In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in Jamaica, Brian Camenker of MassResistance outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:[1]
1; Legalize homosexuality
2; Hold gay pride parades
3; Accept child sex trafficking
4; Demand non-discrimination laws
5; Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
6; Push the homosexual agenda in schools[2]
7; Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and three women, woman and box turtle, man and sex toy)
8; Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
9; Promote the transgender agenda
10; Demand to be treated "equally"
11; Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
12; Ban counselling for kids confused by homosexual issues
13; Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion, such as shock therapy
14; Attack churches
15; Encourage abortion

Christians are right to protest against it, and Folau is justified to add homosexuality into the mix of moral depravity, outlined in his quote from Christian scriptures.

Dan

These indoctrinated folk are never ever going to stop! Therefore all those that support their view from elected positions of power need to be removed!

And with them gone, cut all taxpayer funding from these same organisations. Least we forget the lives this BLIND bigotry and gay bashing persecution has taken, just as surely if it were their hands that knotted the rope etc!
Alan B.

.

Dear Max (the author),

.

Many thanks for that interesting historical and cultural background information on Israel Folau.

It certainly enlightens the debate and helps us put things in perspective.

Like everything else, religion is a mixed bag. It does a lot of good but, unfortunately, it also does a lot of harm – right and wrong – reflecting the ancient Chinese philosophical concept of dualism of the yin and the yang.

As long as the two cancel each other out and reach a point of equilibrium, I guess that’s about the best we can do.

No one can be expected to achieve the impossible.

.

.

Dear Runner,

.

The OED defines secularism as :

« the principle of separation of the state from religious institutions »
.

However, an article on the Federal Parliament website, adds :

« Secularism may refer to a worldview which stands in opposition to a religious or spiritual orientation.

In political theory, it refers to the principle of separating the institutions of politics from the institutions of religion. The latter sense is particularly relevant to a discussion of how the law deals with religious tradition. Secularism in this sense has been conventionally interpreted as meaning that mechanisms of the state must stand aloof from religious debates or support for particular religious traditions. For example, the state would not levy church taxes, give financial support to religious specialists, or erect religious qualifications for access to such areas as university entry or public office. The Australian expression of this convention is found in Section 116 of the Constitution ».

Section 116 of the Constitution provides that:

« 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 ».
.

Michael Hogan, Honorary Associate Professor, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney, observes :

« Religious freedom has value in the Commonwealth Constitution only in so far as the practice of such freedom does not offend against the accustomed community rights of other Australians. That this is the exact opposite of what could be expected from a provision guaranteeing religious freedom against the 'tyranny of the majority' has not concerned the High Court ».

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp9900/2000RP11#one

.

The illusion:

Gay - and have another drink - in the Chairman's Lounge.

Gay pride goes before the fall: Proverbs 16:18

The reality:

Gay - and perpetual indulgence - at the Mardi Gras.
Gay - and unspeakable depravities - on the dark web.
Gay - and STDs - at the specialist's surgery.
Gay - and anal cancer or Aids - in the hospice.

God will not be mocked: Galatians 6:7

It is always OK for any person to say, "I won't do that because of my religious beliefs": it is NEVER OK for any person to say, "You can't do that because of my religious beliefs".

Hi Galen,

“In general, the more seriously Christianity is taken, the less pleasant it becomes. (This is equally true of all three Mid-Eastern religions.)"

Yes, indeed, all three, although if you had to rank them through history, and adjust for the backward morality and human rights perceptions of the times, I would suggest that Christianity would be somewhere in the middle, with Judaism playing a comparatively minor role and more on the progressive side.

I'm just ploughing through a history of the 600-year Ottoman Empire, from its Central Asian tribal and pastoralist origins, to its much-belated overthrow by the Young Turks. I was surprised to discover that there were even more brutal invaders than the Ottomans, the Mongols (Genghiz Khan and Timur-the-Lame), but in defence of Islam, one could say that these were neophytes, late converts to Islam, still imbued with their pre-Islamic tribal/exterminationist ideology. For some reason, I always recall the total extermination of the population of Merv by Timur around 1400 (I can't help imagining them all with big moustaches), and then the near-extermination of the population of Baghdad and sundry other cities. Timur's early death must have been a sign from god, at least to the survivors.

As an atheist, I have no particular interest in any of the three, but I have to concede that all of us in the Western world, like it or not, more or less, built our particular moral compass largely on the basis of the more progressive aspects of Christianity and Judaism: perhaps Christianity was, after all, a natural progression on Judaism at the time. Certainly I've always been impressed with the parable of the Good Samaritan, it doesn't seem to have any parallels in Hinduism or Islam: to help someone NOT of one's own group. Not very Mediaeval either: maybe Mediaeval Catholicism was a back-sliding from earlier Christian teachings (that's what power does). Marx probably used to tear up at that story.

Joe

In an enlightened society, if you do not agree with a statement, the appropriate response is to:
1 ignore the comment
or
2 respond with a counter-argument.

In our post-enlightened society, if you do not agree with a statement, the appropriate response is to:
1 claim victim status
and
2 directed towards the person who made the statement > denigrate, abuse, insult, financially-attack, boycott, sue etc etc

*...It is always OK for any person to say, "I won't do that because of my religious beliefs": it is NEVER OK for any person to say, "You can't do that because of my religious beliefs".
Posted by Brian of Buderim, Friday, 10 May 2019 10:01:39 AM...*

Where that oversimplified logic falls apart, is in the counter-attack!

Dan

Max,

<<The Pacific has been the target of a conversion campaign that started in the nineteenth century and continues to this day.>>

Any person, no matter the nation, who is a faithful Christian will follow Jesus' command: "You must go and make disciples of all nations. Baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to obey everything I have commanded you. And you can be sure that I am always with you, to the very end" (Matt 28:19-20).

You may not like it, but evangelising The Pacific is just part of God's mandate to proclaim the Good News of salvation through Christ across the world.

<<Islanders were persuaded to abandon their own religions and convert. Lacking literacy, with no formal education, they were vulnerable.>>

The church of the first century lacked literacy skills and formal education. Oral tradition was its means of communication. Lack of literacy does not make one a non-thinker about eternal issues.

<<This is the context from which Israel Folau came to his views. Like so many of his colleagues, I suggest, he was indoctrinated when a child. His father is a pastor in his church. The family's history is one of devotion.>>

A Christian family that raises its family in the teachings of Christ is not engaged in indoctrination. To the contrary, it is being faithful to the Lord's instruction: "Fathers, don’t make your children angry. Instead, instruct them and teach them the ways of the Lord as you raise them".

A Christian father who is pastor of a church is being faithful to Scripture in raising his children with instruction in the ways of the Lord. That happens in Tongan and Australian Christian families. However, your post repudiates this Scripture.

<<He is one of the hundreds of thousands of targets of an indoctrination program that started two hundred years ago.>>

No, Max! It started 2,000 years ago and has led to approximately 2.2 billion followers of Christ. It's not indoctrination but being obedient to the teachings of the NT.

Max,

<<The Pacific has been the target of a conversion campaign that started in the nineteenth century and continues to this day.>>

Any person who is a faithful Christian follows Jesus' command: "You must go and make disciples of all nations. Baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt 28:19-20). This is proclaiming the Good News of salvation through Christ around the world and also in Tonga.

<<Islanders were persuaded to abandon their own religions and convert. Lacking literacy, with no formal education, they were vulnerable.>>

The church of the first century lacked literacy skills and formal education. Oral tradition was its means of communication. Lack of literacy does not make one a non-thinker about eternal issues.

<<Like so many of his colleagues, I suggest, [Folau] was indoctrinated when a child. His father is a pastor in his church. The family's history is one of devotion.>>

A Christian family that raises its family in the teachings of Christ is being faithful to the Lord's instruction: "Fathers, don’t make your children angry. Instead, instruct them and teach them the ways of the Lord as you raise them" (Eph 6:4). This happens in Tongan and Australian Christian families.

<<He is one of the hundreds of thousands of targets of an indoctrination program that started two hundred years ago.>>

No, Max! It started 2,000 years ago and has led to approximately 2.2 billion followers of Christ. It's not indoctrination but being obedient to the teachings of the NT.

<<may not save him from the possible financial debacle that his religion has brought him to.>>

Folau has stated that his relationship with Jesus is far more important than material reward. "First and foremost I live for God now", he said. See: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/my-head-is-held-high-folau-breaks-silence-after-code-of-conduct-hearing-20190508-p51l94.html