There's just no denying it, bureaudroids protecting hypocrites !

Indy,
>Any religion that asks for donation is divorced from decency !

So how do you suggest they cover their costs?
Or do you imagine they somehow don't incur costs?

_____________________________________________________________________

Paul,
>Hillsong is actually a registered charity and not technically a church
Have you any actual evidence it's not technically a church?

_____________________________________________________________________

Armchair,
Hasn't Brian Houston already lost his job because of that?

Aidan,
There are no costs to cover in having faith !

Hi Aidan,

It's my understanding that all monies connected with 'Hillsong' are channelled through 'The Hillsong Foundation' a registered charity. And we're not talking small beer it runs into many, many, millions.

The message Hillsong would like everyone to believe is "Hillsong is a church that believes in Jesus, a church that loves God and people."

Before Jesus and again after people they should insert the word "money". There is also Hillsong International Ltd, not only do their tentacles wrap around locals, particularity youth and children, they have international reach as well. Make no mistake Hillsong is a well oiled financial money making machine. All in the name of God and Jesus of course, the "Saviour" wouldn't want it any other way.

Wilkie made his claims under parliamentary privilege ie he knows that the evidence just isn't there. If he was convinced of the accuracy of the accusations he'd walk outside parliament and make his claims.

Still, he didn't make the claims because he thought they were proven. He made them as fodder for his flying monkeys.

Jose,

"for a fair trial we cannot comment in a public place"...BUT I had no problem commenting here during the Lehrmann/Higgins trial, did you not. Sounds rather hypocritical.

mhaze,

A member should he/she use parliamentary privilege to attack a person or organisation without offering substantial evidence or foundation of wrong doing, then the house can censure that member for their actions. There is no possibility of censure in this case, as Wilkie tabled a mountain of documentary evidence at the time.

Who are these 'flying monkeys' you are referring to?