The Federal Government funds nearly 30 pregnancy counselling hotlines. All of them are run by pro-life organisations.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1716798.htm

Lateline broadcast this programme a couple of nights ago.
The transcript link is above.

People who had rung some of these so called "hotlines" were accused of being murderers and worse. None of these organisations seems to be providing genuine bipartisan advice. AFAIK, all pro-life groups have a religious agenda, with the Catholic Church heavily involved. The way I see it, taxpayers funds are effectively being used to promote a religious agenda! I think that stinks.

These deliberately deceptive so-called counselling services need setting up. Phone conversations need to be recorded and, if inappropriate tactics and/or language are used, these recordings should be aired through the media.

And personal consultations should be secretly recorded too. Then we'd find out for sure what kind of advice was being offered.

Tony Abbott is probably psychologically unable to admit to the deception. Or maybe he's so brainwashed that he can't even see it. What about 'Don't bear false witness'. It's amazing, isn't it, how religious control freaks selectively ignore this Commandment and instead seem to prefer 'the end justifies the means'.

False and/or deceptive advertising is supposed to be illegal in Australia. How about a simple statement like 'This is a counselling service which does not generally support abortion as an option, but is happy to advise on various other options'. But, just like shonky salespeople and confidence tricksters, they're not honest enough to simply tell the truth.

I'd be interested to know who all those services are. Seems extraordinary if it is true that they are all pro-life.

But I don't think this is an issue about religion per se. It would be a pretty poor world if the only ideology that wasn't allowed in politics was religion! I think the issue is one of transparency and inclusiveness.

I agree about transparency and inclusiveness. The question for me
is how far religious ideology should be allowed to influence
members of Govt, in their decisionmaking for the rest of us.

Lets say that the Health Minister was a JW. Upon ringing Govt
funded Health Councelling services, people were told that blood
transfusions were evil and people should not have them. There
would be a huge outcry! If the Health Minister was a Muslim
and some Islamic ideology was being promoted, there would similarly
be a huge outcry!

The Catholic Church is an extremely political organisation, on
a worldwide scale. Every pro-life group that I have checked out,
has led back to them. Are these councellors qualified? What
about deceptive advertising? I have no problem with freedom of
religion, but I also believe in freedom from religion, for those
of us who think its hogwash.

It seems that there is a bit of a development on this story.
My politics is issue based, not party based. I've often been
a critic of Natasha, but this time I think she got it right,
trying to introduce truth of advertising into the "pregnancy
councelling" industry. After all, any company that falsely
advertises it's goods or services, is soon dragged over the coals.

That was the point of Natasha's bill, but the way I read it,
it was canned by a liberal member, who has received funding
from the Right to Life mob. The conspiracy deepens!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/mp-who-felled-abortion-ad-bill-funded-by-lobby/2006/08/19/1155408071255.html

Greens Senator Kerry Nettle has some interesting things to say on this:
http://www.kerrynettle.org.au/300_campaigns_sub.php?&deptItemID=41

This is why the alleged deceptive advertising is not investigated:
'In October last year Kerry wrote to Mr Graeme Samuel of the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) asking him to investigate whether misleading or deceptive practices of particular pregnancy counselling services were in breach of the Trade Practices Act.

The ACCC replied that as these services do not charge fees for the counselling they provide, they are outside the jurisdiction of the Trade Practices Act.'

Seems that if you're giving away the 'counselling' equivalent of snake oil, rather than selling it, then you can get away with it!

And this is how to separate the honest counselling services from the deceptive ones:
'Click here for the latest online version of the Greens Online Guide to Pregnancy Counselling Services

If you would like to be sent hard copies of the Guide please contact my office on 02 9690 2038 or send your request including your postal address and the amount required via email to: Senator.Nettle@aph.gov.a'

The simple FACT is.....

Politics is a reflection of the values candidates (and therefore their supporters) stand for.

The 'flavor' of our political environment will always be (and should be) dynamic...in flux..

Yabby said:

The question for me
is how far religious ideology should be allowed to influence
members of Govt, in their decisionmaking for the rest of us.

And for me, as a member of this great democracy and a Christian, the question is.. the same, but substitute "Secular/Atheist" for "Religious Ideology" in Yabbys question.

Yabbs... please note your important words "Be allowed" ? whoah ! Are we talking Gulags for those pesky uppity Christians who don't know their place ? :) but.. see below

Yes, lets have transparency, and to the extent that it does not threaten our morality and freedom, sure let's 'include'.... but responsibly. To me that word 'responsibly' has definite ethical/moral/social and political overtones. Such is life. Hence my statement 'in flux'.

I agree that Government should not make any law 'proscribing' a particular Christian denomination as 'the way' but at the same time, I have even MORE reservations about a government that was open to the facilitation of pressures to "re-brand" the social texture of this country in terms of 'tolerance' of a few billion dollars of Oil money being used to build a massive mosque next to St Pauls Cathedral which dwarfs it, specifically to send a message of 'dhimmification' to the community and the world.

To be blunt, I would not allow ANY major move like that by any non Christian religion to alter the fundamental historical cultural posture of this country. To do so would alienate the majority of people and feed Ethno Religious strife of unimaginable proportions.
(Lambing Flat?)

We only need look at the UK to see how oil money is being used to "Islamize" England by stealth. If it were not for the very nature of Political Economic Islam, and the increasingly shrill cries of "Turn England into an Islamic State" FROM the Islamic community, I would worry a lot less. Ultra modern Mosque for 40,000 People?

In the NSW Parliaqment the two most trusted politicians by both sides of government are the Rev Fred Nile and the Rev Dr Gordon Moyes. Why? Because they are unbiased and balanced in their approach. They lead most of the Public inquiries into assumed failures by the State. Neither are lawyers but are diverse in experience with issues of care for people.

In the recent intention of the sale of the Snowy Scheme [Public inquiry headed by Rev Dr Gordon Moyes] though the Greens actively opposed the sale they voted against a proposal to hold a referendum before such public assets be sold.

Again in the Lane Cove tunnel [inquiry headed by Rev Fred Nile] Fred proposed that no changes be made to Epping Highway before the tunnel was opened to acess if Epping Highway could be reduced because of traffic reductions; the Greens voted against such a proposal. The three lanes will be reduced to one and one bus lane. Who is showing care for the will of the people? Who has their own agenda for bus only roads or are assisting the Private Developers for huge windfall of profits.

Yes Yabby I was most concerned to hear that the Federal government had funded 30 abortion counselling services that were tied back indirectly to the Catholic Church. I was most disturbed to hear the experiences of young women who had rung for help. These women all reported high levels of emotional abuse at a time of personal crisis.
How dare God botherers interfere in other people's fertility.

More insidious is Tony Abbott's insistence that abortion counselling and abortion be identified by an easily recognisable item number so that anyone looking at the medicare database can quickly identify every wicked woman in Australia.

This will be a real worry with the development of the Smart Card which will store all sorts of information about the card holder. Imagine the slatternly slobs in Centrelink being able to view your medical history. It's bad enough that they give the wrong information then pursue individuals like the hounds from hell to repay overpayments [that were their mistake in the first place] but to be able to pass moral judgement over their clientele. Oops customers. I don't think so!

How terrible it is that a political [philosophical / idiology / religion] system has personal values imposed as laws!

Could you please define what is meant by the word politics?

The thing is Philo, we live in a rational world. If you say go to
court, to prove your case you need evidence for instance.
Thats the reality.

The problem with religion is that it tells us to forget about the
rational, to have faith in whatever supernatural claims are made
by that particular religion. The supernatural claims differ between
religions, but none of them have any substantiated evidence for
their claims.

When people with supernatural beliefs, suggest that I forget the
rational and have faith in their claims, to then follow laws
based on those claims, I will protest loudly!

For a society to function, we need freedom of religion, to protect
the religious, but also freedom from religion, to protect the non
religious.

Just as you don't want Islamic law imposed on you, I don't want
Catholic law to be imposed on me. Both Catholics and Muslims should
be free to practise their religions, but should respect the rights
of others, who think its all hogwash. Any other society will not
be a tolerant society and without tolerance there will be nothing
but warfare within society.

Yappy,

Consistency isn't your strong point, is it? You support a secular Australia, don't like religious tyrannies, are against Christian (esp Catholic) states and abhor Islamic ones. Yet you're more than happy with the concept of a Jewish state in Palestine.

Well Strewthy, I guess its my kind of sense of justice coming out.
If you read history, Medina had a lot of hardworking Jewish farmers,
old Muhammed slaughtered the lot, apart from those he took as slaves.

IMHO Islam is a bit like the Catholics, they always wants more,
until they have the whole earth conquered, facing Mecca five times
a day. One or two holy sites is not enough, they want more more more.

At least the Jews don't want to force the world to face Jerusalem
5 times a day, and arn't really into converting the world. There
are a mere umm about 8 million of them. Most secular Jews would in
fact get on fine with everyone else ( I admit the Jews have a few
fanatics too). Most secular jews probably would not have a problem
with a secular state. But of course they are fully aware that
given half a chance, their country would soon be converted to an
Islamic state and they would be kicked out, as they have everywhere
else, including from Medina. So why not leave them their little
patch of dirt? It will eventually most likely become a secular state, which is unlikely to happen to Saudi Arabia and other
Islamic republics.

Hypocrite!

Put it this way Strewthy, a secular State by stealth is better then
yet another Islamic republic!

And delusional.

Er Yabby,

You are aware that the reason Israel gets so much of its support from the USA is because of all the right wing evangelists who believe in the second coming? And that Israel bases its claim to exist on the bible?

What makes you think it will remain secular? I'm not so sure it really is, given the zionism underpinning much of its policies. Seems you're just picking sides, as in choosing the lesser of two evils:

Judeo/christianity = bad versus Islam = really bad.

Therefore, I can understand why Strewth has accused you of a certain hypocrisy here.

Just an observation, my friend.

Scout, I know what you are saying, but I have at times also
followed the debate going on within Israel over time, usually
as reported in the Economist.

What became apparent is then when Israel is not fighting with
people who want to turn it into an Islamic republic and drive
them into the sea, within Israel there are quite large tensions
between the orthodox religious and the secular. The majority
of Israelis seem to support the secular model, just a small
% are religious fanatics.

My conclusion is that if you moved all secular Israelis and
Arabs into one country and all religious fanatics somewhere
else, the secular types would most likely get on just fine!

Religious fundamentalism is the real problem, no matter which
religion it seems.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5309376.stm

There ya go Strewthy ! At least the Jews are not after
your infidel blood :)

The profundity of the man's thought, the sweep of his vision...truly awesome!

I wish this god would bloody come and get on with it and choose the ones he wants to become immortal so they can poke tongues and say "Told Ya He Liked Us Better, So There" and make the ones who didnt behave too badly stay here on this earth to do detention and write lines for a hundred years before he decides to love us or leave us to be dammed and mortal.

Or maybe the space ships will return and take us to Ork or Supermans home planet.
It is getting as good as The Young and the Restless. Now that is true damnation to be made to watch reruns for eternity.
Yes I am blasphemous, but it is my soul that will burn so it wont matter to anyone else. I am also tired of going to countries every 3 months and picking through the carcasses of your loved ones who hated their neighbours and their piece of dirt more than they loved their god and doing what they could to prepare their hearts for his coming. Anyone who believes a life is worth less than a stone can make no excuse for why they hate them to make it justifiable to me. I go over for my love of what we could be and not what we allow ourselves to be.

When will people admit politicts and religion are synonymous for views of reality. One is not the opposite of the other: or exclusive of the other.

For instance: example - how we view environment will determine our views of town planning and development. Secularists wish for huge complex cities because of economic reasons; of 6,000 - 10,000 persons per hectare in the City. As a Christian my view is for community planning of not more than 60 - 100 persons per hectare in confined Cities. People are of more value in community than in isolation in huge high rises.

It is what we view as principle values will determine how we plan our lives.

Philo, you are stretching things a bit, talking about Christianity,
town planning and what Xtians think. Your view is just yours, not
the view of your religion.

Some of the greatest environmentalists, who say that one can't
just keep crowding more and more people onto the planet, are in
fact secular people.

The Catholic Church OTOH, a Christian religion IIRC, keeps wanting
to cram more millions onto the planet, bugger the environment.
All very sad really.

Philo

You cannot even claim what other christians want. You can only claim what YOU want.

In the same vein, your statement: "Secularists wish for huge complex cities because of economic reasons"

Is completely lacking in validity, not all secularists want the same thing anymore than all christians. Again you are assuming things over which you have absolutely no idea.

For example, while Yabby, Ludwig and myself have been arguing for sustainable living (which flies in the face of your claim about 'huge, complex cities') we hold different ideas on how this can be achieved.

Your assumptions are limiting your abilities to learn and grow. Just as sharia law or christian ideology can limit our society and our politics from progress and evolution.

Scout,
Obviously you overlooked a very important word "example". It was merely an example on how I think as a religious person about social environment. I did not state it as an absolute of all people who call themselves Christian, however the Christians I mix amongst view town planning the same as myself.

Society is about living in community, not merely economics. Jesus emphasised the concept of less complex communities and its spiritual values over placing the evils of mammon [economics] as the goal of living. Complex high rise cities increases the spread of human diseses, immorality, human disfunction and crime.

Politics means how a society is governed by the values dominant in the society. That people of faith must be denied their view of how society is governed is not democracy but borders on totalitarianism. Where the will of atheists are imposed upon people of faith as in Russia, China etc.

Obviously you believe in evolution is the ultimate answer to the human condition so you desire your views be imposed on society. I ask how many children have you to contribute to the future evolutionary programme. If your answer is none then obviously you are not a link in the programme of evolution. So you ought not put too much faith in evolution as the answer.

Philo

Obviously if you use an "example" it needs to have a basis in fact. Obviously now that your spurious claims have been found out you are trying to wriggle out of your blanket claims about secularists.

And you don't stop there. Now you are putting words into my mouth. I don't believe that economics will solve everything. As a matter of fact I believe in community effort which is why I am currently engaged in a grass roots level campaign seeking humane conditions for animals.

Community is another reason why I live where I do. We are a very cohesive group in the Dandenong ranges - there is a wide mix of people from christians through to pagans and athiests like myself. I know I can trust any of my neighbours - they too reflect the mix of beliefs. We help each other. We don't preach or judge. Something for you to reflect upon, Philo.

At present it is christianity that has become dominant in our political system. Clearly, you are both happy and complacent about this inequitable imbalance.

I posit that you would not be so lackadaisical about this situation if Tony Abbott's name was Mohamed Abdul and his policies reflected sharia law. I imagine that you would be most upset that an Australian government had a preference for islamic beliefs.

This is why separation of church and state is absolutely vital. A democracy doesn't function for a particular religious ideology - a democracy is for all the people.

So I see you uphold only atheists have a right to democratic decisions. Get real! Democracy must represent all views otherwise it is totalitarian.

You continually despise Tony Abbott but obviously people are not influenced by your opinion and continue to support him. You have a right to express an opinion but not a right to impose your views on how we are governed if your view does not represent the majority of people.

The seperation of Church and state has nothing to do with keeping religious views out of politics it has to do with keeping the Government out of promoting a religion. That is Government cannot promote or enforce any particular religion upon the people. Read the constitution.

We have freedom of expression of ideas under our constution and that also applies in Government. Of course you only support left wing atheists and the PC brigade as worthy politicians. I will continue to oppose Governments who impose laws I disagree with; that is the nature of democracy. If Tony Abbott's arguments are believed in the Chamber over his opponents that is democracy at work. When ideas are restricted that is totalitarian.

On Saturday, an article in The Weekend Australian (2-3/9/06, p 21) revealed
the embarrassment of the Australian Democrats, whose online survey on "God
and Government" resulted in 40,000 responses, overwhelmingly "pro-church".

The article said a normal response to such surveys is just 1000.

However I'm not expecting the "God and Government" survey results to be
trumpeted on the Democrats website any time soon!

Will you STOP making assumptions about what I believe! You do not know me at all! MR JUDGEMENTAL PHILO.

I mean stating things like: "So I see you uphold only atheists have a right to democratic decisions."

NO I DON'T

Do you know what a democracy is?

I don't think you do.

At present we have an imbalance of extreme right wing christians governing for all.

BTW I don't always disagree with Tony Abbott - he has made some decisions I agree with such as the recent release of the cancer treatment. It is when his religious beliefs interfere with medical treatment for people - such as RU486, that I and many other people, including christians take issue.

Philo not all christians agree with you. Many Australians identify with christianity - that doesn't mean that they want literalist interpretations of the bible as government policy. For example (a real example) we don't do 'the eye for an eye' barbarity anymore. Many christians are pro-choice. Many christians believe that locking up refugees is cruel. Many christians hold completely different views to you Philo.

As I stated, you are happy to go along with people like Abbott because they espouse the same extreme conservative views as you.

I agree that limiting ideas is very regressive - this is why I try to learn from ALL ideologies rather than just limiting myself to a narrow perspective on just one. I look for the good in all.

Finally you have failed to respond to my point that if Abbott was Abdul you would be shrieking from the highest hill that religion had crept into politics.

Tax payers

I cant belive I am saying this but for once I agree with Yabby.

Mind you I still dont reckon its a blokes topic but what the hell.
Found all the old Cross Dressers again. Hows it going Philo.

We have a right to know their funds are being hanled in a fair manner. I dont think employing 30 Church groups to assist women in a difficult time is doing that.

We all know Churches push their own agenda. What about employing 15 Church groups and 15 athiests.?

Surley thats fair.

.

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/17809.htm

David (Boaz)
You do seem to have a bee in your bonnet about 'Oil money being used to promote Islamic culture'.
I can only assume you ride a bicycle and refuse to contribute to their funding.
I am constantly amused to see George, Johnnie and friends rattling on about the Islamic terrorists while they refuse to reign in their nations' addiction to Arabic oil.

On the other hand they are quite happy to pour billions of dollars into the Israeli economy, fly in heavy weapons, fighter plans, tanks and cluster bombs.
Seems like they are having a bob each way, supporting both sides of the Middle Eastern fratricide.

David, just be thankful that the immigrants to Australia came in quietly and unarmed.
Your mates of Anglo/Celtic history usually arrived with swords slashing and coffers open, ready to grab anything that sparkled.
Ask the Indians, on both the sub continent and the Americas, ask the Africans, the Arabs and the Chinese about the Anglo/Celtic respect for other's culture.

Of course we are still at it.

The only reason the West is rich and strong is that we are plundering the natural and mineral resources of poorer, weaker countries.

We control them with crippling debt backed by naked aggression. Our mega corporations corrupt their rulers, sell them military toys, 'development schemes and private luxury. In return we ask their hungry citizens to grow cash crops for us.

There is no high moral ground from which we can preach David.

What we can do is pull back the curtain of hypocrisy created by our corporate leaders, their puppet governments, hired media moguls and religious propogandists.

This is no black armband view of history. It is a clear statement of the sorry mess the human race is in. Our rulers tell us we are free, and we are. Free to starve on the streets if we don’t have a tidy inheritance, sell our soul to the corporations or run on the treadmill of credit card slavery.

I hope you can eat your jingoism. Very soon it may be all we have left.

accent,
I read the same diatribe on the Lacemba Muslim Youth website. Of course all Western Democratic free countries are greedy and warlike - well that is your opinion. The fact is you are the enemy of freedom that wishes to impose left wing Islamic totalitarianism upon democratic governments.

nice Philo,
Could you elucidate that 'fact' a little more clearly so an old Anglo/Celtic simpleton might have some inkling of your logic?

"The fact is you are the enemy of freedom that wishes to impose left wing Islamic totalitarianism upon democratic governments."

Hey, Philo, this is the kind of statement which a deranged suicide bomber might make, just before he sent himself and sundry others to wherever he imagined he and they were all destined for.

Or maybe just a throw away line from Faulty Towers!

Yabby..you are right on the money about these socalled hotlines.....they are manned by prolife advocates and freely let you know that they are not impartial..nor are they there for you...they are there to 'change your mind' to put it nicely..

No it would not surprise me at all if they actually called women murders and the like....

They are next to useless and only complicate a siuation that is already fraught with guilt and anguish..

Thats the church for you...again.

OZGIRL,
Unless you have used these counselling services; You ought to get accurate knowledge because you are self opiniated rather than factual. Shooting off the top of your head conclusions about pregnancy counselling services of which you know nothing does not enhance your authority.

I've never needed to talk to a pregnancy counselling service, Philo, for two obvious reasons.
1. As a man, I can't get pregnant.
2. I've never fathered an unwanted child.
But that doesn't mean I don't understand the difference between Pro-choice and Anti-choice.

It is the duty of a Pro-choice counselling service to discuss the various options, in a sensitive, but straightforward, non-judgemental way.
It is [to them] the God-given duty of an Anti-choice counselling service to save the embryo at all costs and perhaps also to save a wicked woman from eternal damnation from a vindictive superpower.

Under the circumstances, how can any woman get impartial counselling from an Anti-choice service?

""
oh my God I am going to use this for my TV adds!
Your going to be famous G Y

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
But I don't think this is an issue about religion per se. It would ""be a pretty poor world if the only ideology that wasn't allowed in politics was religion! I think the issue is one of transparency and inclusiveness.
Posted by GrahamY, Saturday, 19 August 2006 12:19:05 PM

The lord is my Shepherd and a good Shepherd lays down his life for his sheep.
>
These are just a few of your quotes that you DONT want posted on the church Turns its back On Animal Welfare Responsibility forum

Your a Hypocrite Grahmam Y

SHAME ON YOU AND CHURCH LEADERS

Ozgirl Any bloke who hangs out talking about womens personal biz is 'Off'

You wont get anywhere with this bunch of loosers. Anyway Yeh contact me..
0755392369

oh by the way there is a thing called a tape recorder Philo.

The only people who would go to some place like these so called servises are ladies with problems by being pregnant.

So if a lady has a problem shes mostly going to be looking for a way out of the problem
Silly really when you think of it.
However its clearly another Church Government kick back like the AWB and the blood money we pay to send millions of animals on death ships.
All this while these Dicks talk about iF or iF not something thats not even! born should be made to enter this terrible world.

A world where millions of people are suffering and starving to death.

A unsafe world by your own predictions.

Think about it.

The only reason this lot post here is they hate women and hate even more women have stopped allowing men to control them.

See you onboard Yappy. That is! if you can draw yourself away from this terribly! interesting forum.

Yo Ozgirl perhaps G Y and Philo could join Yappy and Cameron on the Cruise ship.

What do you reckon Ozgirl?

A question for Philo

A woman is in your care. She is 8 weeks pregnant.

She is emphatic that she does not want to continue the pregnancy.

She is absolutely distraught.

There is no way she wants to have a baby.

She needs help to go to a doctor who can abort the foetus.

Do you help her?

Straight answer please. No fudging.

Yes?

or

No?

Scout,
If a woman has an eight week feotus and she does not want it she will not seek counselling she will seek a doctor who will perform her wish.

Women who are confused or being pressured by parents, boyfriends or husband will seek assistance to determine her options. Counsellors will not make her decisions for her, they present options. However left wing population protagonists will advise an abortion is the best option. They do not have the care services in place to assist those who wish to give birth to a child.

Rex,
I will never need counselling services myself, however I know mature caring and balanced women who are family counsellors. In fact two women in my life have cared for birth mothers who are going through the painful decision of whether to adopt their child or mother the child herself. Ive been involved by caring for fostering infants in the period of the mother making her decision from three days adoption or to fostering till six months. The fact is some of the mothers when witnessing the care of my wife made the decision to seek the care ministries of my Church in the raising of her child.

It is disturbing that the passions of persons like Wendy could not be equally focused upon the need of care for abused children. A foetus at eight weeks has all its human features, nerve system and heartbeat. They feel the pain also.

Thank you for your reasoned response, Philo.

I believe that every pregnancy counselling service should be prepared to discuss, in a balanced, non-judgemental manner, the full range of legal options. And any which are found to be not doing this should be warned and, if they keep on not providing the service they are supposed to give, barred from working in this field.

As far as I am concerned, being unreasonably pressured into having an abortion is just as bad as being unreasonably pressured into not having one.

I have no doubt that many very caring people work for Pro Life agencies. But I suggest that their deeply held religious beliefs make them virtually incapable of discussing abortion as an option in a totally impartial way.

I will draw a comparison. I have friends who are Jehovah's Witnesses. They are some of the nicest people anyone could wish to meet and, in business, almost unbelievably honest. But, quite obviously, they could not be put in charge of a blood transfusion unit.

When it comes to having a personal cause to be passionate about, well it's a good thing that our priorities are not all the same. There are many worthy causes and charities in the world. If we all chose the same one to campaign for and support financially, well one would get the lot and all the others would go short. I believe that you are a charitable person at heart, Philo. May I suggest that you try to recognise the charity which exists in the hearts of others.

Philo, the thing is that the Catholic Church, coming from the papa
himeself, has ackowledged that it cannot deliver objective abortion
councelling, its against their religion basically.

This became a really big issue in Germany:

http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_comm7.asp

So its really frawd to call it councelling, for its highly biased,
with a religious agenda, not what they claim to be. I disagree with
you that women at week 8 don't need advise and know exactly what they
want. They need to be presented with all options, in an unbiased way, not pushed and shoved towards a religious agenda.

Scout, given Wendy's tirades, outburts and abuse of various subscribers on here, perhaps you could counsel her on anger management, the ability to separate emotion from reason, or just
buy her a copy of Goleman's "Emotional Intelligence." :) People
debating on here are not 5 year olds and should not behave like they
were. We can agree to disagree, based on rational arguments,
but unreasoned emotional outburts which take on the role of the
pathetic, are just a waste of space quite frankly. As her friend
perhaps you could help her a bit there

Philo

My question was "would you assist by transporting the pregnant woman to an abortion medic?"

Yes or no

And you fudged, yet again.

Yabby - perhaps if you refrained from personal abuse (ie constant references to Wendy's uterus) you might find she responds a little less agressively.

This world is neither fair nor unfair, benign or malignant; it simply is.

We may hold deeply felt beliefs, and that’s fine. A mark of maturity is realising that we cannot impose our beliefs; our will upon others.

I asked Philo an unfair question, knowing well that he is opposed to abortion; I asked him if he would help a pregnant woman, who vehemently wanted an abortion, by taking her to a doctor who could perform the abortion for her.

With Philo’s predictable response, I have proven that he would impose his beliefs and desires over that of the woman’s.

Philo puts his desires above that of others.

This is a mark of immaturity.

It is also controlling the destiny of others against their will. Therefore, it is about power.

3 years ago, I sat in a veterinarian’s consulting room while he put my elderly cat to sleep. My cat still had a strong heart, good eyesight and hearing, he wasn’t crippled by arthritis; in fact he had a good life. He also had an inoperable tumour in his throat. My desire was for him to live. But, to do nothing would’ve meant that my cat would’ve died slowly of aphixiation, so against my will I held his head in my hand while the vet euthanised my cat.

As I stated at the beginning of this post, the world is neither fair nor unfair; benign or malignant.

It is only our behaviour that can be either, we can treat ourselves and others with respect or we can choose to impose our beliefs upon others.

We create our own good or evil. We are responsible for our own actions. We are not responsible for the actions of others. All we can do is offer our support for whatever decisions others may make – whether we agree or not. We CAN offer an opinion, but that is all we can do; we are not gods, we do not impose control over others.

I would like to believe that Philo would read these words and consider his actions towards others in future.

Scout, I was not even thinking of her comments to me, but to others
like Graham and Philo actually. Going over the top, wearing her
heart on her sleeve, is a reflection on her, not on me, but it was
time that somebody pointed it out to her, for IMHO it makes
her look fairly foolish.

BTW, the uterus is at the core of the US abortion debate, where
partial abortions etc take place. Its also part of any discussion
on biology or medicine, so frankly I think you are rather
misinformed to link it to abuse. Queen Victoria died a long time
ago now, we discuss things openly and honestly in 2006.

Yabby

At least I have A heart.

Scout
As you probably guessed come on here in the search of good christians to confront regarding their absence regarding animal welfare while at they same time talking about womens biz.

Hypicrits. They usually take off as you can see with Graham.

However according to pig farmer I should not be posting anywhere other than your forum and that of Scouts.

Dont ask me why. I am sick of getting a kick in the bum when I try hard to help people.

Thanks for trying to say something to Yabby about his way of speaking to me.

It does upset me but I suspect he talks like that because he doesnt like me so he wishes to upset.

Never Mind I will be putting him on the ship soon.
Just arranging the papers.

Its taking a bit longer because I have to get another licence through compliance because of those three charges against us in the other companies name for animal cruelty.

Still Yabby will be on his way soon. I think I will take him to the dock in person.

That will be my last post.

There was a discussion on Sunrise this morning which I half missed before getting out of the door.
It was about "inside a religious sect" and about what influence this particular sect/cult, called Exclusive Brethren, has on politics.
These people seem mad- I find it hard to believe that even this crazy sect are able to actually influence our politicians by funding the ones who agree with their stands. This is pretty bad if it is true!
Not too many people know about this as they seem to cover their tracks very well.

I found some other article on them when I googled them just now:

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1461155.htm

Has anyone watched the full discussion? I'm finding it interested to find out more about these weirdo's.

Celivia,
In case you had not realised these people are of the highest moral order of society. They own large furniture, food, and clothing manufactuing throughout the Western world. They have equal and legitimate rights to contribute to political Parties in which they believe uphold their moral values. They are no different to Major Businesses making legitimate funds available to political Parties.

I have worked for some and they are decent people. That you wish to degrade them without any facts indicates the poor morality of you stand.

Philo, the Bretheren might be up your moral alley, but I too have
lots of questions about them. Apparently there will be a 4 corners
programme next week, telling us more.

By what I've heard and know so far, they are into brainwashing and
mind control, much like the JWs. I abhor those techniques, no matter
who they are practised by. But I shall wait to learn more from the
4 corners programme.

Philo, Exclusive Brethren may be good business people, but as a religious group I wouldn’t call them of the highest moral order.

Bob Brown called them un-Australian for some of the following reasons. http://greens.org.au/mediacentre/mediareleases/senatorbrown/040906c/
They:
* ban married women from the workplace.
* ban all women from jobs where they are not subservient to men
* ban unions from workplaces under Howard's IR legislation
* ban all children from university education
* forbid voting and military service (there would not necessarily be anything wrong with that if it wasn’t for the fact that they contradict themselves. They say that God makes politics, men shouldn’t. That’s why they don’t vote.
Uhmmm but they bugger the Greens, fund anti-greens etc.

Is it not against their own church rules which dictate to leave politics to God- yet now they pump large amounts of money in politics?

Do they think that God can’t handle politics all by himself and are giving God a helping hand (offering handsful of money)?
I think they might have started out like an normallish cult (as far as cults can be normal) just wanting a ‘pure and simple’ life, but they are turning more and more perverted.

Don’t forget that they are also extremely homophobic- perhaps that’s the main reason they hate the Greens. Either that, or they don't like a cleaner environment.

Don’t forget that they don’t even read papers, or allow computers in their schools.
They also do not want their kids to go to Uni. Why not? They might learn about reality and be poisoned by the world? Is that the reason?

If memebrs have a fallout with their church, they are not only banned from their church but also banned from contacting their families! How moral is that?

High morality? Perhaps in principle, I don't know that- but not in reality. They're only as moral as their last actions!

I think they may be under investigation now so hopefully the truth will come out.

Yabby, "Apparently there will be a 4 corners programme next week, telling us more."

Thanks for letting us know. I hope I won't miss that program! Can't wait to see it! I have lots of questions as well.

Celivia.
You have exposed yourself by aligning your belief in the authority of Bob Brown on morality. Of the Australian population only 8% would agree with the principles of morality espoused by Brown. He is merely the spokes person for an extremist minority group wishing to subvert Australian culture, morals and social values. He stands in a juxtaposition to the normal and traditional morality that birthed Australian society. That is the reason why the Exclusive Brethren are arousing from their secluded lives, because Bob Brown now threatens the security and stability of our society. Four Corners is equally subversive so it will pander to your opinion.

Your quote: "Bob Brown called them un-Australian for some of the following reasons. http://greens.org.au/mediacentre/mediareleases/senatorbrown/040906c/
They:
* ban married women from the workplace.
* ban all women from jobs where they are not subservient to men
* ban unions from workplaces under Howard's IR legislation
* ban all children from university education
* forbid voting and military service (there would not necessarily be anything wrong with that if it wasn’t for the fact that they contradict themselves. They say that God makes politics, men shouldn’t. That’s why they don’t vote.
Uhmmm but they bugger the Greens, fund anti-greens etc."

Philo, why do you think that banning children from university is highly moral?
Why is banning married woman from the workplace highly moral?
Why is banning unions from workplaces without consulting their staff highly moral?

You say: “That is the reason why the Exclusive Brethren are arousing from their secluded lives, because Bob Brown now threatens the security and stability of our society. “

So if I’m correct, this is your (and Exclusive Brethren’s) logic:

1. Exclusive Brethren (EB) may not involve themselves in politics because politics is God’s job. This is their basic rule and the reason they are not allowed to vote, watch tv, read newspapers etc.

2. But because the Greens are opposing EB’s morals, suddenly there is an exception: it is now not God’s job anymore and the EB take over, snatching away politics from God.
Perhaps God meant to include the Greens in politics- otherwise he wouldn’t have let this happen, would he?
Now EB are playing God because they didn’t think God’s decision was good enough, or because they think God is powerless against the Greens and he needs help to hurt the Greens- help from EB, of course.

3. Politics are only God’s job if politics do not contradict EB morals.

Hmmmmmm…
This is too funny, Philo, can I have some more of your logic to entertain myself with?

"Four Corners is equally subversive so it will pander to your opinion."

What about simply the truth, about the weird things they believe in
and how they use mind control and brainwashing to keep followers
inline?

I had a guy who worked for them deliver some gear to me one day.
No radio allowed in the truck, sounds like they are evil too lol.

I think when it comes to reasoning, Celivia left you in your
underpants with her last post Philo :)

Are they allowed to wear underpants, Philo?

I was just in the middle of reading about their spiritual and emotional abuse. I think Yabby might be right about their mind control.

Outsiders are only shown the positive side of this cult and because their system is not based on the truth they cannot allow questions, attacks or open discussions about issues. Leaders will keep secrets from their members. The person or interviewer (Four Corners etc) will no doubt become more of a problem for EB than the issue itself!

This will be enjoyable!
I am looking forward to this Four Corners discussion more by the minute!

Luckily, their members will never know about this program and the truth as they are not allowed to watch TV, listen to the radio, read newspapers or novels and owning a computer is especially evil!

What disturbes me most is that they exclude members who have offended against the church and those excluded are prevented from having contact with their family members because they are afraid to be contaminated with their worldly views.
There are grandparents who have never seen their grand children. Don't you think that is sad, Philo?

These are their so-called highly moral principles.

Now we have the hill-billies AND this EB clan sticking their cult-claws into Australian politics.

We have a large community of Exclusive Brethren in my local area. Many who have left the EB community now attend local churches. Their upbringing might have been strict, but they are the most gentle of people I know, and I have worked for and with a few.

It appears several here want to get their hostile mind and claws into these families and controll them with their own subversive agendas. The only way to help these people develop is by care and love. Not like the Bob Browns of this world whose agenda is ridicule and political controll.

I suggest the Greens look at the number of radical Muslims in their membership and deal with them, because they want political control by Government. The Exclusive Brethren will never join the membership of any political Party, but they have a right to lobby for support of their families as that is their democratic right.

Philo
Your last comment was very sensible.
I have no doubt at all that the members of EB are basically gentle and nice people. I feel really sorry for the ones that got sucked in at a low point in their lives by such a cult/sect. A cult's leader or certain members of a cult may be very charismatic and seductive and not everybody can see through such dishonesty and wackiness.

I think that it is a very good thing that the members who left now attend local churches- I assume they need some support. Many were bullied and emotionally or spiritually abused.
I agree that members, especially the ones who left EB need love and care and I am glad that local churches can provide that for them.
This abuse of EB may come out tonight on Four Corners.

My point is not to attack the members, especially not the ones who left.
My point is to criticise the cult and leader(s) of this cult for what they do to their members. The sooner this cult will fall apart, the better it is for their members.

I don't think people on here don't want to "get their hostile mind and claws into these families and controll them"- it is the EB leader who is doing the controlling and bullying.

My point is to criticise the cult itself to FREE the members from it and to prevent new people from being sucked in.

continued

Philo,
I thought you were into one of the mainstream Christian religions and you believed in the truth of the bible.

EB generally deny the truth of one or more aspects of the bible and that’s why they have separated themselves from Christianity; they have rejected part of Christianity.

The reason EB are spreading so much anti-propaganda about the Greens is to stigmatise the ones who criticise their group.
It is quite common for a cult to convince their initiates that people who oppose their group are demonic and must be avoided. EB seem to have set their mind on doing this to Bob Brown.

Really, Philo, I thought as a ‘good Christian’ you would see through their typical cult behaviour.
If you agree with the ideas of this cult, then you agree there is something untrue about the bible.

If you think that your mainstream religious doctrine is moral and correct, then you must agree that a cult is morally corrupt. How can you say that they are of highest morals? There is almost NOTHING moral about them.

Independent thinkers are the greatest enemies of EB.

How's this for reasoning:
EB are basically a group of dissenters from Christianity, who are mentally and spiritually bullying and punishing their own members to prevent them from dissenting from their group. A bunch of dissenters punishing dissenters. Hmmmm.

Something I found and am posting below just for our entertainment ;)

"While most religions have elements of wackiness in them, the incongruity of the rules by which the Brethren live is unusually abnormal. Their sewer pipes must go straight to the mains. They eschew shared driveways and prohibit cross-lease property ownership. Their cars must not be turbo-charged.
The closest they come to sense is banning television. Computers are out, as are radio-telephones, cell phones, record players and bar coders. All this new-fangled stuff is the work of Lucifer, although aircraft conveniently are accepted. To engage in swimming, team sport, entertainment of friendship outside the membership brings swift exclusion from the sect. It goes without saying that their views on the status and role of women make Saint Paul look like a feminist.

By David Lange (former NZ Prime Minister).

I agree with Celivia, its the cult leaders that are the problem,
usually not the members, who are victims. The question arises
that if cults so brainwash and control their kids, information
about the world etc, that these kids are unable to become rational
and thinking adults, why should those cults not be charged
with child abuse?

A really good point, Yabby, about the child abuse. Many young members were born into the church and don't know better. Kids are kept away from outsiders. If they befriend outsiders, they are kept away from their parents.

Thing is, when prosecuted for abuse, they have this special fat fighting fund set aside. Being a very wealthy cult they have no cashflow problems.
They're not allowed to spend any money on luxuries or holidays so most of the money goes to the church.
The money for this fighting fund comes from the daily Brethren meetings donations.

They want special treatment, too, in court. I hope this link works:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/brethren-sect-sought-special-treatment/2006/09/21/1158431844366.html

Has anyone watched Four Corners?
The program showed me what I anticipated.
These poor dads being separated from their kids was so sad!

Looks like a totally sick environment- amazing that so many people have fallen for this crazy leader. Man of God! Ha!

And dress codes for women?

There was talk also about illegally handing over money. So much secrecy. What else don't we know?

Amazing that people like this are allowed to operate, let alone influence our government!

Yup I saw the programme. Looks like Philo perhaps did too and
has now gone to ground about this :)

I call them the Christian Taliban, much the same religious
zealotery involved it seems.

Yabby,
I did not see the programme. I take people I know at how they relate to me. Your view that they are the Christian Taliban is so ridiculous. They make no attempt to influence opinion outside their their own family and exclusive community. Hence their name.

When was the last time they practised honour killings, or beheaded dissidents or infidels. It is Bob Brown who has stirred up their community by his threatening inquiry into their community.

The Exclusive Brethren is a very conservative religious organisation, similar to the Amish in the United States of America. Members of the Brethren are not allowed to vote. They are not allowed to support any political party, its members are discouraged from voting.

Bob Brown is merely on a witch hunt in an endeavour to control their pratcises and views by introducing his laws. Apparently members of the Brethren campaigned during the Tasmanian election, which antagonised the Greens. Senator Bob Brown, leader of the Greens, recently moved a motion in the Federal Parliament calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the activities of the Brethren during the election.

Bob Brown's motion was soundly defeated by the combined votes of the Liberal Party, the National Party and the Australian Labor Party. Only the Greens voted for the inquiry. If they are supposed to a terrorist group as painted by you and the Greens; then surely one other Party would have supported an inquiry.

I grew up in a country town on the North coast of NSW, in a family of seven siblings, and during a difficult financial time it was members of the Exclusive Brethren that supplied our family with gifts of cereal and clothes from their factories.

"Your view that they are the Christian Taliban is so ridiculous."

Actaully in terms of religious zealotry, its not ridiculous
at all Philo, as you would have seen if you watched the
programme.

Are you aware of the families that are split, with no contact
between some husbands, wives, children etc, for years and
years? All this in the name of Christianity?

You, who preach family values etc, are saying its fine
that the EB split families like that?

Lots more in the programme which was interesting, but I guess
there are none so blind, as those who will not see :)

Philo,
Here just for you; you can watch the video here, or read the transcript:
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2006/s1746895.htm

Here Yabby and others interested, a new article about what teachers at a brethren school think about this sect:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20470419-2702,00.html

“CHILDREN at taxpayer-funded schools run by the Exclusive Brethren sect are brainwashed and their basic texts are crudely censored, say former teachers.

And this is as hilarious as it is sad: “Most modern novels were banned, pages were removed even from permitted 19th-century works and entire chapters were censored from science books.”
"One science book had all the chapters on reproduction cut out…"

Do they teach the kids that babies come from storks?

Ironic!
Since they do not allow tertiary education (coz it damages the soul), they must rely on teachers outside their sect to teach their children.
So they hire people with damaged souls to teach their kids? Yeah, sounds intelligent!

Who wants their taxmoney spend on deceiving schoolkids!?

Seriously, Philo, they might have helped your family, and I am not saying anything about individual members- the excommunicated ones we saw on the program seemed very lovely indeed. I feel for them! But the 'man of God' and the EB's leaders are charming!

In some ways EB are not like the Taliban, but I agree with Yabby that in terms of religious zealotry, there are similarities.
EB bully, dictate, have rules for everything just like taliban.
They oppress women who may not work once married outside the family business, who have dress code, who cannot cut their hair, who must speak less than their husband, who are not allowed to use contraception.

Oh where have I heard similar rules before? Taliban perhaps?

They are after the Greens because they are a extremely homophobic lot, just like the...taliban.

The Greens have every right to question them. Anyway, if they have nothing to hide, why are they being so secretive and so scared to be questioned?

Philo, watch the video and tell us what you think.

If you still have the same opinion, then you must be either a cult apologist or anti-anti cult.

Philo you obviously do not have an understanding of Christianity. It does not matter if the Exclusive Brethren deny any passage of the Bible , all Christians do that, the occult superstition of Bible belief is tailor made to suit individual ego's. The Bible is simply a book of magic spells to evoke a god into awarding immortality. Christianity is all about self worship to become immortal as a god. The Exclusive Bretheren take from the Bible and thus are Christians. As for Christian Taliban any cult which uses its god as self justification to rule another is a type of Taliban. All sects have their specialised form of evil the Exclusive Bretheren has been famous for many years for its specialisation in its anti family ethos, stalking , child abduction and mind control.

West, good post.

Don't hold your breath waiting for a reply from Philo.

In several threads I have noticed he just leaves when the opposition becomes too strong or too logic.

Wish that the government adapted this same strategy :)

Philo, you mean well, but you really should start to look at facts and you will see another side to things.

Thankyou Celivia , The Government needs to address branch stacking and sack a couple of members of cabinet if it wants to free itself from the corruption of religion.

Exactly, West.

Thing is- I am not so sure if this govt wants to free itself from the corruption of religion.

Undisclosed political donations are also a problem.
The govt pretty much seem to welcome the 'funding' of the EB and the Hillsongs.

Proper disclosure of 'donations' to the government would help, to a point.
I know it is hard to keep track of donations of the 'religious right' because, in the case (as an example) of the EB- these donations are made by different EB members in chunks rather than one larger amount that would have to be disclosed.

And they are very skilfull in covering their tracks.

http://www.democracy4sale.org/about.php?pageName=Follow&Id=32
“The law has been weakened in a way that will make it much easier for corporate Australia to avoid disclosing donations to political parties. The previous system was inadequate, but it did expose corporations and political parties to some bad publicity about donations of $1,500 to $10,000 – which are now exempt from public disclosure.

Political donations can distort the political process. Access is power, and money buys access to politicians in our country. This means large donors can influence governmental decisions, which benefit them and their companies. Ordinary citizens don’t have this access and this leads many to feel alienated from the workings of government. “