For my brilliant friend Shelley Stocken who wrote me a poem about genitals. How else to repay her but to write one back about titillating euphemisms. This one’s for you Shelley.
Titillating Euphemisms
I’m going into business
And I know that you’ll be shocked,
But I’m going to start a Titillating Euphemism shop.
Folks will bring me in their tired old todgers, dicks and cocks
And I’ll send ‘em out the door with throbbing manhoods in their jocks.
If you’re sick of that old fanny, tuppy, beaver, box or cunny
I’ve a palpitating portal you can take home to your honey.
If your boobs are tired and sagging and your nipples face the floor
I can whip you up two golden orbs with rosebud tips galore.
But I have a little problem with this business plan cum hobby –
And it’s, “Will my ads pass muster with the Aussie Christian Lobby?”
Will Ms Francis see my billboard and will I be berated
Cos the ‘tit’ in Titillating isn’t technically ‘G-rated’?
Will she ring her friends at Adshel and demand it’s taken down?
Will my business go arse-up before it’s started?
Or will commonsense and sanity, perhaps, at last prevail
Melbourne born, British based, gay rights activist, Peter Tatchell has called for urgent lobbying of the Commonwealth Secretary General, urging him to include LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transexual/Transgender) rights at the forthcoming CHOGM conference to be held in Perth from 28-30 October 2011.
Tatchell’s message reads as follows:
URGENT ACTION:
Please lobby the Secretary General of the Commonwealth association of nations, Kamalesh Sharma, urging him to use his influence to ensure that LGBT human rights are discussed by the Commonwealth heads of government when they meet in Perth, Australia, 28-30 October.
Commonwealth leaders have never previously discussed the widespread victimisation of LGBT people by Commonwealth member states.
You can also write to him via the postal address in my letter below.
Feel free to take ideas and excerpts from my letter to use in your own submission.
Please be polite and thank Mr Sharma for his recent statements where he said that victimisation on the grounds of sexual orientation is incompatible with Commonwealth values.
These are the four LGBT issues we want on the official agenda at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). We want them agreed and adopted by all Commonwealth nations:
Decriminalisation of homosexuality
Laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity
The enforcement of legislation against threats and violence, to protect LGBT people from hate crimes
Consultation and dialogue with LGBT organisations
The Commonwealth heads of government have always refused to address the widespread violation of LGBT human rights. We want this to be the breakthrough summit.
I [PeterTatchell] wrote an article in May in The Guardian newspaper, which strongly criticised the Secretary General and the Commonwealth for their failure to speak out against homophobic and transphobic persecution in member countries.
Within 10 days, Kamalesh Sharma became the first Commonwealth Secretary General to make an explicit and unequivocal public statement criticising homophobia and homophobic discrimination.
Following further lobbying, at the Commonwealth Law Ministers Meeting in Sydney in July, Mr Sharma reiterated that sexual orientation victimisation is incompatible with Commonwealth values.
We now need to build on these successes by ensuring that LGBT human rights are on the agenda of the heads of government when they meet in Perth at the end of this month. Time is short. Please lobby the Secretary General at your earliest convenience. Thank you.
Lobbying the Secretary General direct will add to the magnificent work being done by many other LGBT groups and HIV and human rights organisations. They, too, are pushing for change within the Commonwealth. Our collective efforts in recent months give us the best prospect ever of getting LGBT human rights on the official CHOGM agenda.
The Commonwealth is an association of 54 nations, mostly former British colonies and mostly in Africa, Asia and the Pacific. More than 40 of its member states still criminalise homosexuality, with penalties including flogging and life imprisonment.
Here is a copy of Peter Tatchell’s letter to the Commonwealth Secretary General:
Secretary General
Commonwealth Secretariat
Marlborough House
Pall Mall
London SW1Y 5HX
Dear Kamalesh Sharma,
Re CHOGM in Perth in October – LGBT equality and human rights
First, let me thank you very much for your speech at the Commonwealth Law Ministers Meeting in July, where you stated that “vilification and targeting on grounds of sexual orientation are at odds with the values of the Commonwealth”.
This was, of course, only the latest of a number of positive statements that you have made in affirmation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) human rights.
We greatly appreciate you showing leadership on this issue.
We note that we have not heard any negative responses from member state governments to your humanitarian outreach to the LGBT citizens of the Commonwealth family of nations. We hope this will give you the confidence to continue and strengthen your public commitment to LGBT human rights.
Second, we were very grateful to be granted a meeting in August with the Commonwealth Deputy Secretary General, Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba, at Marlborough House. It was a constructive dialogue and we trust that it has secured new understanding between us, and will lead to further constructive engagement.
We hope the common ground we found at this meeting – concerning the need to tackle homophobia and transphobia – will embolden you to act in private and public to defend LGBT human rights, particularly right now in Uganda, where the Anti-Homosexuality Bill is likely to be revived, and in Cameroon, where the on-going arrest, jailing and mistreatment of men on charges of homosexuality is a matter of grave concern.
The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative has details of the repression in Cameroon. I would urge you to news release a statement appealing to the government of Cameroon to halt its persecution of LGBT people; with specific reference to the fact that such persecution is incompatible with Commonwealth values and international humanitarian law.
Third, I write to you regarding this year’s Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Perth, Australia.
I am working with a number of LGBT, human rights and Commonwealth ngos, including the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.
We are collectively urging that LGBT human rights be put on the agenda of CHOGM in October. We hope that you can assist us in this respect.
CHOGM has never even discussed – let alone declared its support for – LGBT equality and human rights. It is long overdue that CHOGM addressed this humanitarian issue, which it has neglected for far too long. We hope that this year’s CHOGM will end these decades of silence and inaction.
For CHOGM to discuss LGBT human rights would be consistent with the human rights values endorsed by the Commonwealth in its 1979 Lusaka Declaration, 1991 Harare Declaration and 2009 Port of Spain Affirmation of Commonwealth Values. Article 5 of this affirmation commits Commonwealth member states to the “protection and promotion” of equality and human rights “without discrimination on any grounds.” Any grounds obviously includes the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity.
These are the four issues we would like to see on the CHOGM agenda and that we believe all Commonwealth member states should agree to enact:
1. Decriminalisation of homosexuality
2. Laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity
3. The enforcement of legislation against threats and violence, to protect LGBT people from hate crimes
4. Consultation and dialogue with LGBT organisations
Your personal support and influence would be a big help to ensure that these important humanitarian issues are placed on the CHOGM agenda.
As you know, more than 40 Commonwealth countries currently criminalise homosexuality, mostly as a result of laws that were imposed by Britain during the colonial era and which were not repealed when these nations won their independence.
The penalties for homosexuality include 25 years jail in Trinidad and Tobago and 20 years plus flogging in Malaysia. Several Commonwealth countries stipulate life imprisonment: Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Pakistan, Uganda, Bangladesh and Guyana.
These forty-plus Commonwealth member states account for more than half of the world’s countries that still criminalise same-sex relations.
There are, or have been, homophobic witch-hunts in several Commonwealth countries: Nigeria, Cameroon, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Malawi and Ghana.
A group of us have been working with the Commonwealth Secretariat’s Human Rights Unit and the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. They are supportive; believing that CHOGM should affirm that the Commonwealth’s commitment to equality and human rights applies to all Commonwealth citizens, including LGBT people. We hope you will concur and use your office to ensure that this happens.
Thank you for your consideration and assistance.
Sincere appreciation,
Peter Tatchell Director, Peter Tatchell Foundation London, UK
Several years ago, we had some landscaping work done in our backyard. It cost us way more than we’d budgeted and the landscaper left the yard in a shocking mess. We were financially stretched, overtired, overstressed and the yard we had wanted ‘improved’ looked like a bomb had hit it. The job was still unfinished, and I was at my wit’s end.
Soon after, we dropped in on some friends of ours. They offered us morning tea and asked how the ‘work’ was going. I promptly (and embarrassingly) burst into tears.
The next day, they arrived with a car and trailer loaded with a mower and garden tools. They said, “Just here to fix the yard.”
I said, “Oh, really? Oh, th-th-thanks! Just a minute, I’ll go and get my shoes on ….”
“No, you are not to help. We’re going to do it. You just stay where you are.”
And these two (not young) people pitched in, did a day’s work and transformed our construction site debacle to a beautiful garden.
Our friends are devout Christians – Seventh Day Adventists. They know I’m an atheist, they loved my Dad and knew he was an atheist, too. Not once, in all the years we have known them have they ever tried to press their faith on us. I know they would say their motivation to help us came from their religious convictions. But, I think even more highly of them than that – I believe they are simply good people and would have done the same thing regardless of whether they were religious or not.
Nevertheless, this was Christianity in action. Two people living out the conviction of their faith to love their neighbours. In this case, we were the fortunate neighbours, but it could have been anyone else. The point is, their Christianity is used positively – to help, not to hinder; to ease pain, not to cause it.
I am not anti-Christian. How could I be? Members of my own family and some of those I love most are Christians.
While I don’t accept that loving your neighbour, treating others as you wish to be treated, feeding the poor and providing hospitality to those in need are exclusively ‘Christian’ values, I do genuinely appreciate it when I see Christians putting these values into action.
In fact, wherever Christians are making a positive contribution to the world, I am happy to applaud it. If they are genuinely helping people, seeing to their real needs, and doing so with no expectation of obtaining converts but simply to live as they believe Christ did, then who am I to argue? The fact that I think this is a human, rather than a Christian impulse is immaterial. Good is good and as long as the result is happier, healthier people in a more loving, tolerant world, I’m good with that.
So, no, I’m not ‘anti-Christian’. What I am against, however, is the kind of ‘corporate’ Christianity that does ‘good’ with an agenda. The agenda may be to convert, to impose Christian views on those who don’t share them, to swell congregations (and church profits), or to gain political power and influence. Doing good with ulterior motives is pretty poor behaviour, in my view.
This is the kind of politically pragmatic Christianity that decides not to oppose civil rights for homosexuals so they can later crow that they’re not ‘anti-gay’ in opposing same-sex marriage – “Just look how magnanimous we were in giving them the same civil rights as other citizens.”
That’s not doing good – that’s engaging a cynical, political strategy.
I am also ‘anti’ Christianity that does real harm. When Christians tell people in third-world countries that condoms cause AIDS, or they tell frightened women with unwanted pregnancies that abortions increase the risk of breast cancer – then I get cranky.
When Christians weigh the shocking human cost of not granting full equality and acceptance to gay, lesbian, transgender and transsexual citizens against their religious dogma – and choose in favour of their dogma – I don’t just get cranky, steam starts coming out of my ears.
And when Christians are not content with ruling their own lives, but begin to intrude on mine and the lives of those I love – I rise to take action.
By all means choose not to end your life prematurely if your religious convictions dictate this. But do not impose a long, lingering, painful, undignified death on me and mine, because you have some religious conviction about the ‘sanctity’ of life.
Do you want your children to have a Christian education? By all means send them to a religious school or enrol them in Sunday school or a Christian youth group. Have the damned pastor over to morning tea every Saturday if that will help. But don’t put your chaplains into secular public state schools with a view to ‘discipling’ the children of ‘unchurched’ parents. That is crossing the line.
My late brother was a Christian. When he was very ill and disabled and staying at our place, he expressed a wish to go to our local church. I rang them up, talked to the pastor, found out when and where the service was held and (with some difficulty) delivered my rather ‘wobbly’ brother to the door. Then I sought out someone who could keep an eye on him during the service and morning tea. Later, I came back and picked him up. He was astounded that I would do this for him when I was so ‘anti-Christian’.
Why would I stop someone going to church if that’s what they want to do? Why would I discourage or inhibit that in any way? My aim is not to tell people what to believe. I have little interest in that.
Let me tell you what I’m ‘for’. I am ‘for’ love, happiness, equality, justice, tolerance, laughter, caring, hospitality, hugs, honesty, sharing, supporting, helping, compassion, empathy, selflessness and leaving the world a better place than you found it – oh, and chocolate, I’m definitely in favour of chocolate. That’s what I’m ‘for’. And if Christians want to draw on their faith to help them work towards similar goals – they’ll find a staunch ally in me.
But, when they come with hidden agendas, self-interest and dogma to the fore. When they come not to help, but to convert, impose or ‘occupy’. When their actions cause hurt, pain, anguish or death – then they will find me fighting against them with every resource I can bring to bear.
On this week’s QandA (September 19), Jim Wallace of the Australian Christian Lobby invoked the ‘some of my best friends are gay’ defence. Many, including my friend Mitch Sullivan, were skeptical about Wallace’s claim. For example, Mitch tweeted:
“Can I get a show of hands? Fellow gays that are friends with homophobes? Apparently, there are a lot of you.”
But on one of my journeys through cyberspace, I discovered that Jim does, indeed, have at least one gay ‘friend’ . He mentioned this relationship at the the 2011 Australian National Apostolic Church Conference. The organisers helpfully recorded it and posted it online.
Those who watched Q and A may recall that in answering Josh Thomas’s question, Wallace said he understood same-sex attraction was not something that could be changed. And yet, just a few months ago, Wallace is recorded saying exactly the opposite.
In the following transcript of Wallace’s presentation at the conference, he makes it very clear how he deals with a young gay person who has just come out.
“I’m dealing with a young fellow who’s only in the last couple of weeks has gone and told his parents he’s gay. It has destroyed his family. It has destroyed this fellow’s relationship with Christ. And it’s because this 39 year old seduced a young 18 year old at university in his first year …”
Later in his speech, Wallace elaborates on this relationship:
“… let me tell you that only in the last week I’ve had a conversation with a young fellow I’m mentoring you know, who’s ‘cause I’ve encouraged him. I know that the only way that people can be brought out of homosexuality is through Christ, it’s not by my argument, you know. If you read the books of people who’ve talked about coming out [he means becoming ex-gay], you know, it’s only ever people have said to them, people have tried to argue with them – you can’t – because for a start, the people who’ve called them into it have all the arguments and counter arguments they fill their heads with and so you’ll never beat those down. The only thing that will bring them out of it is a closer relationship with Christ – as Christ reveals to them, you know, that it’s sin.”
It’s all so simple. Having Jim and Jesus as your friends you can’t go wrong. Just repent your sins and swear to keep your bum to the wall for the rest of your life and “Poof!” you’re straight! (Pun intended.)
According to Jim, a straight, Christian 18 year old entered into a consensual sexual relationship with an older man he met a university. As a result, the teenager ‘became’ gay. And now that pesky ‘gay switch’ has been flicked on, he’s in an awful predicament – it’s stuck – and only Jesus can turn it off. But, all is not lost – other gay people have become ‘un-gay’. All those non-peer reviewed articles and misrepresented studies from NARTH say so! All it takes is for Jesus to reveal to them that they are sinners. It’s a curious conviction, given that Jim admitted last night Jesus had nothing whatsoever to say on the subject of homosexuality. (If only Jim would follow Jesus’ lead!)
So, Jim ‘some-of-my-best-friends-are-gay’ Wallace has a solution for this young man, struggling with his sexual idenity:
“… I’ve really encouraged this young bloke to go to a church.”
You’d think that would solve the problem, wouldn’t you? But no! There’s a catch! Wallace explains:
“Now going to church and wanting to get more into the church more and more he’s run up against a roadblock with the church because there’s a limit to which the church can have him engaged in leadership within the church – and I understand that. Now, he’s not a practicing homosexual, you know, but there’s a limit nonetheless for them. So it’s a really really difficult issue.”
Let’ recap. As this young man’s friend and mentor, Jim has:
Told him being gay is a sin.
Encouraged him to be celibate until he can change – or otherwise remain celibate for life.
Told him to go to church.
Told him Jesus can make him straight, if he accepts what a terrible sin he has committed.
And, to his credit, the poor kid, with his family freaking out about his sexuality, has tried to do the ‘right thing’. He’s thrown himself enthusiastically onto the path of redemption and change Wallace has laid out for him. He’s become celibate – a huge ask – and he’s seeking more responsibility within the church. But is that enough for the church to encourage him? Not on your nelly. He may as well have a target on his head with the word “Poof” written in large pink letters.
But let’s be fair. Jim is not unsympathetic to his young gay friend. No! He simply compares him to a porn addict or a kleptomaniac … yes, really.
“But what I’d say to you is this. That whatever the struggle, it’s no different really than someone who might be struggling with pornography – and for them it’s a real struggle you know, they just can’t go to the TV without opening it up.
It might be that they’re struggling with something else, you know. Some people are kleptomaniacs and must have a real struggle when they see something they really want and want to grab it. All of these things are sin because of the fallen nature state of our world, you know?
And I just think – and I understand the dilemma – I just think despite the difficulty of being able to get across to the world that we love the sinner, even though we hate the sin, we just have to stay true to that. Because as soon as we compromise it on this, how do we hold it on everything else, you know?
So I think it’s really really important that – as hard as it is, you know – that we hold to it, but we’re compassionate, you know, that we’re loving.”
Sure Jim, the loving thing to do is to completely ignore all the expert expert professional advice on how to deal with a teenager grappling with their sexuality and tell this kid he just has to change for Jesus. Ignore the shockingly high rate of gay teen suicide and tell this troubled young man that God will accept him if only he’ll learn to love girls – or at least stay celibate for life. Send him on a guilt trip over all the angst he’s caused to his family and Jesus. And then put him into a church that treats him like a second class citizen. Great work, friend!
Jim, of course, is wilfully oblivious to the expert opinion of the American Psychological Association, which represents over 132,000 mental health professionals. In 1994, the APA issued an unequivocal statement on homosexuality:
“The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as heterosexuals.
Nor is homosexuality a matter of individual choice. Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. … Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accoutrements.”
Similarly, the Australian Psychological Society’s website insists that homosexuality is neither a ‘choice’ nor a mental disorder.
In Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation (2005), Glenn Wilson, a reader in personality at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, and Qazi Rahman, a psychobiologist at the University of East London assert categorically that the research leaves ‘absolutely no room for parental or societal influence’ on sexual identity. Wilson and Rahman insist that children cannot be seduced or otherwise led into homosexuality regardless of how overbearing the mother or absent the father – ‘no amount of poor parenting can waylay a child born to walk the path of heterosexuality’. According to these mental health experts:
“… the biological origin of sexual orientation means that discriminating against gays and lesbians is as justifiable as discriminating on the basis of eye colour or ethnicity”.
The fact is, Jim’s ‘friendship’ with this young man could, at worst, drive him to self-harm or suicide and, at best, cause untold psychological trauma and long-term damage.
A brochure published in 1999, and endorsed by nearly half a million of America’s mental health experts, counsellors, paediatricians and experts in related fields said, in part:
“… efforts to change sexual orientation through therapy have been adopted by some political and religious organizations and aggressively promoted to the public. However, such efforts have serious potential to harm young people because they present the view that the sexual orientation of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth is a mental illness or disorder, and they often frame the inability to change one’s sexual orientation as a personal and moral failure … a number of medical, health, and mental health professional organizations have issued public statements about the dangers of this approach.”
But, in an recklessly arrogant display of religious hubris, Wallace completely rejects this and decides to ‘fix’ this boy himself (with the help of Jesus, of course).
Kim Brett, a former leader with ex-gay ministries Living Waters and Liberty Inc, has witnessed, first hand, what trying to change someone’s sexual orientation does to them:
“… For a long time I had been witnessing peoples’ (and my own) growing frustration that no matter how repentant, prayerful and committed we all were to living a life as an ex-gay Christian, the changes we all sought and were taught possible never really materialised for most … Depression, anxiety, loneliness and inner turmoil were our constant companions because as seen through the eyes of many churches, our ‘failure’ to change equated with somehow not having enough faith, not being a ‘true’ Christian or having a demonic influence.” (Soulforce, 2007)
Is this why Wallace’s young friend is not considered suitable for leadership in the church? Is it because they fear his homosexuality is caused by demons?
In his speech, Wallace (paraphrasing Charles Colson’s The Faith) explains that great Christian movements are not motivated by some idea of a social gospel. They are motivated by a commitment to fight ‘systemic evil’.
Adrian Price tells what it’s like to follow a ex-gay plan like Jim’s:
“I was seventeen and I was very screwed up and was attempting suicide because I was confused. I am only alive now because I am rather inept at killing myself. I have tried but I am not very good at it. I know others who have harmed themselves and in the states there are numerous cases of people coming out of the program and committing suicide. I’ve been pretty much in psychiatric counselling for last five years because of this. I’ve had numerous suicide attempts because of this. Some people I know have gotten away more lightly. The more determined you were, the more you got hurt. I wanted to make this work, I was celibate for eight years, I did everything I was told.”
I don’t know who Wallace is mentoring, but I hope he might read this. Dear young man, Wallace is not your friend. He does not have your best interests at heart – although I accept he thinks he does. Wallace has no expertise in human sexuality and yet he is trying to coerce you into ‘choosing’ your sexuality – something which medical experts say simply cannot be done. In short, he is asking the impossible of you. He is setting you up to fail.
You may, or may not be homosexual. You may be straight but adventurous, bisexual, homosexual or something else altogether. Time will tell. But it is for you to find out, not for anyone else to determine.
Wallace’s ‘solution’ to your ‘problem’ is to put you into a church which will never accept you for who you really are. The real ‘solution’ is for you to accept yourself just as you are and work from there.
Please, talk to someone at Gay and Lesbian Counselling Services of Australia – it’s just one phone call. Consider the possibility that you are OK just the way you are. Consider also that many committed Christians believe homosexuality is not a sin. Instead, they believe that it’s people like Jim Wallace who are acting contrary to the spirit of Jesus’ message; that it is Wallace who is ‘ungodly’ , not you.
Please take a moment to read about American Christian, the Reverend Mel White. White went through absolute hell. He lied to himself about his sexuality and conformed to what the church wanted by marrying and having a family. He struggled (often unsuccessfully) for years to become an ‘ex-gay’ before he finally realised that it simply wasn’t possible. Ultimately, White rejected bigotry, not God. If that is your choice, you can do that too. Please think about this before you marry some innocent girl and wreck her life as well as yours.
Former Australian Assemblies of God minister, Anthony Venn Brown has been on a similar journey. He warns:
“The church’s stand against gays and lesbians will eventually be proven to be the greatest heresy of the 20th century.”
I’m an atheist, but I have no interest in asking you to change to suit my beliefs. There are lots of gay friendly churches in Australia which will allow you to worship without making you feel unworthy. There’s also an online Gay Christian Network where you can meet with other people who are both gay and Christian, and find no conflict between the two.
Straight or gay, Christian or atheist, you cannot live your life as a lie and no true friend would ever ask you to.
My friend Mitch pointed out in comments (below) that Jim also spoke publicly about his misguided beliefs on homosexuality in a forum on internet censorship. Again, Jim completely ignores research into pedophilia and homosexuality *and conflates the two to suit his own anti-gay political agenda.
* Extract from link:
” … in one review of the scientific literature, noted authority Dr. A. Nicholas Groth wrote:
Are homosexual adults in general sexually attracted to children and are preadolescent children at greater risk of molestation from homosexual adults than from heterosexual adults? There is no reason to believe so. The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation. There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual(Groth & Gary, 1982, p. 147).
In a more recent literature review, Dr. Nathaniel McConaghy (1998) similarly cautioned against confusing homosexuality with pedophilia. He noted, “The man who offends against prepubertal or immediately postpubertal boys is typically not sexually interested in older men or in women” (p. 259).”
My second article for ABC’s Religion and Ethics portal asks whether there is sufficient evidence to suggest the Australian Christian Lobby is at the forefront of the ideological holy war called ‘dominionism’.
This article has been several months in the making. Dominionism is a complex network of international organisations. While some of the more extreme groups happily speak openly about their plans to infiltrate goverments and ‘occupy’ nations, most speak in euphemisms easily deciphered by Christian fundamentalists but designed to be less threatening to those not ‘in the know’.
Apparently George W Bush (or at least his speech writer) was a master at this ‘dog whistle’ language, but is now being superseded by GOP candidate, Rick Perry. Listen out for terms like ‘worldview’, ‘spheres of influence’, ‘change agents’, ‘changing the culture’. Here’s an article which explains how it works.
When I first began researching dominionism I didn’t even suspect any links between the extremist American organisations involved in the movement and our homegrown Christian lobbyists. But, over time, it became apparent to me that there were so many links the questions really had to be asked, “Is the Australian Christian Lobby a dominionist organisation?” “Does it purposefully set out to recruit staff from within the dominionist network?” “Are there links between dominionist theology and the publicly stated goals of the ACL?”
Dominionism is now being taken very seriously in the United States. Take, for example, this article from the New York Times. Perhaps it’s time we started taking it seriously here in Australia.
Chrys Stevenson
Recommended Reading
Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism by Michelle Goldberg
I had a phone call from the Sunshine Coast Daily last week. Would I write a short piece in response to the question, “Is it time for Australians to reconsider the relevance of Christianity?” I gave it a dignified two seconds thought before I said, “Yes!”
The concept was a ‘head to head’ style article, with me answering ‘on behalf of’ the godless and someone else answering for the Christians. And, who represents Christians better than anyone else in this country? The Australian Christian Lobby of course! Well, not ‘of course’ – as we know, they represent only a small proportion of actual Christians – but that’s who the Sunshine Coast Daily chose. And, to be fair, I’m hardly an elected representative for atheists, so I really shouldn’t gripe.
The article will probably go up online later this week, but I know you’re all champing at the bit to read it, so I’ve reproduced it here. Of course, if you’re in the Sunshine Coast region, do the right thing and pick up a hard copy and you might also consider dropping them a line, or giving them a call to thank them for allowing us atheists to have a say*. It seems to be a new policy of the paper and one that should be recognised and applauded.
So …
“Is it time for Australians to consider the relevance of Christianity?”
Lyle Shelton – Australian Christian Lobby
While Christianity’s human practitioners have not always done the right thing, there is no doubt the religion itself has been an overwhelmeing influence for good in the past 2000 years.
People of faith, motivated by its central ethos of love for God and love for others, gave rise to the modern hospital system, public education, trade unions, care for the poor and the abolition of slavery – all before any of these were on the agenda of governments.
Christianity was a major force against the tyrrany of kings and was important to the evolution of modern representative democracy and the idea that there should be checks and balances on people who hold power.
Nations with Christian foundations remain the freest and most civil on the planet.
The 20th century’s experiment with state-mandated atheism in Eastern Europe, Russia, China and elsewhere was a bloody catastrophe.
More needs to be taught about the gulags.
It is a credit to nations with a Christian heritage like Australia that Muslims fleeting persecution from extreme forms of Islam in places like Afghanistan and Iran are so keen to re-settle here.
It’s interesting that people from overfly nations such as Malaysia and Indonesia, which practice varying degrees of sharia law, are eager to come to a country whose legal system traces its roots to the bible.
Christianity says we should welcome as many of these vulnerable people as we can.
Yes, there is a contest for the future values of our nation but a free society does not fear this debate.
Sadly there are some who deeply resent Christianity and seek to expunge it from public life with the coercive force of politically correct laws and tribunals
This is emerging as a serious threat to free speech and freedom of religion which may well affect everyone to some degree.
Mistakes have certainly been made in the name of Christ.
But despite this, Christianity has bequeathed a rich cultural heritage and civility that we would do well to examine closely before aggressive secularists make the decision for us to discard it.
Lyle Shelton is chief of staff of the Australian Christian Lobby
_______________
Chrys Stevenson, Sunshine Coast Atheists
Australians really should reconsider the relevance of Christianity to Australian society.
There was a time when our pubs and shops were closed on Sundays. Now they’re not only open, but bustling.
Today, nearly 70 per cent of Australians are married by civil celebrants. What does it say about Christianity’s relevance when most people, on the most important day of their lives, say ‘no’ to religion?
Australia is one of world’s most secular nations. No need for an atheist bus sign saying “Sleep in on Sundays” – 92 per cent of us already do.
Christianity is in decline. An international survey in 2008 found 30 per cent of Australians don’t believe in God while 26 per cent have doubts to varying degrees.
The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) may have access to the Prime Minister’s office, but they most assuredly don’t represent the views of most Australians, or even most Christians.
Despite the increasingly shrill protestations of the ACL, a recent Galaxy Poll showed even most Christians support same-sex marriage.
While churches oppose voluntary euthanasia, 85 per cent of Aussies support it. Denied the opportunity to die with dignity, Australia’s elderly most commonly choose hanging as an alternative.
Most Australians are horrified at the high rate of youth suicide. Gay teens are up to 14 times more likely to end their lives. Yet, recently, the ACL endorsed a law which allows religious schools to expel students for no reason other than being openly gay.
Has anyone noticed those standing up for fairness, equality and the alleviation of suffering in these scenarios aren’t the Christians?
The ACL may argue that Australia would be a better place if ‘Christian values’ were returned to centre-stage. Consider this. In those halcyon days when Christianity was far more ‘relevant’ than it is today, we supported the White Australia Policy. Racism and sexism were rife. Gay couples had no rights and were derided as poofters and fairies. Christian churches presided over the ‘stolen generation’. With abortion illegal, women with unwanted pregnancies used a coat hanger or turned to back street butchers. Divorcees were social outcasts and single mothers were cruelly coerced into adoptions. It is only as we became more secular that these things changed.
So yes, let’s reconsider the relevance of Christianity to Australia’s past and present. And then, let’s raise a toast to a future in which Christianity is increasingly irrelevant.
Chrys Stevenson is the convenor of the Sunshine Coast Atheists and co-founder of new national lobby group, Reason Australia.
*Sunshine Coast Daily ‘Letters to the Editor’: letters@scnews.com.au
Thank the editor: mark.furler@scnews.com.au (Thanks Mark and journalist Owen Jacques for putting the piece together).
Astute readers may have noticed a couple of historical howlers from our friend, Lyle. Please feel free to address them in comments. Neither Lyle nor I had the opportunity to view each other’s copy before it was submitted, so we were both ‘writing blind’. Now I’ve seen his arguments, I may well take them on directly later in a future blog post. But if anyone else wants to have a go – please feel free.
Gladly’s ears pricked up when he heard I was writing about Skepticamp. A camp? All those lovely pick-er-nick baskets and those yummy chewy campers! But alas, while Skepticamp is skeptical, it doesn’t involve pitching a tent in the woods or being eaten by bears. But, trust me (would I lie?), it’s going to be just as exciting!
Skepticamp is a whole new concept in presenting conferences. No famous headliners here. At Skepticamp, the audience are the stars. That’s right! The participants are also the presenters (although if you’re very shy, there’s no pressure for you to take to the spotlight),
Skepticamp provides a fantastic opportunity for you to meet with like-minded people, to learn from those who are practicing skeptical activism in your city, and to make a ‘name’ for yourself and share your views. You don’t get to do that at the Global Atheist Convention. “Step aside now, Professor Dawkins, I’d like to give the audience my take on evolutionary biology!”
At Skepticamp, every participant is encouraged (but not required) to offer an interactive talk on a science or skeptic-themed subject.
There’s so much talent in the skeptical community, but how do you get discovered as the next brilliant new speaker for TAM (James Randi’s ‘The Amazing Meeting’) or the next DJ Grothe-style podcaster? Even Dr Karl (Kruszelnicki) had to start somewhere! (I’m not sure it was at a Skepticamp, but it should have been).
Skepticamp Australia was born at TAM Sydney in 2010 when Jason Brown (A Drunken Madman/In Vino Veritas) vowed to ‘make it happen’ here in Australia. I’m excited to say I was in the room at the time. During a panel talk on Skeptical Activism, a question came from moderator Brian Dunning (Skeptoid): “What would you do for activism if you were handed a budget?”
Jason leapt up and said he would organise a skepticamp, to inspire, inform and motivate skeptics in Australia. Never backward in coming forward, he said if people would give him some money there and then, that’s exactly what he’d do. Suddenly, everyone, including the panelists, started pulling out their wallets and giving Jason money, and soon Skepticamp Sydney was underway. Now, that’s grass-roots activism!
Skepticamp Sydney was a huge success. Held in May this year, it attracted around 100 participants. Sessions were short – 10 minutes presentation and 5 minutes for questions. A good plan! It means if someone’s as boring as dirt, you don’t have to endure them droning on for an hour. And, if they were fascinating, you can always collar them for a good chat during the breaks. There was also a ‘flash talk’ session, in which participants were invited to give a quick 5 minute talk on a skeptical or science subject close to their heart.
To give you some idea of the ‘flavour’ of a skepticamp, Sydney talks included: Peter Bowditch on how not to get sued for your skeptical activism; Tim Harding on GMO foods; Kylie Sturgess on homeopathy; Bob Lloyd on the persistence of ‘woo’ beliefs in the nursing profession; Tim Mendham on dealing with the media (without blowing it for everyone); Dave Singer on online activism; Joel Pittman on his intimate acquaintance with evangelical religious education, and; Alan Conradi on the dangerous practice of using unproven treatments on children with intellectual disabilities.
There’s no speakers’ program for Skepticamp Melbourne, yet – that’s up to participants. But, I’m sure it will be every bit as interesting and diverse as the Sydney event. (Melbourne’s sure to do it better than Sydney, right?)
Lucas Randall from the Melbourne Eastern Hills Skeptics (Meh!) together with Chris Higgins, Linley Kissick, Kieran Dennis and Ed Brown are the ‘un’organizers for Skepticamp Melbourne. If you can give them a hand (or some sponsorship), I’m sure they’d like to hear from you. They’re at skepticamp@melbourneskeptics.com.au .
Organizers are also needed for events planned for Brisbane and Perth (contact @drunkenmadman on Twitter if you can help).
If you want to present, there will soon be an online application available, but, if you’re so excited about putting your name forward you just can’t wait, email your idea to skepticamp@melbourneskeptics.com.au and tell them I sent you. –
These events take a tonne of organizing and if we want an active and vibrant skeptical community, we really have to get behind them. If you’re in Melbourne, make the effort and support Skepticamp – you won’t be sorry!
Not everyone is a cut out to be a media performer. Being in front of a television camera or radio mike is nerve-wracking. So, when your average ‘Joe (or Jo) Blow’ finds themselves in the media spotlight and ends up babbling incoherently, you have to have some sympathy. It’s not an easy gig.
That’s why companies pay good money for polished professionals to represent them. When the reputation of your business or organisation is at stake, you simply can’t risk hiring amateurs.
So, I was surprised by Jim Wallace’s performance on Seven’s Sunrise with Mel and Kochie this week. Speaking about same-sex marriage – a topic with which he is very familiar – Jim explained the Australian Christian Lobby’s objections as follows:
Well, ah, Kochie the reality is that ah the Scriptures are very clear about the fact that ah Jesus and ah when people become a Christian it’s an individual and a personal experience but from that point on we try to live more like Jesus would want us to and certainly in the Scriptures it’s very clear ah he wouldn’t have ordained homosexual marriage. Now, the reason, though, is couched in the ah natural and that is ah whether you believe that God created ah nature, or whether you believe that there was nothing at all exploded and then there was everything, the reality is that, ah in this issue that it still takes the involvement of a man and a woman to create a child …
And I find it absolutely amazing that at a time in our history when we’re jumping through hoops to try to make sure that every tree on the planet ah has its natural environment so that it can flourish that we would be challenging the definition of marriage which creates exactly that environment for a child requiring that it’s between a man and a woman … the reality is here we’re about holding up an aspirational mode ah in society which government has the right to do to make sure that – to make sure that children can flourish in the same way we are demanding for trees.
Frankly, regardless of your views on same-sex marriage, it was a woeful performance from someone who is paid to do better. Someone has to ask – and it may as well be me – has Jimbo jumped the shark?
If I was one of the shadowy figures pouring money into the Australian Christian Lobby, I’d be having a long hard think about the way the organisation’s been travelling over the last 12 months and asking myself if it’s time for new leadership: “Has Jimbo done what we hired him to do or has he made the organisation a national laughing-stock and damaged the ACL’s reputation beyond repair?”
Inexplicably, I’m not privy to Jim’s job description or performance goals, but I reckon I can make a pretty good guess about why he was hired. But first, I need to tell you a bit about the ACL’s history.
The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) was founded way back in 1995, only it wasn’t called the ACL then, it was known as the Australian Christian Coalition (ACC). The name was derived from its American cousin, the scandal-ridden Christian Coalition of America, established by the rabid, right-wing televangelist, Pat Robertson.
At first, it seems, there was little attempt to hide the ACC’s dominionist agenda. In fact, one of the organisation’s early journals was called Mandate –an allusion to the belief “that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns”. That’s right, folks, the long-term goal for these people looks a lot like TOTAL WORLD DOMINATION.
The aims of the ACC could not have been clearer: “to reclaim our society and our government for God and to have the Christian voice heard”. Did you hear that, non-religious and secular Australians? You’ve got their country and they want it back.
Not surprisingly, the ACC soon found its dominionist theology and fundamentalist lunacy simply wasn’t going to fly in the Australian political landscape. If it wanted to appeal to ‘middle Australia’ it needed a little cosmetic surgery.
Of course, this didn’t mean the ACC planned to abandon its Christian nationalist agenda and ditsy dogma. God forbid! No! It simply meant that a shiny new veneer was added to make it seem … well … somewhat less batshit crazy.
In fairly short order, the name was changed to the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), former SAS chief Brigadier Jim Wallace was brought in to provide the group with some mainstream credibility and a Christian marketing group, Capacity Builders, was engaged to help the ACL build a shiny new non-threatening image. The aim was to position the group as “a balanced and compassionate ‘voice for values’: a lobbying force influencing all levels of Government”. You have to admit, that sounds so much less alarming than reclaiming the government for Jesus.
But, as Barack Obama said, (allegedly in allusion to that poster girl for fatuous fundamentalism, Sarah Palin), “You can put lipstick on a pig – but it’s still a pig.”
And so it was with the ACL. Behind the glossy website, the highly staged ‘In Focus’ in-house ‘news’ interviews with CEO Wallace and artless attempts to tone down the fundamentalist rhetoric, the ACL remains what it originally set out to be – an organisation intent on gaining ideological control of Australia’s key public institutions.
Of course, despite putting the former head of the SAS in charge, the ACL isn’t plotting a military coup. Its strategy is far more covert. Following the tried and true approach of American dominionists, the ACL plans to achieve its aims through the quiet infiltration and colonisation of our secular public institutions – and the apathy of the Australian public is crucial in facilitating its advance.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory, doesn’t it? But why else would the ACL set up Compass Australia, an offshoot which identifies and mentors up and coming young evangelicals and facilitates their career paths into positions of influence? We don’t have to develop hypotheses. In a 2007 interview with “Christian Today”, David Yates, the coordinator of Compass naively blurted out the whole sordid plan:
“One of the key things that ACL likes to focus on is areas where it can have a disproportionate impactfor the Gospel. So, the area of politics and government, where ACL works in, is one particular field. If you can get through government and policy makers then it can influence laws and it can have adisproportionate effect within the culture.
That is why we were thinking about the Compass program, or, alternatively, thinking about 15 to 20 years down the track, who will be in the media, education, politics, law, and history?
These fields, to us, are the strategic areas …”(Emphasis added.)
Further evidence of the ACL’s dominionist agenda is found in the backgrounds of its personnel, the organisations which support the group, the literature they quote and recommend and the conferences they attend – in short, the company they keep. It takes a bit of detective work, but scratch the surface of the ACL and you find links (direct and indirect, current and historical) to numerous bastions of dominionist theology.
Indeed, if you search hard enough (and I have), you’ll find the ACL is publicly listed as a supporter of the Reclaim 7 Mountains movement. (Oh, and Jim, don’t bother getting that 7 Mountains link deleted – I’ve got a screen shot.)
(click to enlarge)
It sounds innocuous enough until you read that this movement claims a divine ‘mandate for taking nations’, advocates breaking down the wall of separation between church and state and provides ‘a template for warfare’. Indeed, the perky blonde who introduces this video about 7 Mountains breezily confirms its dominionist message. The Lord, she says, is coming back for “an overcoming church … a church that knows how to possess and occupy.”
This kind of talk is all very good for rallying the troops. But, for the ACL to maintain some vestige of public credibility, it must maintain the charade of being non-threatening and moderate. It wouldn’t do for any theocratic aspirations to become common knowledge. (Oh, oops! Sorry Jim!) That, I imagine, is why old Jimbo Wallace was appointed as front man and CEO – he appeared to be ‘mainstream’, his military record demanded respect and who would suspect someone with his background to be involved in a group whose aim was to impose a ‘disproportionate influence’ on a democratically elected government?
But, given this week’s bumbling media performance, we have to ask, “How well is Jim doing his job?”
In my view, if Jim was brought in to give the ACL a veneer of mainstream respectability, he’s failing badly. In fact, observing Jim over the last couple of years, I’ve come to the conclusion that Christian dominionism and bald-faced bigotry must be hand-crafted from polystyrene. No matter how hard he tries, Jim just can’t stop them floating to the surface.
It’s been a hard year for Jim. It began with him endorsing a law (labeled ‘appalling’ by a senior Anglican bishop) which allows religious schools to expel gay students – for no reason other than for being ‘openly gay’.
Next, sexism reared its ugly head as Jim expressed the antediluvian view that women should not be allowed to serve on the front lines of Australia’s defence force. Why? Because just that morning Mrs Wallace needed Jim to help open the Vegemite jar. Yes, really. You can’t make this stuff up!
Then there was the shameful ANZAC Day tweet in which Jim suggested our diggers didn’t fight for Muslims and gay marriage. In less than 140 characters Jim showed he was out of touch with the values and sensibilities of ordinary, decent Australians and destructively inept at using social media.
In Queensland, the ACL was humiliated when their campaign against a safe sex billboard featuring two gay men, backfired. When 30,000 people took to Facebook demanding a decision to pull the ad be reversed, the advertising company quickly caved. Even the Queensland Premier and state treasurer branded the ACL’s actions homophobic.
“…you’re trying to capitalise on [this tragedy] for political gain. That’s disgusting. It’s cheap point scoring. It’s tacky. People see right through it. You’re not convincing anybody of anything except the idea that Christians are out-of-touch and only interested in protecting ourselves.”
I don’t know how much the ACL paid Capacity Builders to develop its new image, but I’d venture to say it’s money down the drain for the organisation’s financial backers. The ACL is increasingly isolated and frequently exposed as a propagandist machine for the rabidly religious right. Under Wallace, the organisation lurches from crisis to crisis – outraging the non-religious and embarrassing the crap out of all but the holiest of happy clappers.
And so, returning to Tuesday when Jim fronted up to Seven’s Sunrise program for a little argie-bargie about gay marriage with the intelligent, articulate (and gracefully gay) Dr Kerryn Phelps. It was a pathetic performance which revealed Jim no longer has what it takes to represent the ACL.
Jim’s arguments against same-sex marriage were weak and easily refuted. Worse, his claim that Jesus would not have approved of same-sex marriage shows either a cavalier disregard for the truth or a pitifully poor grasp of the New Testament. As ex-Christian author, Jake Farr-Wharton explains, “Here’s what Jesus says about homosexuals in the New Testament: “ _”.”
Once again, the ACL cemented its reputation as a national laughing-stock.
Now, if the powers that be decide Jim’s still their boy and elect to keep him on, well, that’s just dandy. I’m happy to sit back and watch the continuing decline of the ACL under his increasingly inexpert leadership. But I reckon when Jim comes up for his annual performance review the ACL puppeteers might just think about this week’s Sunrise performance and the events of the past few months and start wondering, “What is it we pay this guy for?”
It might be time to think about an early retirement, Jim.
Following my series of blogs and Drum article on the High Court Challenge against the National School Chaplaincy Program, I’ve undertaken to write two follow-up articles on the implications of the case.
The first looks at the impact the States’ intervention may have on the way the Commonwealth government operates.
The second (still in progress) looks at the possible implications of the Williams case on the NSCP itself – whether or not Williams wins.
I’m very honoured that both ABC’s The Drum and Religion and Ethics website have agreed to publish the first article, with an option for the second when it’s completed.
The issues tackled in the article are very complex, but I’ve tried hard (oh, you don’t know how hard I tried!) to present them in an accessible and entertaining way. If I’ve achieved my aim, you’ll find it both enjoyable and informative.
Way back in April my friend, Peter Cartledge from the Sydney Atheists, contacted me about an idea he had for a new (as yet unnamed) atheist journal. I happily agreed to write an article for it and, at last, Peter’s brilliant idea has become a reality.
Please support the new atheist magazine,Impius (impius is Latin for atheist). I’m sure you’ll find lots of thought provoking ideas within it – and, surprise surprise, you may find that atheists sometimes disagree. That’s a good thing. We don’t need dogma!
My article is called “Accent-chu-ate the Positive”. Here’s how it starts. To read the rest, you’ll have to read Impius.
Accent-chu-ate Positive
When Peter Cartledge asked if I would write something for this first edition of “Impius”, I had three questions: Deadline? Word length? Suggested topic? Peter’s reply to the third question set me back on my heels a little. He said, “Anything positive about atheism.”
Peter’s suggestion made me realise that we tend to get so tied up arguing against religion that we sometimes forget to argue in favour of atheism. I think there’s a good reason for that: none of us wants to fall into the trap of being an ‘evangelical’ atheist. As Nietzsche warned, “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.”
With this in mind, our concern ‘at the coalface’ of public debate is, generally, to keep religion from intruding upon our secular freedoms rather than imposing our lack of belief upon theists. We certainly don’t want to become ‘soldiers for atheism’ as our opponents purport to be ‘soldiers for Christ’ – even though we are, too often, vexatiously branded as ‘militant’. I am often moved to explain that our battle is political, not religious; we’re not trying to de-convert believers, we’re just trying to stop their beliefs from colonising our lives and coopting the secular institutions which preserve both freedom of and from religion.
Is it possible to talk about atheism in a positive way without being evangelical? I think so. As Peter reminded me, I began just such a project in “Felons, Ratbags, Commies and Left-Wing Loonies”, the first chapter in Warren Bonett’s The Australian Book of Atheism (Scribe, 2010). In “Felons …” my aim was to make a start at reclaiming atheists’ role in Australian history – “to stake a claim in the nation’s future through reference to the contributions of the past.” It’s a project I’ve continued to work on intermittently, but the diversions of day-to-day tussles with aggressive Christian nationalists too often means I’m involved in fighting against religion rather than fighting for a nation in which the role of the non-religious is fully recognized and respected … [more]
For my brilliant friend Shelley Stocken who wrote me a poem about genitals. How else to repay her but to write one back about titillating euphemisms. This one’s for you Shelley.
On this week’s 
My 
Following my 
Gladly, the Cross-Eyed Bear 