Australia Christian Living Ethics Sex and sexuality

Why I won’t be joining the Victory Parade at Sydney’s Mardi Gras

This Saturday is the big Mardi Gras festival in Sydney.   I won’t be there. Not just because I will be speaking at the Village Church weekend away – but also out of principle. I won’t be joining in the celebrations.  Not because I’m homophobic (I’m not!) nor because I think gay people should be persecuted (they shouldn’t) – but because I find the whole charade depressing and depraved.     I’m also not entirely sure what the purpose of the parade is.   If I was to go by Sydney Mardi Gras website it would not be pleasant (please note do not click on the link if you are offended by the bad language or the gross sexualisation – in parts).

I think I’ve managed to work out what Mardi Gras is but first of all let us say what it is not.

 

  1. It is not diverse, inclusive or equal

There is no diversity. If you divert from the only philosophy in any way you are accused of blasphemy and banned.  If you dare to believe and express the scientific fact that biological men cannot become women, then you are out. You dare to question any aspect of Mardi Gras and the philosophy on which it is built and you are out. There is no inclusion, no diversity and no equality. One feminist Lesbian speaker was disinvited because of her alleged ‘transphobic’ views.   I share her video here – its short but powerful..

Are we past peak LGBT?   “The LGBT community has become a safe haven for the mentally unstable, who are not seeking help and who are not in any sense of the word, Queer…this community has become so ridiculously intolerant, whilst preaching love”  – no wonder she got banned!

I wonder if we are past peak LGBT?  Mardi Gras in Sydney in 1992 had some 500,00 spectators, last year it was 300,000.  Maybe it’s become passe?

This is no inclusion, diversity and no equality for the whole of society. Where are the parades celebrating the disabled? The immigrants? And the most persecuted group in the world just now (Christians)?

Screenshot 2020-02-28 14.02.31

It seems that like the police or government in Scotland, if you want to prove your credentials as diverse, inclusive and equal you just have to set up an LGBT unit. I wonder why the police have not set up Christian units or drive round in cars with crosses to show ‘solidarity with the Christian community? Perhaps some groups are more equal than others?

It’s not about social justice

There was a time when a gay parade in Sydney could justifiably claim to be about social justice.  But no more.   This is where the elites come to party. The bank ANZ is a major sponsor. In fact they have set up a campaign (unasked for and unwelcome by some of the gay community) which puts them right at the top of the virtue signaling league table. Steve McAlpine has pointed out their hypocrisy clearly.

Screenshot 2020-02-28 14.07.05
The ANZ Poster Campaign

But meanwhile – whilst spending money on demonstrating their social justice credentials, ANZ agreed to compensate hundreds of Cambodian families who had been forcibly evicted from their homes and land to make way for a sugar plantation and refinery, thanks to funding from ANZ.   Nothing sums up the juxtaposition between these two versions of social justice – the one is concerned entirely with sexuality – the other looks for justice for the poor.  ANZ’s campaign is Orwellian in the extreme – although calling for ‘Love speech’ in reality it is a campaign to hate all who dare to disagree with their sexual philosophy.

It is a celebration of sexualisation

2153It seems as though many of the 12,000 participants like to self identify as sordid, squalid, and sexually perverse.  For some it is good, clean, harmless fun.  Others come to watch a freak show.  But yet others it is an opportunity to display perversity in public.  There are gay people who loathe the whole charade – because of both the sordid sexuality and the sordid commercialisation.  And if you wonder where all this leads – the worst thing is the sexualisation of children and the idea that this is somehow ‘family fun’.   This tweet appeared today which exemplifies the path we are heading down.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1233340636058804225

It’s a commercial goldmine and a political and sporting minefield

The corporates sponsor over 100 floats. Sydney airport has rainbow walkways. On my way to work everyday as I walk through Wynyard station I walk past businesses each trying to outdo each other in their ‘love is love’ rainbow signals. The politicians all have to express their support. The sporting organisations likewise – who cares if Rugby Australia are destroying Australian rugby – at least they are on message.   It doesn’t matter what you personally think, or even if you know what you are supporting, the only thing that matters is that you are seen to support and that you can in no way be accused of the Blasphemy against the Holy State – homophobia.

It is a victory march.

Mardi Gras is not about a fight for equal rights. This is about celebrating the victory of cultural supremacy.  Every knee must bow. Every tongue confess.  We see this everywhere, in every sphere of contemporary life.  For example Apple have just announced yet another seriesabout coming out.   And the ever Woke Disney have just announced their first LGBT cartoon character.    Meanwhile not to be outdone the Democratic Presidental candidate Pete Buttigeig helps a nine-year-old come out as gay on stage.   Mardi Gras is a conqueror’s parade – where the victors still manage to portray themselves as victims and the real victims in this cultural war, (the poor, children and the devout) are left bleeding on the margins.

 Why not go and protest?

Some Christians argue that we should go and that we should be the real protestors. No. Why? What would be the point? I have nothing against the people and see no reason to antagonize or participate in something which could and probably should, be regarded as hateful. Our battle is not against flesh and blood….

My suggestion is that we should react in the following ways:

Firstly we pray.

There are forces at work here that are far beyond our protest, politics or persuasion. The modern Western world is reverting to a pre-Christian Greco/Roman/Pagan society with all its decadence, inequality, cruelty, confusion and perversion. But it is precisely within that society that the Gospel flourished and turned the world upside down. Only the Holy Spirit can enable that.

Secondly we love.

Not by wearing meaningless ‘love is love’ rainbow t-shirts, but rather by simply caring for people, including our enemies, as those made in the image of God. Rather than stand with a placard along Oxford Street in Sydney this street I would personally open up the churches and invite people in for tea and prayer!

Thirdly we reason and we bear witness to the glorious changing grace of Christ.

Like for example the former Sydney gay activist David Bennett – seen here in this discussion on Unbeleiveable. A discussion which incidentally shows why the Church has been so pathetic in its response – Brandon Robertson’s response is a classic demonstration of how to use the devil’s favourite tactic – ‘did God really say?”.

Screenshot 2020-02-28 14.34.03

We also need to think.

To understand. To know the times. To get the bigger picture.  I had the great privilege of teaching on this at a talk in Norwest Anglican church this week.  It is clearly a live topic – I expected about 50 and 160 turned up.    I think it is essential for us to get the bigger picture.  For example Roger Scruton marvelously describes the situation –

“Family law grew from the desire to protect a specifc form of domestic life, based on the lifelong union of one man and one woman.   But once the state became involved in tying the bonds between people, it also, in response to radical reformers, played an equal if not greater part in undoing them. Our laws against incest , bigamy and child marriage reflect the belief that marriage, as defined by the state, is to be judged in terms of another and higher standard. But when marriage is rewritten as a contract between the partners, in which future generations have no voice, those laws lose their underlying rationale. Hence, by a series of almost unnoticed changes, allowing ever easier divorce, and ever more blatant neglect of children, the state has overseen the gradual undoing of the marriage vow, to the point at which the advocacy of homosexual marriage seems not merely a logical consequence of all that has preceded it, but a manifest offer of ‘equal treatment’ to a previously marginalized minority”   (Roger Scruton – How to be a Conservative).

I know of noone who expresses the issues as clearly, compassionately and biblically as Rosario Butterfield.  Please take the time to read this brilliant article from her – Are We Living Out Romans 1?

Also if you have time watch this wonderful lecture which incorporates her testimony – remarkable!

I leave you with her final paragraph from the article….

Listening to the challenges of people who identify as LGBTQ (as well as the praying parents that stand behind them) can be helpful if it allows you to meet them where they are with the gospel that changes minds, wills, affections, and allegiances. Biblical counseling and faithful preaching that breaks our hearts on the Rock of Christ is crucial to this conversation, as is kindness and genuine care for the well-being of others. But Romans 1 is the true Christian’s guide as we seek to live for Christ in this post-Obergefell world. A person’s well-being is never disconnected from truth, because truth is not only true, it is better, it is beautiful, it is ethical, and it is lovely.

Perth’s Pride, Perth’s Shame

“I AM WHO I SAY I AM” – Reflections on Dundee Pride

After writing this I popped into my local chemist to pick up my prescription.  I could not believe what I saw on the window – lots of posters using the rainbow.  When I spoke to the chemist we had a good chat about what it was for – it was not primarily to celebrate Marid Gras but to encourage gay people to take the Prep drug in order to get rid of HIV. IMG-7824_3 Getting rid of HIV is surely a worthy aim – and I loved his enthusiasm for that.  So I set off home with my rainbow bag.  Such of course is the cultural domination of this narrative that even to ask the questions that were in my head would seem to be blasphemy.  Without writing another essay let me just simply say – I accept that a chemist may be able to dispense ‘health’…but dispensing love and and equality?  What would happen if I went in and asked for a prescription for love?  Would I get viagra?  What about one for ‘equality’?  Of course, these words were being used in their new colonised meaning – not in the way that they are usually understood.  The whole message was code for supporting this one community and this one lifestyle drug.  There is no equality there – because other lifestyle drugs are not freely available (Prep costs $10,000 per person per year.

And it is a lifestyle drug – it is mostly for gay men who have unprotected sex or drug users who inject.  I could not find out what the costs have been to the Australian health service – but assuming that 1% of the population are gay men it must be beyond $2.5 billion per year.   That’s money that obviously cannot be spent on anything else.  Maybe it’s a good thing – and maybe it’s justified (and I am prepared to accept that it could be –  once I see the evidence – I’ve already begun to make enquiries) but what if there are those who are being denied vital medicines because the government cannot afford them?  Is that equality?  Or are a couple of lifestyles being privileged beyond all others?  And is anyone allowed to even ask these questions?

 

 

 

13 comments

  1. Thanks for all the fantastic material you pass on to us through your blog and Quantum, David.

    I was going to remark that in some ways the rainbow flag has been appropriated from its symbolic use by the Judeo/Christian faith. However, I found that this question has already been aired and that the reply is that ‘cultural appropriation’ can only be viewed as applying to a majority group taking on something from a minority group. So it is no longer a truism that “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”. I have no idea who makes up these ‘rules’ but it seems to mean that it is considered fine for minority groups to ‘appropriate’ things from majority groups (eg marriage) but not the other way round. This can only lead to social divisiveness and is so regrettable.

    1. Just wanted to point out that they are not using THE rainbow, they are using their rainbow.
      It only has 6 colours. They cannot produce a 7 colour rainbow, I don’t think God will let them, but the graphics people can’t do it either.

      1. How amusing.

        Which is it Peter, God won’t let “them” produce a 7 colour rainbow or, mysteriously, the graphics people just simply can’t do it…..6 colours they can produce perfectly fine but bump it up one more to 7 and they are just flummoxed.

        The flag as originally devised actually had 8 colours. Some variations have had 9 – and despite your proclamation that God wouldn’t allow a 7 colour rainbow flag to be produced they have been – perhaps he was looking the other way that time.

      2. You can de synicle, if it makes you feel good, but my understanding is that they could not get the specific of the colours right. The six are easy but to get more did not work.
        Yes they did try more to no avail.
        Of course, with today’s printing technology, who knows.
        I believe God gave us the rainbow of seven colours for a specific purpose, you are free to believe whatever you like.

    2. If the Christian church is a majority group then it would not be fine (as it seems to be) for it to “appropriate” minority LGB etc! flags that are misappropriated in the first instance, as it would be partaking in misappropriation of the covenant sign, and it certainly should not be seeking to appropriate pride, the pride of life, the opposite of humility of Christ.

  2. Just a straight now one thing that you mentioned in your blog.
    the Sydney Mardi gras never ever had 500,000 people, in fact they never ever had 300,000 people.
    We (Salt Shakers) took this point to the media 15 years ago. In fact we stopped the police authorising the figures given them by the Mardi gras organization because they were, point blank, fraud.
    Given the facts the police stopped substantiating their figures.
    The parade route is less than 2 km or 2000 mm long, two people can stand side by side in 1 m, that makes 4000 people in each row. It’s easy to do the maths. 300000 / 4000 = 75 rows of people that’s 37 rows on each side of the parade.
    We went to Mardi gras twice not because we wanted to but because we needed to justify our mathematics. we walked the whole length of the parade on both occasions and in some parts there were perhaps 10 maybe 15 rows (at Hyde Park), but nowhere else could there be more than 5 rows of people if anybody is going to see anything.
    By the time it got towards the end of the parade route there were maybe 2 or 3 rows of people.
    given an average of 10 rows on each side of the parade for the whole length that would give 40000 x 2 80000 people.
    I don’t want to go on but we calculated that if the whole street was open purely to spectators they still couldn’t fit 300000 people.
    And remember, two thirds of the street is taken up for the parade itself.
    The whole thing is a facade, just like the 10% of people were never gay, and even the homosexual hacktivists eventually had to admit that was in fact a wrong. The figure is more like 2-3%.

  3. Many years ago when Sir Robert Menzies was PM of Oz , he attended a Commonwealth meeting with the short – lived UK PM Sir Alec Douglas Home.

    In a private aside , Sir Alec teased RM as follows : ” Come on Bob we are both Border Scots so why is your name pronounced Menzays instead of the correct Mingies?

    I don’t know, but I’ll look into it when I get hume.

    1. There is a small town in the Dandenong Ranges (Victoria) called Menzies Creek (not names after Sir Robert). It has at times been referred colloquially to as Ming River, with allusions to the former P. M.

  4. More:

    It seems Dean Peter Catt also argues that the empty tomb, the innocence of Jesus, the tearing of the temple veil and the darkness that descended when Jesus died are all metaphors, not historical events. See pages 18-19 of the Diocese magazine:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://anglicanchurchsq.org.au/wp-content/themes/acsq-theme/focus/1523403686/focus.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi25YDBjvvnAhUObisKHf3bC0cQFjAOegQIAxAC&usg=AOvVaw19dypFQ4E1Rpw0vB2Rs3wt

    Pastor David, is there any evidence at all that the early Christians considered the text in this way or is Catt just making things up to suit his own sensibilities?

    1. While I’m not David, there is s lot of good resources, evidence that they are historical accounts based on eyewitnesses, not myths at all, not based on lies and fabrication.
      As CS Lewis points out, they bear no relation myth.
      But this is typical of unbelieving liberal Anglicanism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: