AFA Forums Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.
 Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

 Call to action Call out to atheist activism on polls, news articles, petitions or other injustice. Let everyone know we have a voice.

#1
20th March 2016, 10:14 PM
 Coryate AFA Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Roaming around Australia Posts: 314
Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

The Sex Party have the right idea, but they don't actually seem to be doing anything via the regulators as far as I can see.

https://www.sexparty.org.au/news-art...ritable-status
__________________
“The figures looked more or less human. And they were engaged in religion. You could tell by the knives (it's not murder if you do it for a god).”
― Terry Pratchett, Small Gods
#2
21st March 2016, 06:08 PM
 wearestardust What me socialist? Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: not telling Posts: 8,582
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Quote:
 Coryate said The Sex Party have the right idea, but they don't actually seem to be doing anything via the regulators as far as I can see. https://www.sexparty.org.au/news-art...ritable-status
Quite.

It is not obvious to me how, under current law, the regulator could do much.

I do hope this post doesn't attract responses to the effect of 'they should, because I really really want them to, and their ideas are ever so wrong'. From my reading of the types of things that can be charities, holding objectionable views is not by itself a bar.
__________________
WAS2018
 Blue Lightning liked this post
#3
23rd March 2016, 11:31 PM
 Logic please Wonder if the beer tastes as good? Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melb (capital of The Nanny State!!!) Posts: 16,322
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Not content with bullying Turnbull into FUBARing the SSP, the ACL want to dance triumphantly all over the remains:

http://www.acl.org.au/2016/03/acl-calls-on-qld-government-to-release-names-of-safe-schools-as-concerns-remain/
Quote:
 The Australian Christian Lobby QLD Director Wendy Francis said it was time the QLD Government comes clean and releases the names of the schools that have signed up to the controversial so-called Safe Schools program, particularly as concerns with the program linger. “It is not good enough for the QLD Government to keep secret from parents the names of the schools that are using the Safe Schools Coalition resources,” Ms Francis said. “It is hard for Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and Education Minister Kate Jones to defend their position when the Federal Government has called for greater transparency in the program and there remains deep concerns with the remaining gender ideology. “It is disturbing that the Opposition Party has been kept in the dark about the full extent of the program’s use in QLD.” Last month the ACL resorted to lodging a freedom of information request in order to obtain the names of the schools involved. The ACL in QLD is running a petition against the Safe Schools program that is signed by 8,360 Queenslanders, and besides other things calls for the names to be released.
Get lost, religious bigots. You want the names of the schools so you can target them some more? There's this thing called confidentiality and child protection...
Quote:
 “In addition, the Government should provide this information to the Shadow Education Minister, Tim Mander, who has expressed concerns with the program.”
Well, for someone who's screaming for transparenct, that's remarkably... ummm... non-transparent.

Because that would be the very same Tim Mander who was head of Scripture Union QLD before joining the LNP. And he's shadow Ed Minister???
Quote:
 Francis said the QLD Government should be open-minded about the program and focus on ensuring the best resources were available to students, rather than blindly follow rainbow ideology.
Yes, they need people to be so open-minded that their brains fall out, to get any traction...

On another note, this must buuuuuurn:

http://www.acl.org.au/2016/03/vic-govt-forcing-safe-schools-gender-theory-on-parents/
Quote:
 The Australian Christian Lobby has written to the Victorian Government calling on it to implement the Federal Education Minister Birmingham’s proposed changes and be open-minded about further reforms to the controversial Safe Schools Coalition Program. ACL Victorian Director Dan Flynn said Premier Daniel Andrews and Education Minister and Deputy Premier James Merlino were ignoring the concerns of parents and potentially setting kids off on harmful pathways by forcing all high school children to be taught radical gender theory. “Telling concerned parents they are bigots and homophobes if they have concerns about Safe Schools is arrogant in the extreme and completely disrespects parents’ prime responsibility for the education and well-being of their children.” Mr Flynn said Mr Andrews should heed the advice of more moderate voices in the ALP such as Federal Labor Shadow Minister, Anthony Albanese, who on ABC’s Lateline said it was acceptable to implement ‘sensible changes’. “The Safe Schools content is so extreme one has to wonder if Messrs. Andrews and Merlino have actually read it and understand it. “The Premier and the Education Minister repeatedly assert that this program is an anti-bullying program when even the program’s creator, Roz Ward, says its not about bullying.
Can't you just smell the impotent desperation?
__________________
*Gods* are not only a legal fiction, but a fiction in every way. Just ask the nearest hippie...
#4
12th April 2016, 06:49 PM
 M.Shiels Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 5
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Logic please: “Get lost, religious bigots. You want the names of the schools so you can target them some more? There's this thing called confidentiality and child protection...”

Since when is name-calling a substitute for reasoned debate?

The Safe Schools Coalition web-site displays the names of all other Australian participating schools. If this is considered appropriate or at all necessary to begin with, why should those of the thirty odd Queensland schools not also be shown?

Also, kindly explain in what way the Australian Christian Lobby has targeted the identified schools. Is it possible that Queensland politics plays a role as well?

Logic please: “Can't you just smell the impotent desperation?”

Not really. From what I read, for better or worse, the ACL has apparently been punching above its weight for some years now. Whereas the fact that it managed to garner in excess of 8000 Queensland signatures in support seems to indicate a genuine degree of community concern.

However politically futile, I enthusiastically support the abolishment of ‘tax exemption for religion’, together with accompanying donation-deductibility. Yet, the Department’s exemption list comprises such a wondrous (and numerous) assortment of prima facie questionable entities that it seems unfair, if not ultimately ineffectual, to query the eligibility of any single one on its own.
#5
13th April 2016, 12:32 PM
 wearestardust What me socialist? Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: not telling Posts: 8,582
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Quote:
 M.Shiels said Logic please: “Get lost, religious bigots. You want the names of the schools so you can target them some more? There's this thing called confidentiality and child protection...” Since when is name-calling a substitute for reasoned debate?
I think it's hardly name-calling, or even unreasonable, to suggest that the nefarious ACL wants to do nefarious things. One may feel confident that they don't want to have a list of the names so they can pray over it.

Quote:
 The Safe Schools Coalition web-site displays the names of all other Australian participating schools. If this is considered appropriate or at all necessary to begin with, why should those of the thirty odd Queensland schools not also be shown?
Might be a point there, LP

Though that still doesn't make the ACL innocent in this regard.

Quote:
 However politically futile, I enthusiastically support the abolishment of ‘tax exemption for religion’, together with accompanying donation-deductibility. Yet, the Department’s exemption list comprises such a wondrous (and numerous) assortment of prima facie questionable entities that it seems unfair, if not ultimately ineffectual, to query the eligibility of any single one on its own.
That's rather my point too. It's actually bad law and/or administration to make rules for individuals or specific organisations because we don't like them. The general class of "advancing religion" needs to be removed as a tax-exempt status.
__________________
WAS2018

Last edited by wearestardust; 13th April 2016 at 12:34 PM.
 Logic please, Blue Lightning liked this post
#6
13th April 2016, 05:13 PM
 Logic please Wonder if the beer tastes as good? Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melb (capital of The Nanny State!!!) Posts: 16,322
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Hi M.Shiels. Welcome to the forum. Nice intro, yours. Oh wait, you didn't.
Quote:
 M.Shiels said Logic please: “Get lost, religious bigots. You want the names of the schools so you can target them some more? There's this thing called confidentiality and child protection...” Since when is name-calling a substitute for reasoned debate?
Well, that's a first. In my 6 years here, I can't recall a previous (implied) accusation against me, of eschewing reasoned debate in favour of name-calling. But since you've ignored the rest of what was posted, in order to mischaracterise my post thus...

I assume you're objecting to the term "religious bigots". Sorry, but that's not name-calling. It is an accurate (and pejorative) description of them and their exhibited, documented behaviour and pronouncements.

If, purely hypothetically speaking, I had called them "addle-headed god-bothering morons", your accusations of name-calling of rational discourse might have had some validity - depending on what else I'd written. That's a possible example of name-calling. Clearly not what I did. You're welcome.

Now - 2 simple questions for you, M.Shiels:

1. are the ACL properly characterised as "religious"? YES/NO
2. do the ACL exhibit behaviours and positions reasonably described as "bigoted"? YES/NO

Quote:
 M.Shiels said The Safe Schools Coalition web-site displays the names of all other Australian participating schools. If this is considered appropriate or at all necessary to begin with, why should those of the thirty odd Queensland schools not also be shown?
Well, there's a relevant question of whether any should be shown at all. Counter-question - if their problem is the program itself, why do they need to know individual schools? Why do you apparently think it's appropriate at all?

There's also an issue of Wendy Francis and ACL Qld being particularly vociferous in their opposition to, and targeting of, anything vaguely non-hetero. Exhibit A - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-06-0...uproar/2741304
Quote:
Quote:
 M.Shiels said Also, kindly explain in what way the Australian Christian Lobby has targeted the identified schools. Is it possible that Queensland politics plays a role as well?
Gladly - as providing supporting evidence for all assertions on request is a key forum rule around here - http://www.acl.org.au/2016/02/kids-pulled-from-school-as-all-of-us-released-in-australian-schools-by-lgbti-activists/
Quote:
 Concerned parents are pulling their kids from school after some 490 schools across Asutralia signed up to the $8 million Government-sponsored program 'Safe Schools' that endorses students cross-dressing and other radical sexual concepts. ... “I would hope that the schools that have signed up to the program have fully informed parents about what their children would now be exposed to and taught,” Ms Francis said. Victorian mother of four, Cella White, has withdrawn her son and daughter from Frankston High School, South of Melbourne, because it had signed up to the$8 million Federally-funded, Safe Schools. “I feel that the Safe Schools Coalition exposes my children to questionable information that is neither convincing, nor conclusive,” White said. “The school is not hearing me and my input seems irrelevant.” ... Sydney pastor David Maher said he had written a letter to the Burwood Girls School on behalf of some 15 parents and members of the community who were concerned with the Safe Schools Coalition program. “I know of a number of parents and girls that are fearful of saying anything public because of possible bullying by teachers and other negative repercussions,” Rev Maher said. ... Ms Francis said: “We encourage parents across the nation to inquire from their children’s school whether it has signed up to the “Safe School” agenda. If it has, parents should be speaking out loudly in defence of their children by pressing the school to withdraw from the dangerous program.”
Emphasis mine. From Wendy Francis, too. Do you doubt their own expressed intention to continue to target schools?

BTW, the ACL's blatant astroturfing techniques used for targeting have been well-documented, in addition to the links and evidence already adduced - https://newmatilda.com/2016/02/24/ex...ams-opponents/

Their history of astroturfing calls into question how genuine their alleged "community concern" actually is.
Quote:
 M.Shiels said Logic please: “Can't you just smell the impotent desperation?” Not really. From what I read, for better or worse, the ACL has apparently been punching above its weight for some years now. Whereas the fact that it managed to garner in excess of 8000 Queensland signatures in support seems to indicate a genuine degree of community concern.
By your own logic, a "for" petition count of 70,000 signatures would override that? - http://www.starobserver.com.au/news/...natures/147142 (please note, I'm not agreeing with your logic, merely testing it)

BTW, misrepresenting people's posted material in the way you just did is against the rules here. And given that people can read back for themselves, pretty pointless too. Just sayin'.

If you read again, you will see that my comment that you quotemined is in the context of their Victorian bleatings. Not QLD. I even quoted that.

Now, having fulfilled my obligations under the rules to substantiate my posted claims, I'll invoke the same rules requiring all member (including you) to answer relevant questions. In addition to those I've already asked...

Why exactly have you objected to my post in the terms you have? What is your position on the Safe Schools Program? Please be specific.

Cheers.
__________________
*Gods* are not only a legal fiction, but a fiction in every way. Just ask the nearest hippie...

Last edited by Logic please; 13th April 2016 at 05:15 PM.
 two dogs, robertkd, odd, Strato, TokenSkeptic and 1 others liked this post
#7
13th April 2016, 05:46 PM
 robertkd Socialists ARE NOT Communists Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Rockhampton Posts: 4,760
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Quote:
 M.Shiels said Logic please: “Can't you just smell the impotent desperation?” Not really. From what I read, for better or worse, the ACL has apparently been punching above its weight for some years now. Whereas the fact that it managed to garner in excess of 8000 Queensland signatures in support seems to indicate a genuine degree of community concern.

Yep 0.0017% thats a wide section of the community, I know maybe if we all close our eyes and click our heels together three times we'll be back in Kansas.
__________________
An atheist hears a voice in their head, they're delusional.
A theist hears a voice in their head and it's providence.
mmm go figure

http://www.betterhuman.org
#8
13th April 2016, 08:06 PM
 M.Shiels Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 5
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Despite some surprise on my part that you don’t consider Logic Please’ labeling the Australian Christian Lobby “religious bigots” as name-calling, thank you for replying And ignoring of course how this particular phrase is more usually applied to those who display an unfair intolerance toward religious viewpoints, which hardly applies to the ACL.

‘Unfair’ is perhaps the key word --- Logic Please insinuates that the ACL ‘targets’ participating schools in some unspecified way, to boot invoking “confidentiality and child protection”, dishonestly so in my view, yet fails to offer a single shred of substantiating evidence that it ever ‘targeted’ any school whatsoever, or is likely to do so in respect of any Queensland school.

As mooted previously, I rather think these shenanigans are more to do with supplying ammunition for parochial power politics than schools per se or any particular programs.

The “nefarious ACL wants to do nefarious things”, you say. The first dictionary I met with defines ‘nefarious’ inter alia as ‘extremely wicked or villainous’. Your description is no doubt accurate, but here too I think we’re entitled to some sort of substantiation, if only by way of example.

The ACL doesn’t seem to make any bones about either what it stands for or how it operates, that is, a politically active, socially conservative, right-wing Christian lobbying body. In a free and democratic society, mere disagreement with its views hardly seems justification for name-calling, not to mention that there are also no doubt scores of non-religionists who agree with at least some or all of its policies. It also goes without saying that special-interest groups like the ACL and similar will readily resort to all sorts of machinations and tricks in order to get their views across.

I wrote the above earlier in the day before I struck your post, Logic Please – if you allow, I’ll simply continue on by now addressing your reply.

With respect, your opening rhetoric seems to signify little and I’ll skip it accordingly.

I already described the nature of ACL above. Does it exhibit views reasonably described as bigoted? Surely this is largely a matter of subjective semantics, personal opinion: one man’s freedom fighter is another’s cold-blooded terrorist?

Personally I fail to see why the names of the participating schools should be displayed at all.

You mention Wendy Francis, her targeting “anything vaguely non-hetero, and the condom safe-sex adverting campaign aimed at gay couples.

From the same article as quoted by your goodself:

"I've been labelled homophobic. This has absolutely nothing to do with gay couples," spokeswoman Wendy Francis said.

"This has nothing to do with anything other than another condom ad in a bus shelter, where the children are catching buses to school and billboards where their parents are stopping at lights.

"I will continue to fight sexual imagery in our outdoor advertising until we can get it removed."

It wouldn’t surprise me if some parents felt the same.

Alas, I fail to see how concerned parents “pulling their kids from schools across Australia”, or of Wendy Francis offering gratuitous advise to parents via the ACL Website (one probably unknown to most parents), somehow amounts to a ‘targeting’ of schools by the ACL. I’ll not ask how notions of “confidentiality and child protection” enter into it.

Then, with the names of more than five hundred schools already on display, what possible difference can another thirty or so Queensland ones make?

I merely mentioned the figure of 8000 Queensland signatures to indicate that some parents indeed had some concerns with SSC’s program, concerns well substantiated by your own cited articles.

And scant to do with some other petition presented in the Federal Parliament overriding this or that, or even whether we ought to be for or against the program. Our concern resides solely with whether the claims or assertions made by you are able to withstand scrutiny. In my opinion they do not.
#9
13th April 2016, 09:28 PM
 Logic please Wonder if the beer tastes as good? Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melb (capital of The Nanny State!!!) Posts: 16,322
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Quote:
Who died and made you Grand Arbiter of that, or anything else??? I am happy to let readers judge that. If you really think I have made unsupported claims, you are welcome to report me for it to the Moderation Team, who will consider your complaint and sanction me if upheld.

Figuratively sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring what I'm posting =/= "scrutiny".

And your unwarranted accusation of dishonesty on my part, and continued allegations of name-calling despite my having dealt with this, are noted. You have not resiled from nor retracted these, despite my posted reply.

M.Shiels: This is my second request (under the rules) to relevantly answer the specific questions I have posed to you. Without the wall-of-text polemic.

I'm also about to start requesting evidence, substantiation and links for every single assertion and claim of yours. Best to have them ready.
__________________
*Gods* are not only a legal fiction, but a fiction in every way. Just ask the nearest hippie...

Last edited by Logic please; 13th April 2016 at 09:32 PM.
#10
13th April 2016, 09:39 PM
 robertkd Socialists ARE NOT Communists Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Rockhampton Posts: 4,760
Re: Strip the Australian Christian Lobby of it charitable status.

Quote:
 M.Shiels said The ACL doesn’t seem to make any bones about either what it stands for or how it operates, that is, a politically active, socially conservative, right-wing Christian lobbying body. In a free and democratic society, mere disagreement with its views hardly seems justification for name-calling, not to mention that there are also no doubt scores of non-religionists who agree with at least some or all of its policies. It also goes without saying that special-interest groups like the ACL and similar will readily resort to all sorts of machinations and tricks in order to get their views across.
So you freely admit to being nefarious and not acting in a transparent and honest way, I see for you the means justify the ends. Plus an appeal to some form of group think.

Quote:
 I already described the nature of ACL above. Does it exhibit views reasonably described as bigoted? Surely this is largely a matter of subjective semantics, personal opinion: one man’s freedom fighter is another’s cold-blooded terrorist?
Nah your bigoted lets face it if you don't agree with something your against it.

Quote:
 Then, with the names of more than five hundred schools already on display, what possible difference can another thirty or so Queensland ones make?
So it's not really important but you wanna make it important, be consistent.

Quote:
 I merely mentioned the figure of 8000 Queensland signatures to indicate that some parents indeed had some concerns with SSC’s program, concerns well substantiated by your own cited articles.
No you thought you were important with 8000 but acl seems vastly over represented in the scheme of things.

Quote:
 And scant to do with some other petition presented in the Federal Parliament overriding this or that, or even whether we ought to be for or against the program. Our concern resides solely with whether the claims or assertions made by you are able to withstand scrutiny. In my opinion they do not.
No of course nothing else matters just your perception of the world, wake up call.
__________________
An atheist hears a voice in their head, they're delusional.
A theist hears a voice in their head and it's providence.
mmm go figure

http://www.betterhuman.org

 Bookmarks