A Vote For Australian Labor Is A Vote For Incremental Homosexual Totalitarianism And Radical Government Over-Reach 

Good news if you like police states because there’s a 50-50 chance Australia will take one big leap towards it at our coming July 2nd election: all you need to do is vote for Labor.

Now, you may be supportive of homosexuality and redefining the only definition of marriage in all history but before you leap at the following proposal, just imagine the day when such a ploy is used against you because, guaranteed, it will come.

Government always seeks more power and while today they target the enemies of homosexuality, tomorrow they will target other enemies…and maybe you will eventually find yourself on their list when it is too late to do anything.

Given that just over 60% of Australians identify as Christians (compared to the 2-3% of homosexuals), will Christians be getting our own discrimination commissioner from labor?

Yeah, didn’t think so.

Here’s the bad news:

Labor has announced it will appoint an LGBTI discrimination commissioner to the Australian Human Rights Commission if it wins government in July.

Senator Penny Wong announced plans in Melbourne on Saturday morning for a full-time, dedicated commissioner to champion the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex people.

She said the move would help ensure LGBTI Australians feel safer and more included in society.

“The commissioner will address structural discrimination, work towards ensuring our schools, workplaces and communities are free from discrimination, continuing Labor’s tradition of removing discrimination and creating a more fair, more equal Australia,” Ms Wong said.

Senator Wong said the person appointed to the job would have a big task ahead of them.

“The simple truth is we’re not equal … and whilst great progress has been made in the fight for a fairer Australia, our fight is far from over,” she said.

“Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, and intersex Australians continue to face discrimination in so many areas of their life.

“The impact of this discrimination is real and it can be deadly.”

Senator Wong said discrimination also included state-sanctioned discrimination and reiterated that the Opposition would legislate for same sex marriage in the first 100 days of the next Parliament if elected.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-21/election-2016-labor-promises-lgbti-discrimination-commissioner/7434660

Progressives Claim That “Christians Are Obsessed With Sex” But Progressives Really Are Obsessed With Sexualizing Very Young Children And Having Access To Them In Schools So They Can Teach Them To Experiment Sexually

The is a quote that is often attributed to Joseph Stalin. Before I quote it, I want to explain that it is a controversial quote and that many people get hung up on its apparent mis-attribution to Stalin. This offended response is a nice smokescreen for ignoring what the quote actually says and, no surprises, there’s a good reason for that: the quote, no matter its source, is a hard-hitting truth that exposes the Marxist-Progressive agenda.

Here it is:

“America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”

All of this was at one point accurate – the American population was zealously patriotic and largely moral specifically because of their strong Christian heritage and faith.

Three guesses as to what problems America has today?!

Firstly, Christianity is scorned as a curse in favour of false gods, ideologies, and idols.

Secondly, Christian morality has been usurped with relativity and amorality.

Finally, patriotism has been replaced by a self-loathing of all that America once stood for and a welcome embrace of the Communist ideologies that America once fought so hard.

One more thing that is heartily accepted in America and her Western allies these days: teaching young children to become sexually active and experiment with twisted LGBTIQ-endorsed perversity.

Who needs life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Now, how on earth did a culture known as “Christendom” change so quickly and so completely?

Was it an accident? A mistake?

Of course not – a lot of people worked very hard to completely alter America and disconnect the nation from its history.

The same is true in most Western nations and Australia is no exception.

It began early in the century but found its voice with the sexual revolution in the 1960’s. Paraded as “liberation”, it was in fact anarchy that has lead us down the road of faultless divorce, abortion-on-demand, a plague of STD’s epitomised by HIV AIDS, normalising homosexuality, and now the sexualisation of children no older than toddlers.

Consider the following article by Jennifer Oriel:  

There are few forms of predation that offend our common morality more than child sexual abuse. During the 1970s, paedophile groups capitalising on the sexual liberation movement sought to redefine their exploitation of youth as an expression of children’s sexual rights, self-determination and autonomy. Groups such as the North American Man/Boy Love Association claimed children were sexual beings and sought to repeal age of consent laws to liberate their sexuality. They were welcomed by fringe elements of the neo-Marxist minorities movement that advocated sexual libertarian ideology under Queer and “sex positive” politics. Today, the discourse on children’s sexual rights and the belief they are sexual beings are invoked to justify school programs that sexualise youth at ever younger ages.

The Andrews’ Labor left government in Victoria invokes neo-Marxist rhetoric to defend questionable school programs that encourage the sexualisation of children. The Safe Schools Coalition (SSC) and Building Respectful Relationships programs were introduced using minority politics as the rationale. In each case, a state-designated minority group and political cause are aligned in a program of social change that uses youth as change agents. Program designers create a health case for government funding without causal evidence to validate a relationship between program activities and core objectives. The Safe Schools program was created for the minority group LGBTQI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex) for the cause of anti-bullying with the stated objective to improve health outcomes.

The program encourages young people to become change agents for the cause of sexual ­diversity. When the program was criticised by conservative Senator Cory Bernardi, Labor leader Bill Shorten accused him of homophobia. After community outrage following revelations that program co-founder Roz Ward designed Safe Schools as part of a Marxist social change strategy, the liberal coalition withdrew commonwealth funding beyond 2017. Despite the Marxist objective of the Safe Schools program, or perhaps because of it, Daniel Andrews continues to defend it. His education minister James Merlino vilified politicians concerned about the hard Left’s indoctrination of children, calling them “bigots”. 

Unfortunately, the SSC debacle is not isolated. It has transpired that the Andrews government has produced another school program that sexualises children. As with the SSC program, Building Respectful Relationships (BRR) began with a state-designated minority group, women, aligned with the important cause of domestic violence prevention. The case for government funding was again framed as a health imperative, namely, the prevention of violence against women. And once again, the program was introduced in schools without causal evidence linking its exercises to the stated objective. Like Safe Schools, the BRR program promotes a radical agenda divorced from its stated program objective. It promotes the sexualisation of children by inculcating techniques and beliefs centred on the premise that children are sexual.

In the program instructors are encouraged to sexualise children, and children to sexualise themselves and their peers. They are asked to view highly sexualised personal ads and write their own, discuss transgenderism and anal sex. Program authors acknowledge that one exercise may cause “disassociation” in children. Sexualising and inducing a dissociative state in children are methods of paedophilic predation. They are not methods of domestic violence prevention. It is increasingly common to find the sexualisation of very young children promoted as part of sex education in schools. In 2009, the United Nations produced International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education. The first iteration met with controversy after conservatives revealed it sexualised prepubescent children by promoting masturbation.

NGOs have joined the UN in a push for radical sexual programs aimed at youth under the auspices of sexual diversity and sexual health. The International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) claims that “the taboo on youth sexuality is one of the key forces driving the AIDS epidemic”. In fact, the premature sexualisation of youth, especially the exploitation of girls for prostitution, have been key drivers of HIV transmission in Southeast Asia and Africa for ­decades. Despite the fact, the IPPF asserts repeatedly that “young people are sexual beings” and criticises the Catholic Church for imposing barriers on young people, denying “pleasurable and positive aspects of sex”. Its solution is comprehensive sexuality education, which it describes as perhaps “the single most important gift that parents can offer to their children”.

The Netherlands government promotes comprehensive sexuality education in what some call the Dutch model. Under the Dutch model, schoolchildren begin sexual programs at four years of age. Modules for young children include “what feels nice” and “does bare make you blush?” Lessons marketed under the “Spring Fever” package include “being naked”, a module that explores nudity, undressing and being in the bath. It is unclear why any adult would solicit an account of how a child undresses or why the Dutch state would mandate such discussion in schools. CSE advocates defend their programs with studies that indicate efficacy, but mainly in comparison to abstinence programs.

There is a more moderate middle path that provides children requisite knowledge in biology, safety from violence and mutual respect without encouraging their sexualisation in activities that resemble grooming. The sexualisation of childhood by governments and NGOs should be a source of broad community concern. The state has no business interfering in childhood by conditioning children’s sexual responses. As a whole, parents remain the best arbiters of their children’s morality and guardians of their development. Australian children are ranked 14th in literacy and 19th in mathematics according to OECD reports. Governments should take remedial classes in teaching kids the basics of reading, writing and arithmetical instead of indulging messianic pretensions to parenting by proxy.

Even if Stalin never said it, I am saying it and I am saying that the Marxists clearly took its advice and have successfully weakened America and the West, perhaps fatally.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/14/ben-carson-cites-stalin-gets-quote-wrong.html
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/protect-kids-from-marxist-sexualisation-programs/news-story/2d4f796c2c53c26c22320df709719f7a

Dear ABC, Crowdfunded Illustrated Homosexual Fairytails Are Not Headline News But The Dangers Of The Homosexual Lifestyle Sure Are

If I successfully Crowdfunded a fifth leg for my dog, it would no more be “news” than this joke.

What would be news however is an LGBT Aesop-styled fable about the massively increased prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in the LGBT community. Or drug and alcohol abuse, depression, and suicide.

I mean, if your are going to try and pawn homosexuality and other abnormal, dangerous and destructive desires and disorders onto the general public, at least be honest about what is under the hood.

I’m loath to post any of this propoganda masquerading as “news” but there is one important comment which sums up the key problem here:

“The conflict does not arise from a coming out story or someone struggling with their sexuality or a disapproving parent. In this utopian kingdom, sexuality isn’t questioned,” he said.

Ah utopia! Y’know, the key underlying promise of Marxism/Humanism/Atheism.

Otherwise know as a “lie”.

So these authors are under the insane delusion that total sexual anarchy is actually the gateway to utopia – a place where nobody asks any questions or, at least, the wrong type of questions. Just like in Communist countries! 

The threat of the gulag seems to have that effect on questioning types.

With that disturbing lie exposed, let’s consider a very contrary reality to this delusional LGBT fantasy: the massively increased prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases, drug and alcohol abuse, depression, and suicide in the LGBT community are all equally high in all the homosexual-friendly cities of the world including San Francisco, Rio De Janiro and Sydney. 

The LGBT lobby are so eager to represent homosexuals as victims that they will overplay their hand and confess the reality that homosexuals still turn to drugs, alcohol, and suicide even when they are embraced, supported, and celebrated.

Regardless of location, consider the following cited article by Matt Slick that clearly identifies homosexuals as victims but most importantly, victims of their own dangerous lifestyle choices and sexual practises:

Okay, so now that we have something to work with, let’s take a look at homosexuality and see if it is beneficial or harmful to society. Let’s start with disease and see what the statistics teach us.

Disease

2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection: “Men who have sex with men [MSM] remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While the CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009).” (Center for Disease Control, cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HIVIncidencePressRelease.html)

“A recent CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection.” (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm).

25% of HIV infected in U.K. unaware of their infection: “Of the estimated 86,500 people living with HIV in the United Kingdom, about 25 percent are not aware they are infected, the Health Protection Agency said recently.” (The Body, thebody.com/content/art59714.html)

Clearly, the disease statistics related to a homosexual lifestyle prove that such a lifestyle is harmful not only to themselves but also to others, especially when you note that in both the U.S. and U.K. large percentages of HIV infected people don’t know they are infected. This is a danger to society since it supports the spread of disease on a large scale.

Financial Impact

$12.1 Billion annual cost in US: “Future treatment for the 40,000 people infected with HIV in the United States every year will cost $12.1 billion annually, a new study showed.” (msnbc.msn.com/id/15528984/ns/health-aids/t/new-us-hiv-cases-cost-billion-year/)

$1.5 Billion Cost for 2001 in Canada: “June 2001, Halifax, Nova Scotia–HIV/AIDS cost Canadians more than $2 billion in 1999 in direct and indirect costs. Health care costs accounted for about $560 million; prevention, research and supports to AIDS victims for about $40 million; and lost economic production due to premature death and disability for nearly $1.5 billion.” (gpiatlantic.org/releases/pr_cost_aids.htm)

The financial drain on society due to the medical costs of HIV is huge. The greater the impact, the more damage it does to the society’s financial stability.

Mental Health

How is the mental health of homosexuals and lesbians? Does it have the same bell-curve as the rest of society? No, it does not. Take a look at these statistics and note that the mental health issues are not due to social pressure and rejection by the majority of society who considers homosexuality to be aberrant.

” . . . homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com . . . the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle . . . the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual . . . While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark–the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality–both die on average in their early 50’s, or in their 40’s if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s.” (onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=255614)

73% of the psychiatrists in the American Psychiatric Association who responded to a survey by Harold I. Lief said that they thought that homosexual men are less happy than others. 70% percent said they believed that the homosexuals’ problems were due more to personal conflicts than to social stigmatization. Study by Harold I. Lief, Sexual Survey Number 4: Current Thinking on Homosexuality, Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality 2 (1977), pp.110-111 (Cited in Growing Up Straight by George A. Reker).” (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)

Sexual Molestation

Higher sexual molestation with homosexual parents: “A disproportionate percentage–29 percent–of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent. . . . Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.” (P. Cameron and K. Cameron, “Homosexual Parents,” Adolescence 31 (1996): 772″ (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php).

Certainly, no one wants children molested by adults. (Unfortunately, pedophilia is now being pushed as another ‘sexual orientation’ see http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=11517). Society needs to protect its children–not subject them to sexual pressures and molestation. However, the homosexual lifestyle clearly presents an increased threat to our children.

Sexual Promiscuity

Sexual promiscuity helps support the spread of disease. What are the promiscuity statistics of the homosexual community? Shockingly bad!

28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners: “Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners. Bell and Weinberg p 308.” (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)

Low rate of sexual fidelity among homosexuals. “There is an extremely low rate of sexual fidelity among homosexual men as compared to married heterosexuals. Among married females 85% reported sexual fidelity. Among married men, 75.5% reported sexual fidelity. Among homosexual males in their current relationship, 4.5% reported sexual fidelity. (Sources: Laumann, The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216, McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253, Wiederman, “Extramarital Sex,” 170. This is extracted from http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02)

Does anyone think that such mind-blowing promiscuity is healthy for any society, especially when the homosexual community is particularly subject to HIV infection? Homosexuals are members of society, and their behavior, which is a manifestation of their “orientation,” is extremely dangerous. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-12/promised-land-long-overdue-lgbti-fairytale-comes-to-life/7320074
https://carm.org/is-homosexuality-dangerous

Hypocrisy In A Highly Politicised Australian Football League

“Leftist” and “hypocrisy” are synonymous.

OK, this will be a very brief article. I have written often now about the Australian Football League and its lousy politicisation of a once enjoyable game. We used to be able to go to the footy and forget about politics and controversial social issues. Not too long ago we could enjoy a couple of carefree hours watching some sport.

But not any more: the AFL has lately been pushing one wretched PC political cause after another. It has pushed multiculturalism rounds and Islamic rounds and homosexual rounds, etc. Instead of just promoting a game, it has decided it will stand on the hot potato issues of the day.

Plenty of people are already fed up with this. I certainly am. And we have had another example of this just this weekend. At one match a banner was unfurled saying no to a mosque. This got the AFL all bent out of shape:

AFL boss Gillon McLachlan says he will not tolerate the game “being used to vilify” sections of the community after an anti-Muslim banner was unfurled during Friday night’s match between Richmond and Collingwood. McLachlan said the league would work with police and the Melbourne Cricket Club to identify those behind the sign, which said “Go Pies! Stop the mosques”. He said if those involved with the banner were club members they would be banned from attending games.

The AFL also issued a statement after the game: “The AFL condemns the behaviour in the strongest terms and such actions have no place in society and not in our game. Match day security removed the banner when they became aware of it and evicted the patrons responsible.”

Not to be outdone, Collingwood president Eddie McGuire said that those people responsible should be banned from football for life: “I hope the police got their names and numbers, if they’ve got anything to do with our club they’ll be banned. Get these people and make an example of them. They should be banned for life.”

Good grief. Now it is one thing if the AFL wants no controversial political topics promoted at their games. But I just mentioned that it is up to its ears in pushing various radical causes. Thus we have gross hypocrisy going on here, as well as rabid leftist politics being rammed down our throats.

As an example of this hypocrisy, consider this banner which was allowed to go ahead last September with not a peep out the AFL. Given that so many refugees coming here are in fact Muslims, this is a very political and controversial issue. But it seems the AFL is just fine with it.afl 6

As long as it is a leftist cause, then it is full steam ahead. But dare to take a different point of view, and the AFL will crack down on you like you were a child molester. Hey AFL, I got news for you: either get out of the game of pushing radical leftist causes altogether, or spare us this blatant set of double standards.

Regardless of what you think of either banner, it’s gotta be one or the other: no political banners, or a range of political banners.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-02/afl-will-not-tolerate-deeply-offensive-anti-muslim-banner/7294430

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/mcg-security-remove-racist-stop-the-mosques-banner-from-scoreboard/news-story/b91dd5e28719a4c85f92911178680bf1

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/04/02/01/51/stop-the-mosques-collingwood-banner-mcg-eddie-mcguire-ban-for-life#MrhP5iIhDYIlQcrK.99

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2015/sep/14/football-and-refugees-in-australia-the-important-role-the-game-can-still-play

Some More Terrifyingly Accurate Commentary On The Trump Phenomenon (Which Is A Consequence Of The Success Of The Obama Phenomenon)

Look, Hillary is exactly the same too so don’t go thinking there will be a winner when one of these two gets elected – there will only be losers.

The States, the Free World, everyone.

Time to stop trusting in human leadership and look to the God-man Jesus.

Why would millions of Americans rally behind a Republican presidential candidate who, according to every poll, and at a rate plunge precisely commensurate with the number of times he opens his mouth, has a zero percent chance of winning the general election?

It’s simple. America’s mood is revolutionary – like, in an Emancipation Proclamation kind of way. Our present political climate, an antagonistic cacophony of cultural discord, rage and exasperation by the unwashed masses with our party establishment “better-thans,” is like nothing we’ve ever seen or imagined.

Or is it?

Dutch politician and historian Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer (1801-1876) is credited with what seems an eerily prescient foreshadowing of the bizarre phenomenon that is “Trump 2016.”

“Pent-up anger and long-held frustration due to economic stagnation, moral decay, spiritual impotency, and political corruption,” he opined, “invariably pave the way for the rise of crass manipulators. Instead of a mastery of truth, such revolutionary opportunists tap into fear and rage, ignorance and prejudice, staging great public spectacles of narcissism.”

It’s human nature. Such sense of hopelessness, anger, betrayal and frustration can lead otherwise good people (some of whom I respect and admire) to make very bad decisions – to exercise poor judgment.

It gave us Barack Obama in 2008.

And Donald Trump in 2016.

trump america againIndeed, we’ve moved seamlessly from “Hope” and “Change We Can Believe In,” to “Make America Great Again.” It’s as though van Prinsterer had a crystal ball through which to keep tabs on the Donald’s ivory Trump Tower office suite.
“Pent-up anger and long-held frustration due to economic stagnation, moral decay, spiritual impotency, and political corruption. …”

No honest person – though President Obama, a decidedly dishonest person, yet tries – can say with a straight face that we have not entered an era of “economic stagnation.” With trillions in debt, tens-of-millions of Americans dependent on unfunded “social justice” programs, and millions more having given up on looking for work altogether, we’re actually teetering on the precipice of total economic collapse.

Moral decay, spiritual impotency, and political corruption? That’s America 2016 in toto. Since 1973 we’ve sacrificed nearly 60 million of our most innocent fellow citizens at Baal’s altar of convenience and “equality.”

Just this past June we had five radical lawyers on the U.S. Supreme Court thumb their nose at natural law, shake their fist at God and presume to deconstruct and redefine the institution of marriage to include the “especially abominable sin of Sodom.” This, while an increasingly apostate Christian church sat idly by and did little-to-nothing or, worse, affirmatively endorsed this shameful desecration of God’s created order.

I needn’t elaborate on Washington’s systemic culture of political corruption. They no longer even try to fake it. The betrayal has cut to the quick.

Enter Donald Trump – a several-times-bankrupt, big-government globalist, pro-socialized medicine, pro-abortion, pro-“gay marriage,” lifelong liberal Democrat – to save the day. That is, at least, to peddle the right kind of snake oil and bark the right kind of empty “Make America Great Again” platitudes that festering wounds crave and itching ears want to hear.

“… invariably pave the way for the rise of crass manipulators.”

Crass manipulator? No two words better describe Mr. Trump. Unless, of course, you consider it classy when a leading presidential candidate, an unrepentant serial adulterer, personally attacks his political opponents as “stupid liars,” sleazily suggesting that their wives are ugly (Heidi Cruz is a lovely woman both inside and out), brags about the size of his manhood from the debate stage, or habitually and unapologetically verbally abuses women – somebody’s wives, mothers and daughters – by calling them “pigs,” “ugly,” “fat” or “great pieces of a–.”

Trump recently boasted that he’s “such a good Christian.” Inexplicably, many Christians believe him. Or, at least, they really, really want to.

I pray that someday he will be – that Donald Trump might have a genuine coming to Christ and that, as Jesus told us would happen once he does, he might reflect this transformation in and through the righteous fruits of his words and deeds.
Like each of us, Jesus is Donald’s only chance at salvation.

“Instead of a mastery of truth, such revolutionary opportunists tap into fear and rage, ignorance and prejudice. …”

That’s all Mr. Trump has to work with – “fear, rage, ignorance and prejudice.” As absurdly demonstrated time and again, he’s completely devoid of substance and, when pressed to articulate even a modicum of evidence that he maintains but a middle schoolers grasp on the issues, deflects the question by personally attacking the questioner with the most shrill, jarring and vulgar of ad hominem name calling.

The man is a political chameleon. Over and over again, he somehow gets away with wholly reversing himself on any given position, on any given issue, on any given day – sometimes within hours of making a completely contradictory, and often incoherent, position statement.

Even so, to his cult of personality, the Trumpster remains the Teflon Don.
“… staging great public spectacles of narcissism.”

Angry Donald TrumpAs contemporary political figures go, and second to Barack Obama alone, Donald Trump represents the caricature of wounded narcissism (a self-centeredness that likely stems from insecurity). You needn’t ask, but he’s all too happy to tell you anyway. “I am a really smart guy,” he constantly reminds us. “I’m intelligent. Some people would say I’m very, very, very intelligent.”

“Sorry, losers and haters,” he has said, “but my I.Q. is one of the highest – and you all know it!”

I don’t doubt it. History has shown that “crass manipulators” and “revolutionary opportunist,” as van Prinsterer called them, are, generally speaking, very intelligent.
Of the Dutch historian’s seemingly prophetic statement, columnist and Pastor John Kirkwood asks, “Prescient or just discerning? This [the Trump phenomenon] couldn’t come true if it were not for the decline of the conservative mind. This couldn’t be happening if it were not for the faithlessness of the believer. Yet, we stand in judgment over other nations that have been conquered by fear, rage, ignorance and prejudice, and in our hubris exclaim, ‘It could never happen here.’”

Yet here it happens.

And what of the “faithlessness of the believer”? What of this demonstrably incongruous wave of Christian support for Donald Trump?

Van Prinsterer might have blamed it on widespread “moral decay” and “spiritual impotency.” I mostly agree.

Still, for the church, at least, and insofar as concerns many Christians’ wayward support (in my view) for this man of the world, I think the phenomenon can more precisely be described as “moral indifference” and “spiritual adultery.”

It’s a lack of faithfulness – a trusting in the things of this world, rather than in the promises of God.

“Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” (James 4:4).

It’s better not to hedge your bet with the Creator of the universe.

http://eaglerising.com/31850/the-great-prophecy-of-trump-2016/

Safe Schools Coalition Founders: “Safe Schools Coalition is about supporting gender and sexual diversity. Not about celebrating diversity. Not about stopping bullying. About gender and sexual diversity. “

So when the founders of the “Safe Schools” anti-bullying program admit that it’s not about bullying and instead all about homosexual and transgender indoctrination, will anybody be willing to face this revelation?

Or is it ears closed as usual?

Are you really okay with Marxists indoctrinating your children into pervere and promiscuous sexual practises with crazy reality-denying philosophy to boot?

The two people on stage, in the video, are Roz Ward, Coordinator of Safe Schools Coalition Victoria, and Joel Radcliffe, Project Officer of Safe Schools Coalition Victoria.

CLIP 1

Roz Ward:

We’re going to talk about visibility. And it’s one of the challenges, I think, of working – and we work deliberately and specifically around sexual diversity and gender diversity. Not all forms of diversity. We’re talking about sexual diversity and gender diversity. And both of those things are not necessarily visible. You can’t look around the room and be like “You’re sexually diverse. You’re gender diverse. Whatever.” It’s not the same as saying “Oh. There’s a lot of people from different cultural backgrounds. I can see them in here.”

Not all cultural diversity is visible but there are, ya know, there are those triggers to make you think “Are we doing stuff to make those students from different cultural backgrounds feel included?” There’s not the same triggers around sexual diversity. People can be invisible and there are schools where they say…still…we don’t necessarily work with them but we hear the stories of “But we don’t really have any gay students in our school.” Because they’re not necessarily visible, right? So we’ve gotta think about really explicit, visible cues that are very clearly about gender and sexual diversity. So we think very specific posters work really well, very specific messages from school leadership, very specific things written in your school newsletter, that Safe Schools Coalition is about supporting gender and sexual diversity. Not about celebrating diversity. Not about stopping bullying. About gender and sexual diversity. About same-sex attractive. About being transgender. About being lesbian, gay, bisexual – say the words – transgender, intersex. Not just “Be nice to everyone. Everyone’s great.”

CLIP 2

Roz Ward

…positive parents have driven that change in schools, and out of 132 schools, we have had one complaint from a parent about being part of Safe Schools Coalition. One complaint. And that’s not what the schools thought was going to happen. All of the school leadership, or a lot of school leadership said “What can we do when a parent complains?” We give them some advice and then they’ll come and we’ll be like “Did anyone complain?” and they’re like “No. It’s great actually. Somebody called us and said congratulations for joining.” And it’s way more likely to be that we find, than people complaining.

If, and when, and sometimes, in that case when the parent did complain – we have complaints sometimes directly from parents who are not [inaudible] in what we’re doing. When people do complain, then school leadership can very calmly and graciously say “You know what? We’re doing it anyway. Tough luck.” Basically. In a nice way. “What can you do? This is a program that’s about supporting safe and inclusive schools. We’re going to celebrate IDAHO day, and we’re going to do it with our junior campus, and so, ya know, it’s unfortunate that you don’t agree with that. We’re going to do it again next year, and if you really, strongly disagree and you want to take your kid out of school that day, that’s their loss, really.”

Joel Radcliffe:

It’s important to know that it does come up a lot. People say “What about the parents?” a lot. Schools give parents…Parents have a lot…seem to have a lot of power over schools. Parents don’t have the power to shut this down. There’s an insignificant minority that might have an issue with it. None of them really ever say anything. I know one person that does. The Principal knows how to deal with that person. They know what the message is. They know why they’re doing this work and why it’s so important. That’s part of the school culture. That’s part of the school community. You’re either a part of it or you’re not really, at the end of the day. And no one’s taken their kid out of school…

http://www.acl.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Safe-Schools-not-about-bullying-transcript-2.doc

More Statistics And Hypocrisy Regarding The Dangers Of The Homosexual Lifestyle

People who support and promote homosexuality equally promote the horrific addictions and diseases, both mental and physical, that always accompany this dangerous, promiscuous lifestyle, the foremost of which is HIV but extends well into other STD’s, alcoholism and drug use, as well as depression and suicide.

It’s basically on par with promoting heroin or methamphetamine, except we can all clearly see how stupid that is. Therein lies the double standard for destructive lifestyle choices.

When people take pride in their drug use, we scoff at them for the blind fools they are but when homosexuals parade themselves in vulgar attire on floats across the city before the eyes of children, people clap hands and cheer.

Cheering people into an abyss works for Marxist Leftists and Progressives but personally, I don’t want to see anyone slowly and needlessly die from AIDS, something the homosexual lifestyle hands out like candy. 

Must be a personal quirk of mine or something?

Consider the article below:

The latest trend in major league baseball is the banning of smokeless tobacco.

Liberal city councils in Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Boston have all banned the use of smokeless tobacco within their city limits, and that ban extends to major league baseball stadiums.

California is getting ready to ban it statewide, which will affect stadiums in Oakland, Anaheim, and San Diego, and the state of New York is getting ready to follow suit.

The fine for a first offense must be at least $250, and the fine for every subsequent violation in the same year must be at least $2500.

This is for a habit, mind you, that is perfectly legal.

The justification for banning cigarette smoking in public places is that innocent bystanders will be forced to breathe in secondhand smoke. But that risk does not exist with smokeless tobacco.

So liberals are banning chewing tobacco not because it’s bad for others but because it’s bad for you. City councils all across the fruited plain are fining people for engaging in legal behavior because that behavior, legal or not, is a risk to their own health.

But using their own logic, the logic of moralistic liberals who fancy themselves the smartest people in the room, we should start fining people for engaging in homosexual sex.

Why? Because sodomy, just like chewing tobacco, is harmful to human health. According to the CDC (not a member of the vast rightwing conspiracy) 60-65% of all male victims of the disease in the history of the epidemic contracted it through having sex with other men.

In 2013, gay and bisexual men accounted for a staggering 81% of all HIV diagnoses among males over the age of 12, and accounted for 65% of HIV diagnoses among all persons. (Another 10-14% contracted it through injection drug abuse, making it the second-highest risk factor.)

According to the International Journal of Epidemiology, active participation in the homosexual lifestyle can knock 8-20 years off a man’s life expectancy, and reduce it to what it was in 1871.

According to the Gay & Lesbian Medical Association, there are at least 10 specific elevated health risks associated with sodomy that practitioners are urged to talk over with their health care provider. The dangers include depression and anxiety, suicidal ideation, substance abuse, alcoholism, eating disorders, hepatitis, various cancers (including anal cancer and colon cancer), and an alarming list of incurable sexually transmitted diseases.

A pro-homosexual activist organization in California, The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, persuaded the people of Los Angeles County in 2011 to institute fines for every porn producer who allows performers to engage in unprotected gay sex. (The ban extends to all porn shoots, heteroseuxal as well as homosexual.) Why the ban on unprotected gay sex? Because of the obvious risk to human health, particularly of contracting HIV/AIDS.

So homosexual activists themselves have found a way to impose fines on certain forms of homosexual sex, even if the behavior is not against the law.
Thanks to the misguided Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court ruling of 2003, sodomy is now “legal” everywhere in the United States. Using smokeless tobacco is legal everywhere too. If liberals can find a way to sanction one form of legal behavior because they endanger human health, simple consistency and logic dictate that they should find a way to sanction other forms of legal behavior which do the same.

If liberals truly care about the health of all our citizens, it’s the least they can do.

http://barbwire.com/2016/03/18/fine-smokeless-tobacco-gay-sex/

Intollerant Homosexual Lobbyists Vandalise And Destroy Cory Bernardi’s Office Over “Safe Schools” Program

Mud slinging, name-calling and Ad hominem’s are a Leftist institution.

Indeed, I’m not sure you can truly be a “Progressive” Marxist unless you are willing to lower yourself to the point of tarnishing the reputations of your ideological enemies.

As a Leftist, your ideas are bankrupt and entirely unsupportable because of the relative nature of your foundational naturalistic atheist worldview and so if you have no real option in winning arguments, what are you left with?

Personal abuse and violence!

You accuse, you abuse, you vandalise, you violently force, you riot, you slander, and you avoid actually arguing the merits of your convictions at all costs (because if people knew your Marxists goals and your insane utopian idealism, they would be horrified).

This is the case with the indoctrination of Australian school-aged children into homosexuality, transgender, and premature sexuality through the laughably titled “Safe Schools” program, a program marketed as being about “anti-bullying”.

What teaching children to bind their breasts or penis has to do with bullying is anyone’s guess? 

Bill Muehlenberg’s piece Seven Things You Must Know About The Safe Schools Program discusses this sickly perverted, government-funded and promoted program in detail and is a must read for all parents.

But back to the vandalism and abuse of Leftists who are, in this most recent instance of hilarious hippo crush, have harassed the office staff of Cory Bernardi and throw in vandalism to boot.

What was Bernardi’s offence?

Well, he dared to highlight the content of the “Safe Schools” program, namely a course designed to fully indoctrinate and confuse children into homosexuality and transgender theory, even primary school-aged children.

Here’s the report:

Two dozen students have trashed Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi’s Adelaide office, protesting against his stance on the Safe Schools Program.

The students, who stormed his office chanting and scrawling slogans on both the exterior and interior walls of the office, also overthrew furniture and threw papers onto the floor.

In a tweet, Senator Bernardi said the protesters “threatened his staff”.

He said it was unfortunate he was not in Adelaide to “assist his amazing team”.

“Gutless actions like this will never stop me speaking the truth,” Mr Bernardi tweeted.

Police said a man had been reported for marking graffiti on a road sign.

They said they would review CCTV footage and witness statements, and further charges may occur.

Senator Simon Birmingham also slammed the protesters, calling them hypocrites.

“I have seen some of the pictures from Adelaide and for people who say they are standing up for tolerance and for understanding to then think that destruction of public property, that violence of that manner is appropriate, is deplorable, is hypocritical,” he said.

“I would have hoped we would see much better, indeed from all sides.”

The program, according to the website, offers resources and support to equip staff and students with “skills, practical ideas and greater confidence” to create a safe and inclusive environment for same-sex attracted, intersex and gender diverse students, staff and families.

Coalition MPs indicated earlier this week they would push for an inquiry into the anti-bullying program.

Senator Bernardi said some of the material in the program was “age inappropriate” and would “horrify parents”.

He claimed the “innocuous-sounding” Safe Schools program actually provided links to sadomasochism sites and encouraged 12 and 13-year-old children to experiment sexually.

Praise be to Jesus that a review of Safe Schools is underway.

Perhaps it might even become a program that actually makes schools safer.

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2016/03/17/seven-things-you-must-know-about-the-safe-schools-program/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-18/safe-schools-protesters-trash-cory-bernardi’s-adelaide-office/7258388
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-18/safe-schools-program-to-be-modified-only-used-in-high-schools/7258826

“Safe Schools”, An Anti-Bullying School Program In Australia, Is So Interested In Teaching Children About Homosexuality, Gender Theory, And How To Bind Their Breasts And Penises That They Forget To Care When Christian Kids Get Bullied

My favourite part is where the one kid asks why teachers are pushing sex on them so hard if they don’t want them getting pregnant. 

Touché kid.

Bill Muelenberg’s write up disturbs:

The ‘long march through the institutions’ as Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci put it is working out real well. Instead of taking over a nation with tanks and bullets, why not just subvert it from within? Take over the main institutions of power and influence, such as the media, schools, churches, courts and so on, and you can capture a culture.

This is what we call cultural Marxism and we see it especially being played out with the so-called Safe Schools Coalition. I have written often about this pro-homosexual indoctrination program disguised as an anti-bullying program. Others have as well. A terrific piece by Paul Kelly in the Australian the other day is worth quoting from here:

This is much more than an anti-bullying program. Most people know an anti-bullying program when they see it. But this is something else — a pervasive and radical ideological agenda. Indeed, it does not even pretend to be anything less.

Senior ALP figures Bill Shorten, Penny Wong and Kate Ellis and other politicians stridently defending the program and attacking its critics are misleading at best and deceptive at worst. The materials, literature, instructions and recommended class activities are pervasive in their ideological content and often extraordinary in the activities they recommend for years 7 and 8 students. This story is a case study in hijack: how a program of social and sexual engineering was inducted into the school system by a lobby that won huge institutional support. The program is legitimised by a need whose validity is beyond question: preventing the bullying of LGBTI students.

In many ways the program is the purist example of the disruptive cultural and power changes sweeping through Australia. Its content would have been inconceivable 10 years ago. It reflects a transformation in thinking about sex and gender, the collapse of traditional and religious norms, the confidence of the progressive class that its moment has come, and the ability of a minority lobby to seize the ascendancy and command a majority position.

He concludes:

Shorten branded Bernardi a “homophobe” for criticising the program. Opposition education spokeswoman Ellis attacked Turnbull for pandering to “views of extremists”. ALP Senate leader Wong said: “This is a Labor program, we funded it in government, it’s a program designed to address the terrifying statistics of self-harm, of abuse, of discrimination and of bullying of same-sex attracted and transgender kids.”

Amid defenders of the program it is hard to discern any concession whatsoever that there are problems with this program. There is no serious sign of respect for parents who have reservations. Just the reverse — they are patronised and insulted by indirect linkage as extremists and homophobes. It is hard to find another example where the political class has been so arrogant in its imposition of a new and far-reaching agenda. Let’s confront the truth: there is a process of intimidation at work. It reminds of the mother on the ABC television’s Q&A program a few weeks ago, upset her son was encouraged to cross-dress, reduced to saying, “but it was a science class”.

There is no doubt the cultural norms are changing. This program constitutes dramatic evidence. But the progressives have overreached — their arrogance and intolerance and on vivid display. Turnbull, however, will find this a difficult issue to manage. And any politician asserting this is just another anti-bullying program is naive or engaging in a gross deception.

Let the children speak

But as good as such critiques are, the best thing we can do is let the children speak. They are the ones feeling the full force of this cultural Marxism, with everything homosexual being rammed down their throats. Let me offer the stories of two young people, sent to me by a distraught mother.

These children are attending public schools in Victoria and are experiencing on a daily basis anti-Christian bigotry and homosexual bullying. The first story comes from a 15-year-old:

Impacts of “Safe Schools”

-Spoken about in almost every subject, especially health subjects. It claims it is an opt-in program but when you are forced to do a health subject where it is integrated into all of them you can’t get out of it.

-Becomes a higher priority than other more important world issues. One day the wall was filled with students’ posters about health issues in other countries and morbidity and mortality rates but then the next day the posters were gone and replaced with LGBTI posters.

-The posters are plastered all over the school. If you walk down the hallway you find posters. Entering the coordinators you find about 15 stuck in various locations. The posters are everywhere you go and it is impossible to not go by one every day. This means the content is taught as the truth to everyone even if they don’t really want to know about it. It is subconsciously being taught to everyone all day without them even noticing.

-It makes students who aren’t LGBTI or who don’t agree with it feel inferior and those who do feel superior to others. No one speaks about heterosexual relationships anymore as it is how conception occurs and no one really wants to get pregnant while still being in school. Those who are LGBTI comment about how cruel those who disagree with them are and talk bad about them, but never actually get into trouble as it is “just their opinion” but if someone mentions they disagree they get excluded from the other peers, making them feel unwanted and as though their opinion isn’t as important.

-It dramatically sexualises relationships from a young age. If teachers don’t want us to get pregnant then why are they approving posters about who would like to sleep with who? Many students believe that the only purpose of life is to have sex. These posters around the school make students think of this a whole lot more than they should. LGBTI relationships are the only ones that seem to be supported, as they don’t result in an unintentional pregnancy. This also adds to how those who are heterosexual feel less important than those who are.

The second story comes from a 13-year-old:

Bullied Because I’m Christian

When you’re a Christian people don’t like you. They try to do everything they can to put you down. I am only thirteen years old and I have been physically and verbally bullied because of my beliefs. Last year I moved to high school and at first I thought it was great but as I get settled I find that if I tell people that I am a Christian people will treat me like crap.

The first time it happened was when I was telling one of my friends the good news about God. And the next week or so I get pulled out of class by my teacher and she told me that my friend’s parents complained because I was bible bashing their son. I told my teacher that I am not a closet Christian and I wasn’t telling the boy that he has to believe, I was only telling him the miracles that God has done. Later that boy approached me and started calling me names that are better left unsaid. His father called me one name that was very rude. Eventually the boy moved schools at the end of the year.

There have been a few incidents that have only happened within the last month. My friend mentioned that I was a Christian and some people in my class heard her say it and then they looked at me and said, “I hate Christians.” This made me very upset and on the same day someone who I thought was my friend said that she doesn’t believe in God and that whoever believes is stupid. Then she started saying God’s name in vane and laughing about it.

To protect this family, I of course have had to use anonymity, but I can fully vouch for these stories. And tragically, there would be plenty more such stories. We sure do need to hear these stories. All that the mainstream media wants to do is run with stories of homosexuals, but never of those adversely impacted by these pro-homosexual programs.

Since the MSM refuses to do its job, I certainly will do it for them. If other readers have similar stories to tell, please send them to me and I will happily run with them. The truth must get out into the public arena. And please pray for this family, especially the two students. They are going through hell.

And pray for all the other families who are on the receiving end of this homosexual indoctrination campaign.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/paul-kelly/safe-schools-turnbull-in-crossfire-over-sex-agenda/news-story/8196b1e8ad262992922598316cd9c5a0

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2016/03/13/cultural-marxism-in-schools-let-the-children-speak/

The Annual Academy Awards Ceremony: A Great Platform For Proclaiming The Confused (ie Hypocritical) Thinking Of The Leftist “Progressives”

Most people don’t understand that Progressives are Leftists are Marxists, which in simple terms means that every individual exists only to serve the collectivist community (by dying if need be), which is always run by wealthy and powerful Progressives (think Obama, Hillary, Stalin, Mao, and frankly Hitler too). 

To keep said community under control, it must be divided into groups (ideologically or superficially – it’s all good), which are in turn encouraged to fight each other (not the greatest challenge given sinful human nature). 

This constant warring keeps the enemy (usually the morally upright or at least people you would probably want in power) and the useful idiots (who actually think they are helping make the world better) all busy while the “informed Progressives” turn cultural footholds into strongholds and amass even more power to create their idea of utopia (picture Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s USSR or Mao’s China – it’s where atheistic humanism always takes society).

All this to emphasise that Progressivism is all about fracturing society.

That’s why you will always hear about victims groups from the Left – blacks, women, homosexuals, trangenders, aboriginals, the poor.

Yes, there’s always a bit of truth mixed in and some of these groups have legitimate victim stories to tell.

However, Progressives redefine these groups so all they can identify as is perpetually insatiable victims of a few actual but mostly fabricated crimes. Also, they are never to blame for any of their circumstances. Only when they get super-special treatment can they be “equal” with all the rest of us.

For example, homosexuals are perpetual victims of everybody – especially Christians, fertility, and the natural biological order – but they are also portrayed as “victims” of HIV, a disease they get from their dangerous sexual practises (yes, anal “sex” transfers HIV and a whole host of diseases to at least 10% of all homosexuals so we’re talking a very serious but entirely preventable epidemic) and even though they do it to themselves, we are told by progressives that somehow none of it is their fault- victims duh! Homosexuals, therefore,  should receive special treatment from everyone, whether by redefining marriage for their tiny percentage or receiving state subsidy to help safeguard their quite literally disease-ridden sexual practises.

Like homosexuals, all of these groups are forever “unequal” and they will always be “unequal” until the next Communism or Reich is fully established and no one can raise a free hand to stop it.

That said, please remember these two important points:

  1. Informed Progressives (like Obama) are using these groups as pawns to gain social, cultural, and political power and importantly, they could give a rat’s about the wellbeing of these groups. Their mission is to be God of their own communist utopia, no matter how many suffer to make it happen.
  2. Useful idiots often do actually care about these groups but they are idiots because they think that the informed Progressives are fighting for a better society (yes, they really do – think all of these Academy Awards speakers, especially Leonardo DiCaprio and his obsession with saving the world from climate change) when it’s really just a long series of power plays. Useful idiots make up the numbers and vote your Obamas and Hitlers into power willingly.

It’s a necessary contextual backdrop for this:

Last week, British singer/songwriter Sam Smith won an Oscar for the theme song of the latest James Bond film Spectre. From what I understand of the ratings, not many (including me) saw it, so let me recap his acceptance speech, which I found on YouTube.

He said he read an article written by some other British guy that no openly gay man had ever won an Oscar. Smith (no relation – I hope) said whether this was true or not, he’d still like to dedicate his award to the LGBT community all around the world. He continued by saying: “I stand here as a proud gay man and I hope we can all stand together as equals one day.”

After the merriment subsided, people took to Twitter and such to correct Smith that he wasn’t the first. Of course, he said he may not be, but that didn’t matter to the low information crowd who watched these displays of self-aggrandizement.

Smith responded to the criticism by saying: “Second openly gay man to win an Oscar or third or fourth or 100th, it wasn’t my point. My point was to shine some light on the LGBT community who I love so dearly.”

The best director Oscar went to Alejandro somebody or other for The Revenant. His name is not as important as what he said during his acceptance. He exclaimed: “What a great opportunity for our generation to really liberate ourselves from all prejudice and – you know – this – tribal thinking and make sure once and forever that the color of skin become as irrelevant as the length of our hair.”

Okay – so we have some liberal movie-maker up there preaching equality, color-blindness, and an end to “tribal thinking.” That is terrific. But what is tribal thinking? What is a tribe? Is it not a community of people who come from a common ancestry, have common values, and share common interests? Tribes willingly segregate due to these interests, do they not?

So I suppose then this director wishes for people to be more integrated – recognized as individuals, rather than a tribe. I guess this is what he meant by an end to “tribal thinking.”

Yet, he began his acceptance by thanking the Native Americans and the English Americans who were in the film. So is he not guilty of tribal thinking – lumping all the Injuns into one “tribe” and all the limeys into another.

And what of Sam Smith? He too is guilty of “tribal thinking” by setting the LGBT “tribe” above all others.

But this is what the hypocrites of the left do – they insist on having it both ways. They say we should be striving for a colorblind and all-inclusive society, which I agree is a laudable but wholly unachievable goal. They then blame the right for not giving just recognition to the black tribe, or the Latino tribe, or the gender-bending tribe, etc.

Yet, they are frankly the only ones to willfully, happily separate people into one group or another when it is to their benefit. How many thousands of times have we been lectured that the right must venture into the “black community” to win their monolithic “tribal” vote. The entire Black Lives Matter movement could be considered “tribal.” And they insist on it.

When a white insists that all lives matter, they are shouted down – not because all lives don’t matter, but because the left must maintain the “tribal” aspect to advance whatever is their cause that day.

These pampered Hollywood weenies, as do all liberals, love to stand up and preach equality and inclusiveness, yet it is the left and only they who advance tribal thinking. The only conclusion any reasonable person could come to is that the left must be advocating for the return of the 1896 Supreme Court decision, Plessy v. Ferguson, Separate but Equal doctrine.

https://kirby.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/hiv/resources/HIVASRsuppl2014_online.pdf
http://freedomoutpost.com/and-the-oscar-went-to-tribal-thinking/