#SSM Same Sex Marriage - VOTE NO - New Hate-Crime Laws

[Br.IanVonTurpie]

AN OPPONENT of same-sex marriage has been ordered by Mitcham Council to take down a sign from his property – or face a $20,000 fine.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger/east-hills/mitcham-council-orders-resident-to-take-down-vote-no-sign-or-face-penalty-of-up-to-20000/news-story/89e873c503655fd6dc65b7415e215791

Ernie van Stralen put the sign, reading "Vote No, it's the loving thing to do", in the front garden of his East Pde, Kingswood, home last month.

But it was soon vandalised and Mr van Stralen was contacted by council staff, who told him it required development approval.

The council ordered Mr van Stralen to remove the sign by Monday, October 9.

He felt he had been "victimised" by people who had complained to the council.

"(The council) sent me the notice that I had to take it down ... or I'd get a $750 fine, and if I wouldn't comply they'd take me to court and I'd lose and have to pay court costs," Mr van Stralen said.

"It smacked a little bit of heavy-handed policing. Even though it was well handled, I still think there needs to be some room for expressing our opinion."

He said the first sign he put up was stolen and a subsequent sign had a rock thrown through, was defaced it and ripped down.

To protect it against vandalism, he resorted to taking the sign down at night and putting it up again in the morning.

A letter from Mitcham Council development compliance officer Henry Mitchell earlier this month informed Mr van Stralen that his sign was a "construction or alteration of the land".

If Mr van Stralen or the council had chosen to take the matter to court, Mr van Stralen could have faced a penalty of up to $20,000 plus legal costs.

Should he have continued to leave the sign up, after a conviction, he would have been fined a further $500 a day.

Mitcham's general manager of development and community safety, Craig Harrison, said Mr van Stralen's sign was considered advertising and could not be put up without lodging a development application, even though it was temporary.

The state's Development Act gives councils the power to request the removal of illegal signs and enforce a penalty if residents do not comply.

Under the Act, any sign that is "visible from the road or public place or by passengers carried on any form of public transport" requires council approval.

Mr Harrison said only real estate, directional and commercial signage were exempt from the law.

"The content of the sign was not considered offensive. However, as it was an advertisement and (a) subsequent change in land use without development approval, the sign was required to be removed," Mr Harrison said.

Mitcham Council says it has taken down two other signs across the district in relation to the marriage law postal survey – both against same-sex marriage.

The home of a Yes voter, adorned with advertising.

The council does not have a formal position on same-sex marriage.

The sign is now being stored away from public view, in Mr van Stralen's backyard.

Mitcham Council says it has taken down two other signs across the district in relation to the marriage law postal survey – both against same-sex marriage.

The council does not have a formal position on same-sex marriage.

MITCHAM Council will fly the rainbow flag for a fortnight during November's Feast (Fag) Festival ... to support diversity.
http://www.news.com.au/national/south-australia/mitcham-council-to-fly-rainbow-flag-during-feast-festival/news-story/57ed7fde44883b988f31967395b1eb78

[Rev.Cambeul]

https://www.facebook.com/Cailen.Cambeul/posts/1854852948158278

https://www.facebook.com/VoteNoAustralia
https://www.facebook.com/VoteNoAustralia/photos/a.887906804696865.1073741829.887335734753972/925445847609627

Vote NO Australia - Marriage Plebiscite
Like This Page · Yesterday ·


(What do you think of this!)

NEVER did we expect that Australia could become like Communist China—where our Government bans certain Facebook pages from being viewed in Australia.

Last night, VOTE NO Australia was censored from being viewed in Australia. It can be seen in America, in Europe in fact it can be seen everywhere except in Australia.

20,000 fans, supporters of the VOTE NO page lost their freedom to support NO changes to EXISTING LEGISLATION.
(Is it now a crime to go against Turnbull's stated position?)

[Br.IanVonTurpie]

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2017/november/if-love-is-love-i-wanna-marry-my-child-australias-slippery-slope-toward-gay-marriage

SYDNEY, Australia — The same-sex marriage battle has come to Australia as Aussies face the final days of a postal survey to redefine marriage in their country.

So far, 75 percent have voted and preliminary results show a majority approving legalized marriage between people of the same sex. The postal survey has drawn controversy across the country but it has also stirred the church to rise and fight for the preservation of marriage.

"Down a slippery slope" is how the Party for Freedom political party group describes Australia if voters approve same sex marriage.

Muehlenberg says everything changes when you change the definition of marriage — change to the culture, your children, education, words themselves. The words "mother" and "father" will be taken out of the dictionary because they will be seen as discriminatory and bigoted.

Pastor Daniel Nalliah calls the postal survey on same sex marriage a blessing in disguise.

Party for Freedom Member, Jeff Pryor says, "We are just carrying the slogans of the gay movement that they're saying love is equal. Love is love. So if love is love, I wanna marry my child."

Another member, Nick Falks commented, "This is going to be the future after gay marriage. It may take decades but it's all about sexual rights and we can't deny them these sexual rights because it's discrimination. And that's nonsense for those who are pushing legalizing gay marriage in Australia. So why shouldn't it extend to polygamist relationships. Why shouldn't it extend to bestiality where does it end?"

Some Australians believe it's a personal choice to love anybody they want, that everybody should be free in 2017 to make their choice if they want to get married or not, no matter what their sexuality is.

One lady commented that marriage should be redefined because different values are coming through, different minorities are having a voice, and it's important we recognize them as legitimate people with feelings and with rights.

In the past weeks, Australians were sent postal ballots where they can vote yes or no to the question, "Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?"

If Australians approve the survey, the law will only be changed if Parliament acts on the advisory vote.

Cultural analyst Bill Muehlenberg says, over the past 13 years, Parliament has tried to change the law 22 times. Each vote has failed. He believes that even if the no vote wins, it will only be a reprieve.

"A lot of people don't know just how serious this is. The so-called safe schools program which is really a pro-homosexual program for our children... all of these, it's a package deal. You get the same-sex marriage, you get all these other bits thrown in," Muehlenberg says.

Casey City Councilor Rosalie Crestani says she was persecuted for raising concerns about promoting homosexuality in the community.

"I've never seen the churches in Australia so active in any issue as this one which is fantastic. Australia has proven there are thousands of men standing in the gap," he says. "This is not right. We want marriage to be kept between a man and a woman. When the same-sex marriage bill came out, the safe school program which was undercover in the schools got all exposed. We will not let the next generation slip away. We will stand and fight till the end."

[Rev.Cambeul]

UN slams Australia's human rights
http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/un-human-rights-commission-slams-australia-on-refugees-policy-amid-manus-island-saga/news-story/2c70b77369adeedcfe970dfce87c161a

Extract: AUSTRALIA's gay marriage postal survey and its hard-line policy on refugees has come under fire from the UN as advocates warn the Manus Island stand-off could turn deadly.

[Br.IanVonTurpie]

UN slams Australia's human rights
http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/un-human-rights-commission-slams-australia-on-refugees-policy-amid-manus-island-saga/news-story/2c70b77369adeedcfe970dfce87c161a

Extract: AUSTRALIA's gay marriage postal survey and its hard-line policy on refugees has come under fire from the UN as advocates warn the Manus Island stand-off could turn deadly.

AUSTRALIA'S voluntary postal survey on gay marriage is "not an acceptable decision-making method", the UN Human Rights Committee has said in a damning report released overnight.

The committee has recommended Australia urgently legislate to make same-sex marriage legal regardless of the poll's results, which are due to be released next week.

The committee has also blasted Australia's policies on refugees as advocates warn the stand-off with asylum seekers on Manus Island could turn deadly.

Honestly!All Australia's problems have been due to the UN! So we vote in a postal survey and they think voting is wrong. We offer alternative housing for refugees and for some reason they think they aren't safe there?

Even Blind Freddy knows it is part of their tantrum! We'd do well to leave !

[Rev.Cambeul]

The Vote is Over.

The vote for decency and the future of White Children - the NO VOTE - has lost by 12%.

The results of 12.7 million votes were announced in Australia on Wednesday morning.

Yes responses, 7,817,247 ... 61.6 per cent of clear responses were Yes.

No responses, 4,873,987 ... 38.4 per cent of clear responses were No.

36,686 responses were unclear representing 0.2 per cent of total responses.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/marriage/samesex-marriage-survey-why-thousands-of-votes-were-deemed-invalid/news-story/6459dc09f72545daa718dcbfe693a043

However, the battle continues.

Politicians are now debating how extensive the new Hate-Crime Laws are going to be.

* Can a priest refuse to marry fags or dykes?

* Can a marriage celebrant refuse to marry fags or dykes?

* Can a baker refuse to bake a wedding cake specifically designed for fags or dykes?

* Can incorporated groups or clubs refuse the membership of fags and dykes?

* Can religious organisations - whether state acknowledged Christian or unacknowledged Creator - reject fags and dykes?

* And, have I broken the new Hate-Crime laws by dispensing with the term "Same Sex Marriage/Couple" in favour of the plain old "fags and dykes?"

Let me give you some insight about that last one:

Yesterday, I received a phone call from an Australian Creator that had been approached by a rather senior representative of the State Police - I'll withhold which state. The Brother had printed his own protest flyer re fag marriage, and stuck it on the window of his car. The brass-tacked copper proceeded to question our Brother with an end-goal of Hate-Crime charges. Basically, the questions took the following format:

* Who created the flyer?

* Who put the flyer on the car?

* What does the flyer represent?

* What is the purpose of the flyer?

The key questions here are: Who placed the flyer on the car and, What is the purpose of the flyer? If the Brother was to answer with something like, "It's to annoy the fags. I hate those degenerate bastards." He would probably be held in prison, refused bail, arrested under the state's and possibly Federal Hate-Crime charges.

Fortunately for the Brother, he was able to genuinely say that he merely placed the flyer on his car as a protest against Same Sex Marriage. The difference with the second statement is that it was one of legitimate concern during a national debate, while the former reveals intent that has been deemed a criminal act under Hate-Crime legislation.

Under Australian Federal and the various State Hate-Crime Laws, "Good Intentions" is the legal decider as to whether or not you are charged and/or convicted with a Hate-Crime.

However, despite the Brother's clear good intentions to make a valid and reasonable public statement at a time of national debate, the Brother was ordered to either remove his flyer, or be arrested under a range of numerous other laws unrelated to the context of the flyer itself, such as Disorderly Conduct and Incitement to Violence.

Given the option, the Brother had no choice other than to remove his flyer. And the brass-tacked pig waddled off back to its sty of an office, to wallow and await the next opportunity for quick advancement to the heights of the State Political Police.

It should go without saying that our Brother was shocked when he realised how close he'd come to being arrested for Hate-Crimes just for a simple flyer. And even worse, how close he'd come to being responsible for elevating that brass-tacked porker of an overblown constable from complete obscurity to international fame as the pig that found the golden truffle. However, the fact remains that our Brother was not aware of how his local (both Federal and State) Hate-Crime laws work, just as I'm sure many of you reading this remain unsure of how your own Hate-Crime Laws work.

My Advice Is:

* Learn and understand your local Hate-Crime Laws.

* When questioned by the political police, speak only of your good intentions to participate in the debate (whatever that debate may be). Even so, keep it to a short, pre-prepared statement.

* Beyond that remember The Five Words: "I have nothing to say."

Cailen.