The call for diversity is really a show of one’s bigotry. For example ‘FamilyVoice Australia is calling on Grand Slam tennis star Andy Murray to apologise for disrespecting tennis legend Margaret Court and seeking to rename the arena that honours her championship achievements.
According to a report in news.com.au Andy Murray wants the Margaret Court Arena to be renamed before January’s Open tournament.
He further said, “I think as a sport you just have to be as inclusive as possible …”.
The following article is from the Leftist Loony Marxist Lovie The Conversation. This article is supposed to tell us about real scientists supporting ‘where am I’ Joe Biden because President Trump doesn’t believe in ‘real’ science. Oh, before reading the article these are the same real scientists that believe in macro-evolution, climate change, communism/Marxism and fairies.
‘In an unprecedented step, prestigious science publicationScientific American has launched a scathing attack on President Donald Trump and endorsed his opponent, Democratic candidate Joe Biden, in the upcoming US election. It’s the first presidential endorsement in the magazine’s 175-year history.
To this, we say: about bloody time! As we’ve noted before:
Science is political. The science we do is inherently shaped by the funding landscape of government and the problems and issues of society. This means that to have any influence on how science is organised and funded in Australia (or the US or any other country), we as scientists and science communicators must act in ways that matter in the arena of politics.
It’s now more critical than ever, as the editors at Scientific American clearly lay out, that the people who are actually knowledgeable about the world’s crises speak out and represent that knowledge (or “collective wisdom”) in public, out loud and with their names attached.
Diversity!? One would think that any organization, whether Christian or not, would desire to have the most qualified to run the organization! Well, qualifications don’t seem to be the only criteria.
‘A look at the 50 largest U.S. ministries in the MinistryWatch database shows that executive team leaders—chief executive officers, presidents, and the like—are overwhelmingly white and overwhelmingly male.
Of the 50 nonprofits, seven are led by minority males and five are led by females. Only two companies are led by black men—one is African American and the other African. Three are led by Asian men and two by Hispanic Americans. The largest Christian nonprofit based in the U.S., World Vision, is led by a minority male. None of the female CEOs are women of color.’ For the whole article go to https://ministrywatch.com/christian-nonprofit-ceos-mostly-white-mostly-male/
The following is from CREATION RESEARCH NEWS who sends out frequent emails for those who subscribe. So, if the truth hurts then you may not want to read any further.
‘In the 2020 world where even “qualified” professors tell us anybody in any body can be a woman, we are living in a day when you a see a Bible statement coming true in front of your eyes. “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie” wrote Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:11. You and I need to remember how this sequence starts at any time in history and particularly at the end times. As Romans 1 describes it, this all commences with a seemingly little thing – when people cease giving thanks to God daily for all their benefits. That sets into motion an increasingly downhill path in morality and even mentality that is built into the Creation, which ends with the Creator God’s judgement. People become so deceived they will even change their sexual behaviour to that which is not only self-harming, but is completely offensive in the Creator’s sight, and they can no longer even see what sex is. Worse still, they are now training up their own children with the same such lies, so the Next Gen are becoming incapable of recognising their own sex. You and I have to realise that in this wilfully devolving world – men and women are not neutral processors of information bound to find truth and act on it. Neither is science neutral nor capable of researching, free of prejudice. We are sinners and scientific theories never release humans from this bondage. All of us need a saviour, and there is only one. Allah never claims to be this saviour; the Indian goddess of death Kali is definitely not. Only Jesus Christ, Creator of the heavens and the earth, qualifies to deal with your sin and mine.’https://creationresearch.net/newsletters/
Saturday, 17 October, those living in the Australian Capital Territory will be voting for their next government. Family Voice Australia is distributing the following leaflet showing the major differences between the two major parties. Personally, neither party is what a real conservative would desire but the difference between Labor and Liberal is enough to lead a conservative to vote for the Liberal Party. Share this if you know someone who lives in the ACT.
Yep, in Australia and the rest of the West it seems diversity is the main topic. It seems we have ‘Diversity officers, diversity policies, diversity and inclusion training, diversity on a Presidential ticket. The ABC reportedly now has a diversity “content tracker” to make sure their hosts, panellists, guests represent enough – and appropriate – diversity. And yesterday, we learned that Australian TV networks in general are displaying a distinct “lack of diversity”.
So here’s a little quiz for you. Consider these two separate groups of people. Group A – 6 white men, Group B – 3 men and 3 women of varying skin colours. Which group is more diverse?
If you said B, you just might be a little racist or sexist. The correct answer is “I don’t know yet. I don’t have enough information”.
After talking with the groups for a while you may ascertain the following information:
In Group A’s men, there is a farmer, an engineer, a nurse, a truck-driver, a stay-at-home dad, and an artist. Four of them were born overseas – two in Eastern Europe, one in the US, one in New Zealand. Two of them speak English as a second (or third) language. Three have university qualifications. Two live in capital cities, two in regional cities, and two in remote communities. Three of them usually vote conservative, two of them vote Labor/Greens, and the other is a genuine swing voter.
Group B’s members, on the other hand, are all left-wing voters, they all live in inner-city Melbourne, they are all lawyers, they all barrack for Essendon in the AFL… you get the picture.
Now, which group is more diverse?
The problem with today’s diversity drive, indeed the core of identity politics, is that it reduces people down to characteristics that don’t actually describe who somebody is. Yes, one’s race, family heritage, sexuality, physical ability, can deeply affect one’s perspective on life and politics, but it’s those different perspectives that make for interesting discussion, debate, policy creation, not the personal factors that led them there.
There’s no benefit in making sure your panel, or board, or hosts are all from different ethnic groups, or different genders (of which there are only two), if they all think exactly the same.
Yes, it is important to reflect the racial and gender diversity of society, but isn’t it more important to reflect the ideological and intellectual diversity of society?
Martin Luther King Jr famously dreamed “that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.” Today’s diversity experts are turning that on their head, and making immutable traits like race and gender to be the most, if not the only, characteristics worth considering.
Even worse, they seem to be suggesting that within these diverse ethnic groups, there is no diversity of thoughts or ideas or values – everyone in the group is expected to think and behave the same. Remember how US Presidential candidate Joe Biden told voters “you ain’t black” if they hadn’t already decided to vote for him in November. Notice how often African-Americans, or indigenous Australians, are called traitors, coconuts, or an “Uncle Tom”, if they don’t toe the left-wing line. Diversity? Sounds more like racial prejudice.
Some may suggest that Australian TV networks do indeed have a lack of diversity on their news programs, but it’s not a race or gender problem, but rather an ideological problem.
Diversity of experience beats diversity of gender.
Diversity of perspectives beats diversity of sexuality.
White supremacy, hatred and loathing of other human beings is part and parcel of the hellish evolutionary belief system. In Part Two of Evolution = Racism it was ‘…reported in July 2020, The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS, which runs the zoo) said:
“We deeply regret that many people and generations have been hurt by these actions or by our failure previously to publicly condemn and denounce them,” WCS President and CEO Cristián Samper wrote. “We recognize that overt and systemic racism persists, and our institution must play a greater role to confront it.”
But was it really racism?
At the time of writing, the Black Lives Matter movement has gained widespread traction around the world. Statues of colonialists and slavery advocates are being removed or defaced, and similar apologies abound at all levels. However, although one might claim that actions of slavery advocates were racist and/or prejudiced against other humans (slavery existed in many non-white cultures too), it was undoubtedly evolutionary beliefs that led to the humiliation of this young man. Most scientists of the day had uniformly accepted Darwin’s theory of evolution, and the popular idea that humans had evolved from ape-like creatures. Indeed, the display in the monkey house where Ota Benga was exhibited was called ‘Ancient Ancestors of Man’.
The apology misses the mark, completely
As part of its mission to be more transparent, WCS is making all records and archives related to Benga publicly available.
While being politically correct and being swept up in a cultural tide, they are actually failing to be transparent. Although the zoo apologized for this racist action, nowhere in the zoo’s apologies or statements do they mention the real reason Ota Benga was put on display. It was a belief in evolution, as clearly stated by the main players of the day themselves. All five owners associated with Ota Benga—Samuel Verner, William McGee, William Hornaday, Henry Osborn, and Madison Grant—were well-known evolutionists of their day.
The climate of the day
Note this popular reconstruction of Homo erectus dark skin (current at the time of writing).
In CMI’s groundbreaking documentary The Voyage that Shook the World, we interviewed Darwin historian, Peter Bowler, in Charles Darwin’s old Cambridge office. Bowler, although an evolutionist himself, noted about Darwin:
That by the time he writes The Descent of Man in 1871 it’s pretty clear that he, by that time, shares the growing suspicion or conviction of many Europeans. The non-white races simply do not have the capacity to be elevated properly into civilised human beings; that they are mentally and morally at a more limited level. In a sense they are stuck at an early stage in the biological evolution of the human species.
So their way of life may offer us a so fossilised relic of what our own ancestors lived like in the distant prehistoric past. But now Darwin and many of his contemporaries are beginning to realise that what they needed to claim that they are biologically relics of the past. They are in fact equivalent to earlier stages in the ascent from the apes who have been preserved in isolated locations, preserved with those earlier levels of mental and moral development. [sic]
Note the following timeline prior to Ota Benga’s humiliation:
1833: British Empire abolished slavery.
1859: Darwin wrote On the Origin of Species (26 years after abolition of slavery).
1865: The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery in USA.
1871: Darwin wrote The Descent of Man (38 years after abolition in UK and 6 years after USA).
Slavery had been outlawed for more than forty years by the time of Ota Benga’s 1906’s misadventure. In other words, Ota Benga’s humiliation had very little to do with slavery.
The aforementioned Verner (Ota Benga’s captor) was also an academic. Darwin’s views intrigued him when he wrote:
Famous anthropologist adorns the cover of Time with a ‘black man’ wearing a mask of Homo habilis.
Are they men, or the highest apes? Who and what were their ancestors? What are their ethnic relations to the other races of men? Have they degenerated from larger men, or are the larger men a development of Pygmy forefathers? These questions arise naturally, and plunge the inquirer at once into the depths of the most heated scientific discussions of this generation. ‘Pygmies present a case of unmodified structure from the beginning [a view which is] … against both evolution and degeneracy. It is true that these little people have apparently preserved an unchanged physical entity for five thousand years. But that only carries the question back into the debated ground of the origin of species.
Authors Bradford (Verner’s grandson) and Plume cited some of the visitor’s questions to Ota Benga’s display.
Was he a man or monkey? Was he something in between? “Ist das ein Mensch?” asked a German spectator. “Is it a man?” … No one really mistook apes or parrots for human beings. This—it—came so much closer. Was it a man? Was it a monkey? Was it a forgotten stage of evolution?
Clearly, the display was not lost on the public of the day. It was Darwin’s views that caused this small man to be viewed as an evolutionary ‘throwback’.
But, notably, nowhere around the world do we see Darwin’s statue being removed for his offensive ideas that the non-white races were lower on the evolutionary scale.
In fact, many of the racist taunts still being used today have their roots in Darwinian ideology or the idea that black people are ‘closer to the apes’ on the evolutionary scale. For example, see our articles Do monkeys play football? and Ape’ slur against Australian indigenous footballer. Is it any wonder when we still see displays and photos in evolutionary textbooks such as the ones pictured above?
Not the only example
We’ve also previously reported about the killing and removal of various ethnic groups around the world due to evolutionary beliefs. For example, in Australia we cited reports that perhaps the bodies of 10,000 Aboriginal people were shipped to British museums.10
‘US evolutionists were also strongly involved in this flourishing ’industry‘ of gathering specimens of ’subhumans‘. The Smithsonian Institution in Washington holds the remains of 15,000 individuals of various races. And then in April 2019, The State Ethnographic Collections department and the Martin Luther University in Germany, decided to return the bones of 53 Aboriginal people to the Yawuru indigenous group from Western Australia.
The BBC reported:
Aboriginal remains being returned at a ceremony in Germany.
Skulls and bones of Aboriginal Australians were removed by researchers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and put on show in museums around the world. However, they were displaced by settlers two centuries ago and thousands were killed. For more than 150 years, their remains were removed and sent to museums, universities and private collections in Australia and elsewhere.
But note, never once did the German institutions or the BBC mention the evolutionary reasons for their removal of these bodies from their homeland, except the evolutionary timeline invoked with it:
Australia’s native Aboriginal population has occupied the country for about 50,000 years.
It also reported that:
Germany also has large holdings of African human remains. The country has previously repatriated remains to Namibia, where it killed tens of thousands of indigenous Herero and Nama people from 1904 to 1908.
Today, the remains of tens of thousands of ethnically diverse people remain in academic institutions around the world.
‘Fess up’, Bronx Zoo!
Will the Bronx Zoo and these institutions admit the real reasons for these atrocities? Will they provide a proper apology for the evolutionary teaching that these are sub-humans—mere beasts to be studied and displayed for the advancement of mankind? Sadly these ideas still permeate the evolutionary community literature/images. Racism will continue to rear its ugly head until the underlying root philosophy is addressed. As philosopher Santayana said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
A lesson for the church also
As we’ve shown on this issue, the scientific consensus of evolution was an unstoppable juggernaut. I think of Christian missionaries who went to continents like Africa to preach the Gospel to people like Ota Benga and his kin. They did not have the DNA-science of today that confirms that all humanity is more than 99.99% percent similar. But they stood on God’s Word where it says, “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place” (Acts 17:26). Evolutionists in Ota Benga’s day would insist that the ‘science’ was on their side, but they were wrong. Christians who are only too happy to embrace evolution should learn from these atrocities of history in the name of (evolutionary) ‘science’.’ https://creation.com/bronx-zoo-apologizes?utm_campaign=infobytes_au&utm_content=Bronx+Zoo+apologizes+for+putting+an+African+man+in+their+Monkey+House&utm_medium=email&utm_source=mailing.creation.com&utm_term=Fortnightly+Digest+-+2020.08.21
Society is sadly accepting the sinful sodomite lifestyle as normal so therefore anyone that does not MUST be dealt with in the harshest way possible. Therefore a ‘UK bank closes Christian ministry’s account, according to Christian Concern 24 July 2020. Barclays Bank is closing the account Core Issues Trust, a Christian counselling service. The bank has informed them that their account will be closed in September. Core Issues Trust (CIT) provides “help for people who who want to move away from same-sex attraction or behaviours.”
No reason was given by the bank, but it is the latest in a series of denials of service to CIT, including from PayPal and Mail Chimp, Facebook and Instagram. CIT have also been targeted by an extensive campaign of abuse on social media, aggressive trolling and hateful text messages and abusive phone calls to staff. Mike Davidson, CEO of CIT said: “A coordinated campaign has resulted in our ministry coming under immense pressure and key service providers cancelling their services.” He went on to comment: “This amounts to mob rule. If a social media mob can cause a bank to close the account of a Christian ministry, then there is nowhere for Biblically faithful Christian ministries to go. The UK is now becoming an intensely intolerant country. Key service providers have cancelled their services to a Christian charity because of a social media mob.”
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, commented, “If it is CIT first, it will be churches next. If banks and other service providers start to placate social media campaigns by unilaterally terminating their accounts then the UK will be a very difficult place for Biblically faithful Christian ministries.”
Editorial Comment: This is not just a UK phenomenon. Our most recent email newsletter was blocked by Mail Chimp, with no specific reason given. It was eventually allowed to be sent after we removed a brief item that included the following comment: “the Bible reports the Creator God does hate homosexuality, along with adultery, gluttony, thievery, etc, all in the same paragraph, (1 Corinthians 6:9).” Read the item here. Creation Research has also had to deal with denials of service, along with abuse and interference with our websites and electronic media, but this is not just a “woe is us” report. It is a wake-up call to Christians. This is what happens when people “exchange the truth about God for a lie”. See Romans 1:18-32.
Australia is following the Marxist, Muslim, Leftist, Looney, Lovies, PC culture to its own destruction.
‘Do you detect any bias in this newspaper report?
“An elite Brisbane private school has bowed to pressure and dropped a sex-education book that suggests God hates homosexuals, gay people can “successfully” change to heterosexual, and people with ambiguous genitalia are “freaks”. Following Courier-Mail coverage that exposed the offensive book used in Year 10 religion classes at Moreton Bay Boys’ College and an angry backlash from parents, the school has confirmed the resource will be scrapped.” Queensland Courier Mail, August 4, 2020, Page 1.
Editorial Comment: Well it is true the Bible reports the Creator God does hate homosexuality, along with adultery, gluttony, thievery, etc, all in the same paragraph, (1 Corinthians 6:9). Therefore, would it be fair to say the Courier FeMale author of this report hates God’s Word?
Ever since same-sex marriage has been legalized in Australia (which doesn’t make it anymore right than before it was legalized) the LGBTQI crowd have been busy pushing their ungodly agenda. Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
The nutsos continue to have great influence in Federal and state governments here in Australia. Yes, ‘Children face various struggles growing up. Every parent knows that. It’s never plain sailing all the way to adulthood.
And now, a dangerous Bill before the ACT Legislative Assembly on Thursday threatens to make it a criminal offence for a Christian parent to help a child deal with questions of gender and sexuality in a godly and biblical way. The police may bring criminal charges, carrying a maximum of 12 months imprisonment.
Under the Sexual and Gender Identity Conversion Practices Bill 2020 it will be an offence to engage in activity that appears to be for the purpose of changing someone’s gender identity or sexual orientation.
Legal advice on the Bill received reveals that:
Parents who counsel their 5-year-old boy that he is a boy, despite the boy saying that he wants to be a girl, could be subject to criminal proceedings.
Teachers who treat the same gender-confused boy as a boy, in accordance with parents’ wishes, could also be subject to a criminal charge.
Schools set up with a religious ethos and teaching that there are only two genders could be at risk of being investigated by the ACT Human Rights Commission for conducting ‘conversion therapy’ practices.
Preachers teaching a biblically orthodox view of sexuality could be exposed to a conversion practice complaint.
Pastors who counsel any members of their congregations over unwanted same-sex attraction could be reported under the Act.
whatyareckon 