- Apr 25, 2016
- 34,219
- 19,067
- 44
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
The approach you advocate is not only devoid of any understanding of Scriptural principles, it is very harmful & dangerous, robbing people of hope and driving them to depression & suicide.
Which Scripture tells us to cause someone physical pain while exposing them to erotic stimuli, in order to cause them to associate arousal with pain, for example?
If that's not a Scriptural practice, then why advocate for it to be allowed to continue?
It appears you really have very little understanding of what the bill contains because it includes prayer, Bible reading and Christian counseling that tells people there is is always hope in Christ to be liberated from a life of sexual immorality.
Not at all. There is absolutely nothing against any valid Christian practice aimed at a life free from sexual immorality. Because that is not the same as conversion therapy. We need to be very clear that conversion therapy is not aimed at helping people to avoid immoral behaviour, it is an attempt to create deep-seated neurological change.
Read these comments by Victoria's "Commissioner for LGBTIQ+ Communities" and educate yourself.
This is a particularly helpful quote: "Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is about balancing rights, and people have the right to their beliefs. Some sermons may express beliefs that seem contrary to the aim of this Bill, which affirms that people of faith have the right to express their views, but not to force them upon other people. The law becomes triggered when it is aimed at changing or suppressing an individual." (Emphasis mine; this bill will not cover things like sermons or general teaching on sexuality).
Also this: "The second point, around celibacy, would probably only be triggered by this law if the celibacy was on the basis of a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity with the purpose of suppressing that person’s sexual orientation or gender identity." (Emphasis mine, again. General encouragement of celibacy does not fall foul of this law, only if you're encouraging celibacy as part of trying to make a gay person straight or a trans person cis).
Also this: "If general prayer in c) is reported to the Commission, the Commission would not be required or empowered to do anything as this is not a change or suppression practice. The Commission would decline to consider the report." (Emphasis mine. Gosh, you can pray for someone, and as long as you're not using that to try to engage in conversion therapy, you won't fall foul of the law!)
Also this: "5. There are verses in the Bible that traditionally are held to teach that homosexual activity is against God’s will. Which teaching practices (for example a sermon or bible study) will be regarded as offenses.
a) Is it an offense to teach that the Bible says homosexual sex is wrong?
b) Is it an offense to teach that the Bible is authoritative for Christians and that it says homosexual sex is wrong?
c) Is it an offense to teach that LGBT persons should be celibate?
Do these teaching activities cross the line to become offences if an individual is targeted – in public or in private?
Will the educational role of the Commission act to discourage the general teaching that the Bible says homosexual sex is wrong?
None of the above scenarios are offences, as suggested by the question, as offences require injury to be proven which is very unlikely to arise from a sermon about religious views."
(Emphasis mine. Under this bill, if passed, it will not be an offence to teach that homosexual sex is wrong, or that LBGT folks should be celibate, even if that teaching is delivered one-on-one to an LGBT person).
Upvote
0