Vox Brief, May 2011. One of the most disconcerting items on the homosexual agenda is the demand for marriage rights for same-sex relationships. But the Orwellian attempt to equate same-sex relationships with traditional marriage is doomed from the outset. Homosexual marriage is simply an oxymoron. There are many reasons why this move to destroy marriage must be resisted. Here are some of them.
For years, the Greens have been treated as a political curiosity. They won a spot or two in the Senate, but were absent from the real place of political power, the House of Representatives. That has now changed. They will have more senators from July 2011, and a seat in the House. They are in an alliance with the minority Labor government nationally and in Tasmania.
Despite their environmentalism, “the Greens are not a single issue party.” Their objective is: “to transform politics and bring about Green government.” They are part of a worldwide movement that is actively engaged in the political process and aims at a radical transformation of the culture that underpins Western civilisation.
The Greens should be subjected to the same scrutiny as any other political party.
To comprehend the Greens’ political ideology, it is necessary to understand
All proposals to legalise euthanasia or assisted suicide would create an exception to the laws which prohibit murder and assisting suicide.
Such proposals rely on the assertion of a “right to die” combined with the idea that some people would be “better off dead”.
Christians who step out of the comfort zone of the church and into the world of cultural engagement are confronted by a bewildering array of issues. Should we be concerned about the economy, health, education, the environment, abortion, defence, housing, violence, the family, corruption, democracy or what?
When constrained by limited time and resources, are some issues more worthy of being addressed by Christians than others? If so, what are the priority issues for Christians engaging our culture?...
There are many opinions on the issue of funding for parents. Some businesses give women in the workforce an allowance equivalent to several months’ pay after they have a baby. Some people claim that paid parental leave is a “workplace entitlement” like holiday or sick pay, and all businesses should be required to fund it. Others say businesses may not want to employ younger women if paid parental leave were mandatory – so it should be funded by the government. Others argue that stay-at‑home mums need as much or more financial help than workforce mums, since stay-at‑home mums forgo a whole salary to provide maternal care for some years – an option which is best for babies.
They say that any parental leave mandated by the government should be paid equally to all mothers.
What is fair? What facts and principles should guide government policy?...
Minimum Access:
Public
Guest
Subscriber
Member
To access a document other than Public you must login
Public
Guest
Subscriber
Member
