News

amybarrett2

President Trump has nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court.

Barrett, a Catholic, will replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg who died recently.

Judge Barrett has seven children.  Two are children adopted from Haiti and one has Down syndrome.

Democrats have made it clear that they will oppose Barrett, although given they do not have the numbers in the Republican-controlled Senate, it may change little.

It has been reported that Barrett’s appointment will create a 6-3 conservative majority on the court.

“Any nominee should be an originalist with a public record demonstrating deep commitment to protecting Americans’ constitutional freedoms, including religious freedom and free speech for all,” said Alliance Defending Freedom President and CEO Michael Farris.

Farris said that Judge Barrett has an encouraging record of advocating for constitutional freedoms,

“[She] has repeatedly stated her commitment to decide cases based on law and not on personal opinion.”

“President Trump could not have made a better decision,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

“Judge Amy Coney Barrett is an exceptionally impressive jurist and an exceedingly well-qualified nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise said that Barrett is another great Supreme Court pick by President Trump

“Amy Coney Barrett is an impeccable jurist and an extraordinarily thoughtful, principled woman committed to our Constitution—and a New Orleans native! She deserves a swift, fair Senate process focused on her qualifications,” said Scalise.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham said that “Judge Barrett is highly qualified in all the areas that matter – character, integrity, intellect, and judicial disposition.”

Pro-life advocates have been encouraged by the announcement and are hoping that it may signal the end of Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision finding a “right” to abortion.

“I am thrilled with the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett”, said pro-life activist and former Planned Parenthood abortion centre manager Abby Johnson.

“For those who plan to make Barrett’s faith a matter of disqualification, that line of attack is not only inappropriate and bigoted, but bases the nominee’s entire judicial career on everything but her merits and solid qualifications for the position.”

Johnson said that this is “the moment that the pro-life movement and those who hold all life to be dear and treasured have been waiting for”.

The Judiciary Committee hearings into the appointment of Barrett will commence October 12.

pregnant

A bill to create censorship zones around abortion centres has passed the SA Parliament’s lower house.

The legislation will now head to the upper house.

Minister David Speirs, who moved a silent prayer amendment, laid out his reasons for doing so:

“We have heard in the debate, both in this place and in the public domain via the media, both the print media and radio in recent days, that this proposed legislation will not prohibit people from silently and peacefully undertaking the activity of prayer close to a facility where abortions might be taking place,” said Minister David Speirs.

“This house has been assured of that. We heard that from the Attorney-General earlier this morning, and it is her firm view that people would not be prevented from undertaking silent prayer as a consequence of this amendment bill.

“If that is the case, I would ask the parliament to provide clarity, to provide certainty, by codifying the ability to undertake the activity of silent prayer within the proximity of these places,” Speirs added.

Unfortunately, Minister Speirs’ amendment to expressly allow for silent prayer in the censorship zones was defeated 24-20.

MPs in support of the Silent Prayer amendment:

Brown, M.E. Cowdrey, M.J. Cregan, D. Duluk, S. Ellis, F.J. Harvey, R.M. Knoll, S.K. Koutsantonis, A. Luethen, P. Murray, S. Patterson, S.J.R. Pederick, A.S. Piccolo, A. Power, C. Sanderson, R. Speirs, D.J. (teller) Tarzia, V.A. van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J. Wingard, C.L.

MPs opposed to the Silent Prayer amendment:

Basham, D.K.B. Bedford, F.E. Bell, T.S. Bettison, Z.L. Bignell, L.W.K. Boyer, B.I. Brock, G.G. Chapman, V.A. Close, S.E. Cook, N.F. (teller) Gardner, J.A.W. Hildyard, K.A. Malinauskas, P. Marshall, S.S. McBride, N. Michaels, A. Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. Picton, C.J. Pisoni, D.G. Stinson, J.M. Szakacs, J.K. Teague, J.B. Wortley, D.

AmandaStoker 002

Queensland LNP Senator Amanda Stoker often shares our concerns on issues relating to family, faith and freedom. So this week I thought I should share her warnings about new “anti-conversion” laws in Australia.

These laws were recently passed in Queensland and the ACT. The Victorian government is going down the same path, and other states could follow.

Most Australians have no idea about what has happened. There has been very little information in the media, so Senator Stoker’s comments need to be shared widely. Here is what she said in an email to supporters on 7 September:

Right on the back of new laws in Queensland, the rights of parents, teachers, psychologists and doctors were dealt a damaging blow with the passing of anti-conversion therapy laws in the ACT.

Nobody is advocating for archaic, harmful treatments, and indeed I and my colleagues are opposed to such practices.

But these laws go much further than simply doing this.

They potentially inflict criminal penalties on anyone just trying to provide care and support, particularly to young people, who are struggling with the difficult questions associated with gender identity.

Such laws strip parents of their responsibility and indeed their duty to raise and socialise their children to cope with the world around them.

Families need to be able to talk openly, freely, lovingly without fear of legal repercussions.

And our medical professionals need to be able to provide valid, clinical care in the best interests of their patients, rather than being compelled to simply lock patients into an affirmative model that remains medically controversial.  This law criminalises the open scientific discussion that leads to improvements in clinical care – which can only harm people struggling with gender dysphoria.

Even the ACT Law Society has voiced its concerns about the vagueness of the laws, particularly around what exactly constitutes illegality under the legislation.

Similar laws introduced in Queensland a fortnight ago are not quite as far-reaching, but have medical professionals in the state equally concerned. 

We must continue to be vigilant and call out these extreme ideological laws being passed under the pretence of “care” for our vulnerable young people.

I couldn’t have put it better myself. Please pray that more MPs like Senator Stoker will speak out against harmful, unjust laws like these.

Peter Downie - National Director

FamilyVoice Australia

euthanasia 800

The Australian Medical Association has come out in opposition to a proposed Tasmanian euthanasia bill.

Dr Helen McArdle, President of the Australian Medical Association in Tasmania, said the group is concerned about several parts of the so-called Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill.

“It is long and confusing, seems to have been developed on the run, comprises 160 pages much of which we found difficult to understand and many points that seem contradictory,” said Dr McArdle.

“The definition of relevant medical condition is vague and, unlike other states, does not include timeframes in which death is likely. It allows for the relevant condition to be combined with other conditions.

“Therefore, a patient with diabetes, which if untreated, is likely to cause a person’s death combined with arthritis and mild depression would qualify a person to apply for VAD,” she added.

Dr McArdle said that doctors have an ethical duty to care for dying patients so death can occur with comfort and dignity.

“They have a responsibility to initiate and provide good quality end of life care which strives to ensure a dying patient is as free from pain and suffering as possible and upholds the patient’s values and goals of care,” she said

“For most patients, pain and other causes of suffering can be alleviated through good care, including palliative care that focuses on symptom relief, prevention of suffering and improvement of quality of life.”

Dr McArdle said that despite pressure the legislature may feel to pass the bill, “bad legislation remains bad legislation” and that “it is particularly dangerous when it involves life and death”.

MargaretCourt800px

Mark Latham has responded to Andy Murray’s call for Margaret Court’s name to be removed from the arena named in her honour, saying he should “butt out of Australian matters.”

In calling for her name to be removed from the stadium, Andy Murray claimed that “I think as a sport you just have to be as inclusive as possible ...”.  

FamilyVoice has pointed out that his view of diversity doesn’t seem to include Margaret Court - who defends biblical truth and upholds the biological difference between men and women.

“Margaret Court is a great champion, on and off the court and Andy Murray, a Scot, should butt out of Australian matters”, said NSW MP Mark Latham.

“Go back to Scotland, Andy, and fix the problems there, which are massive,” he added.

Andy Murray has lost five Australian Open singles finals.

Margaret Court on the other hand has won a total of 18 titles (11 singles & 8 doubles).

Sign our petition calling on Andy Murray to apologise to Margaret Court.