Catch The Fire Ministries has Changed it's Name


Catch The Fire Ministries Inc. has changed its name to Reformation Harvest Fire, and moving forward, you will see references to this name. We aim to complete this name change as soon as feasible and by 30 June 2020 at the very latest.




Freedom of Speech?Dear friends and family in Christ,

You may click the following link to read the official submission from Rise Up Australia Party on the proposed amendments to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

http://riseupaustraliaparty.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Submission-on-Proposed-Amendments-to-Racial-Discrimination-Act.pdf

We hope that you were able to send yours too as the deadline was 30th April.

Let’s continue to pray for the preservation of Freedom of Speech in Australia and the Freedom to Minister the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ!


5 Responses to “Racial Discrimination Act 1975 – Submission from Rise Up Australia Party”

  1. 1 Bob V

    SUBMISSION REGARDING THE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT

    Section 18 B, C, D and E of The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 should all be repealed and nothing put in their place.

    Laws against racial or ethnic vilification are a gross infringement of free speech, because any negative or critical statement made in
    connection with any race or ethnic group or country can be twisted to be construed as being racial vilification. Pauline Hanson was dumped on for saying “we are in danger of being swamped by Asians” which was a perfectly reasonably assessment of Australia’s immigration system. When I was a One Nation candidate I was interviewed by El Telegraph Arabic newspaper, a very large circulation newspaper read by both Christians and Muslims, and I pointed out that just as in the Middle East the Palestinians don’t wasn’t to be swamped by the Israelis and the Israelis don’t want to be swamped by the Palestinians, Australians don’t want to be swamped by Asians, and the interviewer said that was a very good point.

    The truth is no ethnic group anywhere in the world wants to be swamped by another.

    The use of acts like the racial discrimination act in regard to vilification turn out in practice to be completely one sided. They are almost exclusively used against Europeans by non-Europeans. Most of the racial vilification in Sydney for instance in the last few decades has been carried out by Muslims against non-Muslims. Women have been driven out of suburbs like Punchbowl, Lakemba, Bankstown and Belmore by being called f……ing Aussie sluts by the Muslims who have moved in. Can they claim under the racial discrimination act?

    At a recent anti-Israel demonstration against the Max Brenner Chocolate Company in Westfield Parramatta the Muslims were apparently chanting “Death to Israel”.

    Is that racial vilification likely to incite violence? Were any of them arrested?

    The Muslims want any criticism of Islam to be classified as “racism”.

    Islam is a religion not a race and yet under racial vilification laws it has almost become generally accepted by some parts of the media that criticising Islam or objecting to the establishment of a mosqueor Islamic school, or the halal label on food, is racism. Also, as the persecution of Pastor Danny Nalliah and Pastor Daniel Scott in Victoria showed, vilification laws can cover even quoting word for word from the Koran in some circumstances.

    The only laws we need restricting free speech in regard to race or ethnic origin are laws against defamation, laws against causing
    public mischief by spreading false rumours, and laws against direct incitement to violence. The concept of being “reasonably likely to incite violence” is a total hypothetical.

    “Vilification” is a very vague word that is open to interpretation.

    Vilification can be just robust criticism. If words or an act incite hatred against a person or a group of persons, as the proposed
    amendments to the act express it, that may be a completely unintended consequence of the perpetrator of the words or act. An accurate statement about the disproportionate predominance of an ethnic group in crime statistics, for instance, could incite hatred
    against that ethnic group. Does that mean such a statement could not be made? Criticism of any of the practices of Islam like polygamy or FGM might incite hatred against Muslims. Does that mean such criticism should not be made? In the minds of some people inclined that way anything can incite hatred. Causing fear in members of an ethnic group may also be an unintended consequence of words or an act in connection with that group.

    “Standards of an ordinary reasonable member of the Australian community” as described in the proposed amendment is also a very vague concept. In a court of law the standards will be those of the judge, magistrate or commissioner which are never the same as “Standards of an ordinary reasonable member of the Australian community” and are usually biased in favour of non-Europeans against Europeans.

    I consent to having this made public.

    BOB V

  2. 2 John

    Great letter.

    I would have added “Civil action” to “violence, intimidation, or prosecution” as people are prone to sue these days.

    Comment we live in a society that allows debate as yet, but the interesting point is that it was Satan who introduced debating in the Garden of Eden. Up until then Adam and Eve believed God.

    So debating is not the sign of maturity as some have said, but it is believing God that is.

    Debating is better than being forced to believe what Satan teaches.

    John

  3. 3 Lilian

    Dear Jason,

    I will put this in our prayer requests for May and we uphold Pastor Daniel and all the RUAP in our prayers.

    Please feel free to post this on our National Prayer Strategy for the ten domains .

    Love and blessings
    Lilian

  4. 4 Philip

    All sounds good and if anyone knows what he is talking about here, having seen his parents about to be burned on one hand and his wife and children about to be wiped out on another — courtesy of ethnic cleansing — it would be Pastor D..

    Whatever our current government should do, is beyond me, but I note that if an ethnic/’religious’ group is actively indoctrinating to stir the violence Pastor. D. witnessed ( praise and thank God, he was delivered from it) — if any group is indoctrinating discrimination, violence, ethnic/’religious’ gang supremacy, takeover of our peaceful system of government — if that can be shown to be happening here today — which in effect it has, courtesy of the Sydney riots and the vilification case — what would you recommend the government do, practically, in response? The Koran/Shariah etc. is directly contrary to our Constitution. Could you recommend a royal commission or something such to probe the undermining of the Constitution — or simply re-inforce your demand for big cuts in the importation of Islam? In some sense,you are the experts. And the vilification laws are as useful as a wet lettuce?

  5. 5 Jocelyn

    Thank you so much.
    That is so helpful to read.
    Sincerely
    Jocelyn

Leave a Reply





Youtube Highlights

Australia Day 2019

Archives

3K2 theme by Hakan Aydin