Too Proud? Fifty Years After The Stonewall Riots

Note from Kevin: The following article, by James Parker, is the best summary I have ever read about the homosexual movement. James is a former gay activist who today supports same-sex attracted people and their loved ones.

Fifty years after the Stonewall riots: What the LGBTQI+ movement needs is less pride and more humility…

Fifty years ago gay, lesbians and cross-dressers fought back when police raided a seedy bar in New York, the Stonewall Inn. The ensuing riot lasted for a couple of days. It was the opening shot in the gay liberation movement and over the years has acquired an almost mythological status. This weekend, “pride” events will be celebrated across the world.

I became a gay activist 20 years after the Stonewall Riots. I set out to fight for a better world, where no one should feel shame for being honest about who they were sexually attracted to. I had been raised to believe that a person’s future flows from facing their present reality. My reality was that I fancied men, and only men.

Accepting during puberty that I was erotically attracted to my own sex was an excruciatingly painful revelation, and not without suicidal undertones. By accepting my reality I found a new inner strength, purpose – and yes, pride.

To the best of my knowledge, I was the first person to come out in my Catholic high school. I was also the first person to come out in my university college and consequently saw it as my duty to make a stand for lesbian and gay, or L & G, rights. (There were no BTQQIAAPP+2S minorities in those days.)

I learned of the successful attempt in 1973 by gay members of the American Psychiatric Association to tweak 81 words which suddenly redefined homosexuality and cast off its ancient shackles as a sexual deviance and a mental disease. Just this past week, American psychoanalysts offered an apology for labelling homosexuality an illness.

In the 80s, I engaged with leading gay strategists from the USA and the UK. I devoured their content which outlined all we are seeing transpire today.

Their strategy was that homosexual men and women should infiltrate and take leadership within key areas of society, most notably the entertainment industry, mainstream media, education, politics, healthcare – especially psychology and psychiatry, the military, religion and sport. The purpose was to use their positions to bring about homosuperiority. Yes, not homonormativity or even mere equality, but homosuperiority.

Homosuperiority was to be achieved by meticulously following the propaganda manifesto entitled After The Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays In The 90s, by neuropsychiatrist Marshall Kirk and communications consultant Hunter Madsen.

If you didn’t know, the manifesto is working exceedingly well, thank you very much, with its key themes on display in the Israel Folau debacle.

There were eight principles. Principle 5 laid down in After The Ball calls for portraying gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers, and the use of propaganda to rely “more upon emotional manipulation than upon logic, since its goal is, in fact, to bring about a change in the public’s feelings”.

Propaganda, it says, “can be unabashedly subjective and one-sided. There is nothing necessarily wrong with this.” Corporate Australia has dived headfirst into this principle.

To call people “homophobic” is also expected should opponents fail to wholly embrace homosexual ideology. Politicians and civic leaders have equally become puppets to this principle.

Any speech which opposes, or even questions, homosexual behaviour should be banned as “a clear and present danger to public order”. The school curriculum, psychology and psychiatry and mainstream media all now tow the rainbow party line.

Principle 5 states that “in time, we see no reason why more and more diversity should not be introduced into the projected image” citing “drag queens, bull dykes, and other exotic elements of the gay community”. Remember, this vision was cast over 30 years ago. You now need look no further than local bookshops and libraries to see this principle being lived out.

Once birthed, the seed of pride demands that layers of further lies and calumny be added to protect the original fault from being exposed. Welcome to the world of Gay Pride.

With every generation there is a growing demand to ensure each social stratum is more deeply inculcated with adherence to the original lie. No one must admit that the emperor has no clothes on. Therefore, “conversion therapy”, a term recently created by gay activists, has been used in the past decade to demonise any assistance given to someone suffering the pain of same-sex attraction.

To add another layer of lies to the conversion therapy myth is the phrase “internalised homophobia” which denotes that individuals who refuse to embrace and even celebrate their erotic attractions to the same sex are somehow turned in against themselves. Yes, they are their own problem.

No stone must be left unturned The same lie must be repeated incessantly that not only is gay good, but that gay is godly, and even that God is gay.

This of course requires a complete perverting of the natural world. Aldous Huxley wrote clearly of this when describing the results of social anthropologist J. D. Unwin’s study of 80 primitive tribes and six known civilizations through 5000 years of history laid out in the book, Sex and Culture.

Huxley wrote:

“Sex and Culture” is a work of the highest importance. Unwin’s conclusions… may be summed up as follows. All human societies are in one or another of four cultural conditions: zoistic, manistic, deistic, rationalistic. Of these societies the zoistic displays the least amount of mental and social energy, the rationalistic the most. Investigation shows that the societies exhibiting the least amount of energy are those where pre-nuptial continence is not imposed and where the opportunities for sexual indulgence after marriage are greatest. The cultural condition of a society rises in exact proportion as it imposes pre-nuptial and post-nuptial restraints upon sexual opportunity.

According to Unwin, after a nation becomes prosperous it becomes increasingly liberal with regard to sexual morality and as a result loses its cohesion, its impetus and its purpose. The process, says the author, is irreversible:

The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs.

The LGBTQI+ communities barely bat an eyelid to open relationships – before, during, after and without same-sex marriage. Group or polyamorous relationships are fast becoming acceptable. Any additional minority that wishes to add its letter to the alphabet acronym must be welcomed and incontestably supported, meaning that any sexual activity undertaken by any minority group who “cannot help the way they feel” be accepted. This should both frighten and anger us.

It is no wonder that 50 years after Stonewall, contemporary riots are not being waged on the streets against the police and statutory authorities but appear online with rugby at the heart, one of the globe’s toughest team sports that was deliberately formed not only on Christian values, but with the purpose of forming a strong, robust and masculine spirit evidenced in the witness of Israel Folau.

Our online riot is foremost a fight against Judeo-Christian values, the very glue that has held together Western society and permitted it to excel as it has.

The activists’ world I embraced demanded that I take on a calculated intolerance, a bigoted mindset, a capacity to rabidly hate, and the ability to reject, or at least to distort, everything I came across that even questioned the establishment of a homosuperior world. And all of this while bowing to the mantra that #LoveWins.

I had to believe first within myself that the lie I was being sold was nothing short of the truth. There is no wonder that lavender militants are alarmed to discover that the younger generation they have been resolutely brainbow-washing are now growing less rather than more tolerant of LGBTQI+ individuals and ideals.

Stonewall and contemporary LGBTQI+ activism have never been about an equal, diverse, inclusive and tolerant world. No. The illusory pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is more a darkened cauldron. It brings to the table a diminishment, and ultimate eradication, of mainstream freedoms such as speech, thought, association or a belief or anything which fails to pay total homage to what for millennia has previously been defined as a sexual deviancy.

If you think I have an axe to grind, well, you are right. I care too much to remain silent.

On a daily basis I walk with young people coming to terms with their same-sex attractions, with individuals struggling with the concept of being male or female, and with men and women ditching their other-sex spouse and children (and now even their same-sex spouse and surrogate or adoptive children) to pursue a “more fulfilling” relationship with one or more people somewhere over the rainbow.

Fifty years on from Stonewall, with every pillar of society now rainbow-friendly and frightened, I see 50 plus shades of gay grey which continue to imprison those who pursue an LGBTQI+ utopia. Five decades later, dysfunction has not only been accepted, but in places it has actually worsened.

The cocktail of gay hook-up apps along with accessibility to the drug Truvada taken by HIV-negative people to reduce their risk of HIV infection has birthed a more sexually compulsive world than existed prior to the AIDS epidemic of the 80s. Unbridled sexual activity only leads to more addictive and destructive disconnection, which in turn is leading to more partner interpersonal violence and sadistic practices.

The sexual health clinicians I have spoken to in the past month report working on a constant level of overdrive trying to deal with the inordinate numbers of problematic sexual health cases they have to diagnose and process.

Self-harm is on the rise, even if only looked at from the perspective of time spent engrossed in the consumption of pornography which cuts off individuals from the healthy engaging relationships which we all need to survive and thrive. Then there are the mood disorders, panic, bi-polar and conduct disorders. There is a new rise in agoraphobia, and no significant reduction in suicides, even in pro-homosexual nations like Sweden, the Netherlands and New Zealand.

Is this the Golden Liberation we should be celebrating? For the most part, the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots is a celebration of man’s ever deepening foolishness. The story of Israel Folau reads like a fable and yet unravels before our very eyes displaying layers of pride woven to cover pride to cover earlier pride, all based upon one man privately posting online three verses of the Christian Scriptures.

I fear for members of the LGBTQI+ community and for those who join their ranks. I equally fear for any society that embraces essentialist viewpoints about human sexuality without the balance of constructionist and developmental viewpoints which are presently being silenced.

My activism today is born out of a different heart. For nearly two decades I have facilitated spiritual support groups for those who experience varying degrees of same-sex attraction and for those questioning their biological sex. Those who attend can ask deeper questions compared to those who remain isolated at home or who engage with the gay community as a whole. Attendee’s desire answers – and many get them, and especially to matters relating to childhood sexual abuse, to emotional or physical abuse or neglect.

If one person can move from being homosexual to heterosexual (and believe me there are thousands across Australia and in every nation who are rejecting homosexuality) then it is clear that the fundamental LGBTQI+ narrative of being born gay contains within it a number of myths, each one of which requires dismantling, not celebrating.

I still fight for spaces where young and old alike can face the reality of their attractions. No one should be afraid to admit to, or be discriminated against for, being erotically attracted to their own sex or for questioning their own gender identity.

And yet as celebrations of Gay Pride unfold across the globe, today more than ever I believe we need to take stock of the Biblical proverb quoted consistently throughout the ages, “Pride goes before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

I was invited to reject pride. Today, my dominant attraction is very much towards women. I am one of the fortunate individuals who escaped the gay community and stumbled across professional therapy which enabled me to pursue the developmental viewpoint about human sexuality.

My earlier dysfunctions, still prevalent at the heart of the LGBTQI+ community, have diminished or disappeared. I am no longer a label, or divided from mainstream society, or fighting a losing battle.

Fifty years on from the Stonewall Riots in Manhattan, much has indeed changed, but not all for the good. Instead of giving time and energy to matters of pride, I believe it is time to engage on a whole new level of forming a society where humility becomes ubiquitous at all levels. And for everyone’s sake, that is a battle worth fighting for.


Sacked for Quoting the Bible While Not at Work!

In my country, Australia, the highest profile rugby Union player in the country, Israel Fulau, has just been sacked for quoting a passage from the Bible on instagram that describes who will be sent to hell and included a reference to homosexuals. The lead sponsor of the Australian Rugby Union is Qantas, run by a very strident homosexual rights campaigner. This is the first real test case of the new era in which we live where religious rights are being trampled by sexual rights and the disease of “taking offence”. I hope it goes all the way to our Hugh Court so the best legal minds on the country can somehow create a balance between what we have always cherished as a nation: free speech and religious freedom, and personal rights. In the meantime an unexpected voice of support for Israel has come from a former left-wing national political leader who has re-emerged as a right-wing state politician!

Below is part of a transcript of his brilliant maiden speech to the New South Wales Parliament a few weeks ago via the website Mercatornet:

Mark Latham is one of the most unusual and controversial characters in Australian politics. He is brainy, has a scathing wit and has published several books. He became leader of the Australian Labor Party in Federal Parliament – the youngest in over a century — and contested the 2004 election against Liberal Prime Minister John Howard. He lost decisively. Afterwards he resigned from Parliament and became a political commentator.

Latham has made a career out of opposing political correctness. After resigning from the ALP, he joined One Nation, a party whose main appeal to the electorate is opposition to immigration. It is loathed by both of the major parties. In the recent New South Wales election, Latham won a seat in the upper house of NSW for One Nation. This is an excerpt from his maiden speech in the chamber in which he comments on the Israel Folau controversy. 


Like so many parts of our politics that have changed quickly in recent times, there are voices here who do not believe in the virtues of the West, who do not acknowledge the nation-building achievements of our culture and our country.

It is a bit like a scene from The Life of Brian, a case of: What has Western civilisation done for us? Only advanced health care and education, architecture, engineering, information technology, free speech and the rule of law. In fact, this Chamber, this Parliament, this city, all our public institutions and the material comforts we take for granted—none of them could exist without the greatness of the West—without the advances that began with the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution and continue to this day.

Yet still, among the leftist elites, among the social engineers and cultural dieticians, sneering at our civilisation and its achievements has become their new pastime. They preach diversity but practice a suffocating cultural conformity, wanting everyone to be just like them. They argue for inclusion but as soon as a Christian, a conservative, a libertarian, a nationalist, a working-class larrikin, an outsider from the vast suburbs and regions of our nation disagrees with them, they crank up their PC-outrage machine to exclude them from society. They are tolerant of everything except dissenting values and opinions meaning, of course, they are tolerant of nothing that matters, only themselves.

This is the leftist curse through the ages—the recurring history of those who so badly crave control over others they lose control over themselves. In their lust for authority they lose their respect for the rights of others. It is a bit like a scene from Orwell’s Animal Farm, the Green-Labor-Left has become the thing it originally opposed—elitist, would-be dictators taking away from working-class communities the things these battlers value: the right to speak their mind; to say they love their country and want Australia Day to stay; to practice their Christianity, openly and freely; to send their children to school without the garbage of Safe Schools, Wear-It-Purple days, “Head Rest” indoctrination and the other crackpot theories making some New South Wales classrooms more like a Hare Krishna meeting than actual education; and when they go to work the chance to do their job without being bombarded by employment quotas, “unconscious bias” training and a long list of unspeakable, taboo words, scary, scary stuff, like “guys” and “mums and dads”.

The New Left are the new primitives of our time, junking the importance of evidence, of recorded history, of biological science, to pretend that all parts of our lives, especially race, gender and sexuality can be fluid, that everything we know and feel around us is, in fact, “socially constructed”, that is what they say, “socially constructed”. They are peddling fake news. We have not been brainwashed by capitalist hegemony as the post‑modernists argue. People know and understand the things they see and feel in their lives. It is called evidence. Our personal characteristics and identities are fixed, not fluid. With few exceptions people are born either male or female.

We should not be confusing young people and risking their mental health by pushing gender fluidity upon them. We should not be taking away from parents their essential role as the primary carers of their children in matters personal and sexual. We should not be changing the purpose of our education system, transforming schools from places of skill and academic attainment into gender fluidity factories. Most of all, we should not be losing sight of the interests of mainstream, majority Australia. In the last national census, for instance, 1,300 Australians identified as transgender. But to listen to the political and media coverage of this issue you would think there were 13 million.

Everywhere I travel parents and grandparents, workers and communities, tell me how concerned they are about Australia’s direction. They ask me, “What’s happened to our country? Where has this nonsense come from?”

The answer is clear. The leftist project, then and now, is about control. Having with the fall of the Berlin Wall lost the struggle for economic control, the Left got smarter. It shifted from the cold war to a culture war. It moved from pursuing economic Marxism to pushing cultural Marxism. Instead of trying to socialise the means of production, it is now trying to socialise the means of individual expression and belief—our language, our values, our behaviour. Instead of seeking revolution at the top of government, it has marched instead through our institutions—a tactic that is harder to combat.

The elites have been remarkably successful in this cultural invasion. Our abiding national traditions of free speech, merit selection, resilience and love of country are being lost, not just in the public sector—in schools, universities, public broadcasters, major political parties and government agencies—but also in large parts of corporate Australia and the commercial media. The rest of us are the Resistance to this national takeover. Our chief ally is evidence—evidence and human nature. Through the power of reason and enlightenment people want to have a say about the things that are important to them. They want free speech. They want freedom of religion and belief. Australians are also a tough yet fair-minded people. …

The Australian story in settling a harsh and sometimes hostile continent on the other side of the world is one of the most remarkable in human history. Leaders such as Arthur Phillip and Lachlan Macquarie, in little more than a generation, turned a penal colony into a civilisation—building what has now become the best nation on earth. It was achieved through resilience and mateship—the Australian habit of toughing it out and treating others as equals. Jack is as good as his master. It is in our nature to treat people as we find them—to judge them on their individual merit, their work ethic, their community contribution.

This is what makes identity politics—subdividing our people on the basis of race, gender and sexuality—so foreign to the Australian way. Just as the old Soviet Union fell over because human nature wanted economic competition and individual wealth and excellence, I believe these new mutant strains of social control—post-modernism and identity politics—will also fail. They run contrary to the nature and evidence of our lives. …

Like every other Australian, I own my own words; I know what I mean by them. Like so many Australians, I refuse to allow my words to be controlled by strangers—by the elites with their confected outrage and PC censorship. In truth in society, offence is taken, not given. It is a personal choice, based on assumptions about what someone meant by their words. Yet only the person speaking those words truly knows what was meant. As the great John Cleese has pointed out, telling a joke about someone does not mean we hate them. We love the people we joke about. We love the Irish, the blondes, the gays, everyone—as they have helped to bring humour and joy into our lives.

The other problem with political correctness is in knowing what is genuine and what is not. So much of the offenderati, the outrage industry, involves the fabrication of offence—saying that their feelings have been hurt solely for the reason of closing down their political opponents. PC is riddled with these internal contradictions. …

I am not a Christian but I recognise the vital contribution of Christianity to our civilisation: its vast social and charitable work; its teaching of right and wrong in civil society. I stand with Israel Folau.

In his own private time away from his job playing football he is a preacher at his community church and naturally he quotes the Bible. Why would he not? He believes, as millions of people have believed for thousands of years, that sinners go to hell. As per his valid religious faith, he loves the sinner but condemns the sin. Yet for his beliefs, his Christianity, he is not allowed to play rugby, to chase the pigskin around the park. How did our State and our nation ever come to this? I was on Folau’s list of sinners, more than once actually. I dread to look at how many times I was listed by his social media postings. But as I do not believe in hell there was no way I could take offence.

Those claiming outrage have fabricated their position solely for the purpose of censorship. This is not an argument about diversity. The Wallabies have no female players, no disabled, no elderly, no middle aged. They are selected from a tiny fraction of the young, fit, athletic male population. By excluding a committed Christian, they are making their game less inclusive.

And as for Folau being a role model for young gay men, one only needs to state this proposition to understand its absurdity. Footballers are not role models for anyone, other than in enjoying their sporting ability. I say to any young person: if you are looking for guidance and inspiration in life, study Churchill, Lincoln, Reagan and Roosevelt, not Todd Carney. …

I believe that no Australian should live in fear of the words they utter. No Australian should be fearful of proclaiming four of the most glorious words of our civilisation: I am a Christian. No-one should be sacked by their employer for statements of genuine belief and faith that have got nothing to do with their job.

The Folau case exposes the new serfdom in the Australian workplace. Who ever would have thought it would come to this, how big companies, the corporate PC-elites are wanting to control all aspects of their employees’ lives—their religious and political views, how they speak and think, how they behave, even in their own time well away from the workplace? This is a stunning intrusion on workers’ rights. Yet far from condemning the new serfdom, Labor and the trade unions have been cheering it on.”

Who Moved The Stone of Jesus’ Tomb?

Every Easter skeptics rattle on about the myth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The most eloquent answer to these accusations I have ever read comes from  E.M. Blaiklock, Professor of classics, Auckland University. Here is my summary of his findings.

Theory One: The disciples stole the body

What motive was there for the disciples to steal the body and live a lie in the face of their own terrible suffering, torture and agonising deaths.

This doesn’t agree with an otherwise very accurate historical narrative. All cultural and historical aspects of the writings have been proved authentic.

This also doesn’t agree with the personality of the disciples. Only two were brave enough to enter the city on the night of the arrest, the rest are unheard of for some time. They were terrified.

If the body was stolen then why did ten of the eleven men die a horrible death for a deliberate fabrication? People don’t die for lies.

This action would have been contrary to all the moral and ethical teachings their teacher tried to instil in them.

Theory Two: Joseph moved the body to a more permanent tomb.

This theory has two possible motives; to satisfy Jewish law and to finish spicing the body.

To do the job of shifting the stone, spicing the body and moving it, would have taken a team of men. This team never came public with a body or any evidence to squash the rumours.

Playing around with tombs after dark was illegal. To do so legally would have required the blessing of the Sanhedrin. If he did this then why didn’t the Sanhedrin blow the resurrection rumour?

If Joseph altered anything on Saturday morning he was violating Sabbath law. If he did anything after the guards had arrived on Saturday then the Sanhedrin would have known all about it.

If he did move the body then why didn’t he tell the disciples?

There is no known venerated tomb of Jesus.

Theory Three: The Jewish authorities moved the body.

The Sanhedrin sought to prevent the moving of the body by setting guards, possibly Roman guards, for whom sleeping on duty was rewarded with the death penalty!

Why didn’t they simply produce the body once rumours started spreading?

The official line was “the disciples stole the body”, therefore the Sanhedrin didn’t have the body.

Theory Four: Jesus didn’t really die, he “fainted”

This theory ignores the nature of the wounds. They were enough to kill: 39 lashes with a cat-o-nine tails, nailing of body to a wooden pole, spear thrust into the heart, exhaustion, blood loss and partial suffocation from the cross.

How could a badly wounded man free himself from the bondage of 30 kg of herbs and wrappings and then roll away a 1-2 tonne stone.

The cold of the night would have killed a badly wounded man at that time of year (early spring).

His condition upon exiting the tomb would hardly have impressed the disciples, or convince them that he had conquered death. Such an appearance would have killed off any belief in the resurrected Christ.

The position of the linen wrappings, especially the head linen, suggested he exited straight through them. The produced instant belief in the idea he had resurrected in both Peter and John.

Theory Five: The women made a mistake, visiting the wrong tomb.

Two of the women had already visited the tomb on Friday afternoon to spice the body, so they knew where it was.

If they were at the wrong tomb because of lack of daylight, then why was the “gardener” already at work? Gardeners don’t work in the dark.

If it was late enough for the “gardener” to be at work then it was late enough to find the right tomb.

The priests never directed people to the right tomb. They knew it was empty.

Theory Six: The grave was never visited by the women

Then why did they declare it empty. Within 10 minutes they would be declared liars?

Again, the Sanhedrin didn’t direct people to the right tomb.

It is not within the character of loyal grieving women of cook up a plot.

Theory Seven: Jesus resurrected himself.

The tomb was definitely empty, Everyone in the city knew this. What they didn’t know was why.

The grave clothes told their own convincing story.

There were hundreds of very bold post-resurrection witnesses and advocates, 500 at one time, most of whom were still alive when a written record was made.

The population, by the thousands, immediately believed the resurrection story. Everyone knew something strange had occurred and waited seven weeks for an answer that made sense.

The seven week gap would not be there if the story was a fraud. Time gaps lead to doubts.

Preaching about the resurrection started ten minutes walk from the tomb, in the heart of enemy territory. If it wasn’t empty then it was a stupid place to start preaching!

There was an enormous change in the disciple’s lives. They went from doubting fearful, confused and disloyal men to fearless advocates, willing to die for their message.

Christ’s hostile brother, James, became convinced that his brother was God.

I claim to be a historian. My approach to classics is historical, and I tell you that the evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of ancient history.

Kevin Davis

Asking Jesus A Question: Whats The Real Reason For Easter?

I have recently begun asking Jesus questions and recording the answers I get in a journal. It is revolutionising my Christian walk! Here is the question I asked this morning and the answer I felt come into my heart as I began to write…

“Jesus, its Easter. Please give me a fresh revelation of why you died to set us free.”

“It was an honour for me to come to the cross for you. You are the most important person in the universe if you can see it through the lens of the cross – it was all about you, not me.

I died to myself so that YOU could know who you really are, have the blindness of your heart and eyes replaced with eyes that can see the universe, my universe correctly. It was for you that I died so that you could be free to be with me, to approach me, to be intimate with me.

It was never about mere legalism or religious ascent. It was about intimacy – closeness, deep relationship, deep friendship and fun…lots of fun as you walk with me daily, sorting through the jobs and roles of life with the new lens of intimacy.

I am your best friend, I am with you every minute of every day, enjoying your company and guiding you in straight paths.I am the guarantor of your liberty, freedom, joy, fun and kindness.

This is why I died – it was for you to know me so well that transfer to heaven after death will be a seamless transfer from one realm to another!”

I love that last bit.

Kevin Davis

Two Fascinating and Sad Trends in the USA

Dear friends,

What goes for the USA generally goes for the western world, so these two trends can be extrapolated into a bigger picture of the state of Western Civilisation.

First. Here is the headline I read the other day on the secular website Zero Hedge:

40 Facts That Prove That America’s Moral Collapse Is Spinning Wildly Out Of Control

It was an interesting but very sad read on what is basically the destruction of the family over the last 50 years, led by the selfish sexual revolution.

Then two days later I came across this headline on the same website:

The Number Of Americans With “No Religion” Has Soared 266% Over The Last 3 Decades

I couldn’t help but join the dots between the two. The “No Religion” group is now the largest demographic cohort in what was once the most Christian country in the world!

Christianity believes in family, it teaches dying to self for the sake of others, it teaches moral and sexual restraint. It is exactly these attributes that are disappearing or have  disappeared, leaving the USA with a nightmare of social problems. Homosexual marriage and the transgender avalanches will only exacerbate the problem for the next generation of confused children.

Where will this lead us in 10, 20 or 50 years from now? Fortunately the rest of the world is heading toward Jesus at a rapid pace. I see a future where missionaries from other parts of the world will be re-planting the gospel in the Western world!


How Is Choosing Your Age Different From Choosing Your Sex?

(Copied from Zero Hedge without comment…)

A scholar in Finland recently proposed a novel new legal concept: The ability of people to decide their own age.

The academic notes the difference between “chronological age” (how long one has been alive), “biological age” (the physical quality of one’s body), and “emotional age” (the age one actually feels one is). The former one cannot change at all; the middle one can change through healthy living; but the latter-most one would be able to change simply at will, including legally, depending on how one feels.

Sound familiar? Of course it does. It is worth pointing out that the author of this theory seems both sincere and well-meaning, the frankly unbelievable proposition notwithstanding. But of course it rings very closely to the phenomenon of transgenderism, in which people are said to be able to choose their own “gender,” e.g. a man can choose to be a woman, and vice versa.

The silliness of choosing one’s own age is self-evident; but in acknowledging that, one must also note the cosmic absurdity of choosing one’s own sex. Both rely on a solipsistic and metaphysically untenable view of reality, namely that one can simply wish away concrete biological facts in favor of mere desire. Of course this is impossible, no matter the circumstances.

Yet this is what transgenderism has wrought: A world in which obvious truth is being increasingly abandoned in favor of deeply weird, anti-scientific ideology. It is likely that we will continue to see more and more strange ideological propositions such as trans-ageism; these sorts of things will surely continue until people start rejecting them, up to and including transgenderism. 

But that is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Surrogacy: The New Frontier in Child Abuse

Surrogacy is big business these days. With the mainstreaming of same-sex marriage has come the mainstreaming of surrogacy and the only difference between surrogacy and child trafficking is the timing of the contract and exchange of money.

Far more important than the issue is for adults is the issue for the children themselves.

Here is one persons story from the website Them Before Us that gives you an idea of the cost to the child of their existence being the contract for exchange between two adults, and in most cases of never knowing their birth mother or donor father.

“I am a donor-conceived person. This means that my mom went to a fertility clinic with a sperm bank and was artificially inseminated to get pregnant. She was/is a single mom and this was her only option. She elected to use an anonymous sperm donor.

Anonymous donation is very strict, capitalistic, and based in part on eugenics. Only neurotypical, height/weight proportional, college educated, usually 5’10” or taller, “normal” biological males are allowed to donate. This created a system that selects only middle/upper-middle-class white males of an incredibly specific caliber. It created a binary of “these are males who are worthy enough to make children” and “these are not worthy males.” Any type of neurological or physical difference disqualifies a man. I cannot even donate because I’m too short. This is selective breeding to create humans of a particular appearance and genetic makeup. This is eugenics.

Anonymous donation also means that children are born into a conditional existence. I am allowed to live, but I give up all rights to the entire paternal side of my biology. This means I get no medical history, no pictures, no communication, no information on my biological father.

I was forced to live by an agreement that I had no say in. Why? Because the fertility industry is run like a business and anonymity increases the supply side of the supply/demand need for human creation. We mass produce people like a product and then deny them basic human rights and dismiss their inherent human curiosity. It is my right to know where I come from, who I am, why I am the way I am, and who my bio family and ancestors are. That info should never be systematically taken away from me.”

Read More at We Are Donor Conceived

What I Learnt Today

Ah, Sunday mornings. No church till 10.00, Yes!

I was sleeping in this morning, and sometimes when you do that your spirit is awake while you are half there. That was me four hours ago.

And I had been struggling with a constant niggling problem of mine. I’ve had it for years. Its called religious obligation. I’ve always had it in some form. I was raised in a small farming town and a traditional Methodist/Uniting church. Then I went to boarding school and forgot all about it. In Year 10 high school Jesus found me and it was personal. I was discipled in a Pentecostal church. It was the 1970’s and the height of pietism.

Back then much emphasis was placed on a “quiet time” and Bible study, which was all good, but there was little emphasis on the freedom we are supposed to have in Christ. Jesus said his truth would set us free. He said his burden was lite. But I wasn’t taught to hear his voice and walk daily with him. Then again I am a bit of an intellectual type and its very hard for us to rationalise such subjective data as a whispering into our spirit.

Today, once again, Jesus cut through my thought train and dropped into my heart a truth that instantly set me free from the curse of religious obligation. I was asking questions and sensing an obligation to jump through hoops during the day…pray in tongues, prayer walk, spend time with him. The list was piling up. Yuk. Then he cut through my mental crap and simply said:

“Its easy, not hard”


In an instant I knew exactly what the entire message was. I was released into a peace that is pure, deep and lovely.

Thinking that the Christian walk is hard and an obligation is never where God wants me or you to be. Having fun and enjoying relationship with the creator of the universe is the essence of my eternal life. Freedom and an easy yoke is the essence of our faith, otherwise its just another religion.

So now I am feeling free again and the voice of the Lord has been active in my spirit all morning. I’ve been busy copying these randoms message drops into a note book. Its been fun. I’ve been given ideas on how to diet, how to see creation and how to view people. I’ve even been given an idea to share with a mining company I am invested in!!!

I’m loving it.

As this journey unfolds I will keep you informed.


Introducing You To Randeep Matthews

Ten years ago I attended the inaugural World House Church Conference in New Delhi India. It was an amazing four days as I understood for the first time the power and sheer scale of church multiplication going on around the world, especially in India. Cleverly, those serving us during the four days were introduced at the end as leaders of mass movements numbering from 40,000 to 300,000. One of them was Randeep Matthews.

Randeep sat with us up the back for most of the main sessions and we got to know him as a really cool guy. He is the Indian head of the Christian Outreach Centre (COC), an Australian Pentecostal church. At the conference his house church movement was then numbering 80,000.

It all started when, as a dormant Christian, he was visiting his mum up in Hamichal Pradesh at the foothills of the Himalayas.Two Hindu priests were trying to cast out a demon in the market place by sacrificing chickens. Randeep noncholantly told someone that only Jesus could deliver that woman. Someone else head him and challenged him to do so. After said demon was cast out Randeep slipped through the crowd and went to see his mum.

When he told her what had happened she laughed loudly and thanked the Lord that her son was back on track. A few hours later a crowd appeared and there was a knock on the door. Randeep fearfully answered and someone promptly asked if Jesus lived there as the crowd was looking for more of what had happened at the market place. For the next three hours Randeep could do nothing but pray for the sick and destitute, with miracles and healings flowing freely.

Hetold us he never got to go home for seven whole years as he was too busy overseeing an ever-growing house church movement in his home state.

As I said, when we met him there were some 80,000 in the house church movement under his leadership. His stated goal for his movement, and one that every believer in the network understood, was that they would usher in the first truly Christian state in North India. Hamichal Pradesh is home to 6 million people, so their specific goal was 51% of the state for Jesus. Several years later we caught up with Randeep in Australia and the movement had doubled again to 160,000. He told us then that he had been witnessing to the head Imam of the Chandigah Mosque and the Imam Had just told him via text that he was ready for baptism and to renounce Islam.

Last night, while researching for my next PICTURE newsletter, I came across a 2017  article by an American who works with Randeep. The movement was at that stage up to 750,000 and growing faster than ever.

However, what is truly amazing is that Randeep is only one of dozens of Indian leaders with similar movements all growing exponentially. The Indian church has tapped into the heart of God and the keys of church multiplication. Something very special is happening there that will eclipse anything the world has ever seen in terms of church growth and will eventually spill out to all countries where Indians work.

Here is the the link to the article on Randeep so you can read it for yourself.

Kevin Davis


Check Out This Blog Site

Hi Friends,

Every now and then I come across an individual who is making a difference in peoples lives via sharing their thoughts on the internet. One such person is Matt Clark. His blog site is full of wisdom beyond his years.

It is therefore with great pleasure that I ask you to check it out for yourself. His tact is completely different from mine. He speaks to the human heart, and on issues relating to a generation younger than myself, whereas I speak more to the intellect. We need both.

So, here is the site and I trust you enjoy having a look.

Matt tells me it is read by several hundred people globally and has already saved at least one marriage.