Australian Lawmaker to Introduce Bill Requiring Religious Schools to Employ Homosexual Teachers
(LifeSiteNews) — A South Australian lawmaker plans to table a new bill that would require religious schools to employ homosexual teachers.
Robert Simms, an openly homosexual member of the upper house of South Australia’s Parliament and member of the leftist Greens Party, told Australian newspaper The Advertiser that he hopes to propose the aforementioned bill in August to eradicate exemptions for religious institutions.
“It is outrageous that in 21st-century South Australia, a gay teacher working in a religious school can be in fear of losing their job simply because of their sexuality … Surely all South Australians deserve equal protection before the law?” Simms said in comments cited by Russia Today.
Simms also told The Advertiser that it was “disappointing to see the Federal Government dragging their heels” on the issue, urging the South Australian government to “step up” and introduce the amendments, Russia Today added.
In statements to LifeSiteNews, Warwick D’Silva, national president of the Australian Family Association (AFA), criticized Simms’ proposal, declaring:
Robert Simms’s plan to remove current exemptions for faith-based schools from South Australia’s anti-discrimination law smacks of hypocrisy. Would Simms support legalization taking away the freedom of his Greens Party to employ only those who support Greens’ policy? Would the Greens support legislation that denied them the freedom to refuse employment to a member of the Liberal Party who was also a strong opponent of the Greens?
D’Silva added:
Simms says that these exemptions ‘allow discrimination’ against people on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity. They don’t allow discrimination, they allow religious schools the freedom, the liberty, to employ teachers and staff in accordance with the deeply held beliefs on matters of sex, natural marriage and family. The current exemptions for faith-based schools in the South Australian Equal Opportunity Act protect the inherent right of parents to have their children raised and educated in accordance with their beliefs, as recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 18(4) calls on governments to have ‘respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.’ Mr Simms’s proposals would violate this fundamental human right of parents, just as taking away the rights of political parties to employ only those who respected the principles and policies of their party would violate the civil and political rights of all political parties.
Meanwhile, removing faith school exemptions at the state level would not dispense with federal protections.
“Should Simms succeed in removing the exemptions for faith-based schools in South Australian law, current federal exemptions for religious schools would take precedence,” D’Silva told LifeSiteNews. “This means that the freedom of SA religious schools to choose who they wish to employ would be preserved under the Federal Sex Discrimination Act.”
Simms’ suggestion comes in wake of a heated debate over the employment of LGBT staff in faith-based organizations, such as religious schools, in Australia.
In May, non-profit LGBT organization Equality Australia urged the Australian federal government to “protect” LGBT staff and students in religious schools.
“Every day the government delays is another day more harm is being done because religious schools are allowed to discriminate against staff and students who are gay, trans, pregnant, divorced, or unmarried,” CEO Anna Brown claimed in remarks citedby Cityhub.
Also, in March, the Australian federal government published a report finalized by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) in late 2023. Notably, the ALRC suggested removing the exemption in Section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act that permits religious schools to hire staff in accordance with their beliefs.
An excerpt of the ALRC report reads:
… the Australian Government’s commitment is that an educational institution conducted in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed: must not discriminate against a student on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy; must not discriminate against a member of staff on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy.
Furthermore, the ALRC suggested that religious institutions be permitted to choose like-minded staff as per their religious beliefs if it is “reasonably necessary” and “proportionate” to ensuring a community of faith without violating sex discrimination laws, as per a March report by Crux.
In response to the ALRC’s suggestions, Crux reported that Australian churches submitted a letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese objecting to any efforts to remove legal exemptions for faith-based schools.
Australian National Catholic Education Commission executive director Jacinta Collins, Melbourne Archbishop Peter A. Comensoli, Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher, Melkite Bishop Robert Rabbat, Maronite Bishop Antoine-Charbel Tarabay, Chaldean Bishop Amel Nona and Catholic Schools NSW chief executive Dallas McInerney were some of the Catholic signatories of the letter.
Jacinta Collins underscored that current Australian law enables Catholic and other faith-based schools to employ and enroll staff and students based on their faith.
“The recommendations would severely limit the ability of our schools to operate and teach according to our ethos and are at odds with the Inquiry’s terms of reference, and the desire of families to choose a faith-based school for their children,” she said in comments cited by Crux in March.
“The ALRC has critically neglected the Attorney General’s third term of reference to ensure that religious schools can ‘continue to build a community of faith by giving preference, in good faith, to persons of the same religion as the educational institution in the selection of staff.’”
EXCLUSIVE: Economist Reveals How Gold, Silver, And The US Dollar Went Up After Assassination Attempt
World’s Top Vaccinologist Comes Clean: “We Lied About Vaccines Being Safe”
One of the world’s top vaccinologist’s has come clean and admitted that mRNA jabs are not safe for public consumption. After decades of aggressively promoting the experimental jabs, Dr. Stanley Plotkin is finally admitting that vaccine safety […]
The post World’s Top Vaccinologist Comes Clean: “We Lied About Vaccines Being Safe” appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Failed GREEN Deal? Biden Awards Nearly $2B to Carmakers to Boost EV Sales Because Almost Nobody Wants to Buy Them at Fair Market Prices
President Joe Biden’s drive to force people to totally ditch fossil fuel-engine cars and switch to electric vehicles (EVs) for zero-emission is not going according to plan as demand for EVs continues to plummet. To salvage his failing green deal with the globalists, he is spending $1.7 billion in taxpayers’ money to modernize automobile manufacturing facilities in eight states.
Claiming to help the EV industry compete with foreign subsidies, save 15,000 jobs and create nearly 3,000 new positions, the current administration will extend grants to 11 selected manufacturing plants in eight states, including in Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania, that have temporarily closed or were at risk of closing. The money will be dedicated to retrofitting factories, installing equipment and bolstering annual production.
This will also allow at-risk facilities to convert to manufacturing electric vehicles, related components and a broad range of new-generation cars, such as fuel cell vehicles, hybrid cars and high-growth vehicle drive trains.
The federal funding for the move, which is a part of the Automotive Community Benefits Plan, will come from the Inflation Reduction Act, according to reports. Among those who will receive the grants are auto manufacturing giants including Fiat-Chrysler, which will be given $584 million; General Motors, $500 million; Harley Davidson, $89 million; and Volvo, $208.2 million.
“Building a clean energy economy can and should be a win-win for union autoworkers and automakers,” Biden said in a statement. “This investment will create thousands of good-paying, union manufacturing jobs and retain even more – from Lansing, Michigan to Fort Valley, Georgia – by helping auto companies retool, reboot and rehire in the same factories and communities.”
The funding will complement the White House’s $177 billion investment in EV and battery manufacturing, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said.
Moreover, top White House economist Lael Brainard explained that the investment is projected to generate $3.9 billion in total economic value and ensure that the United States keeps its climate goals intact. “We will not let our transition to clean energy be a zero-sum game where workers get left behind and where local plants close and move overseas,” Brainard said. “The president will not take his foot off the pedal when it comes to supporting the U.S. auto industry.”
(Related: Op-ed: Biden administration’s “green energy” schemes AREN’T AS GREEN as they seem.)
Meanwhile, reports indicate that Biden has been courting auto workers since the weeks-long standoff between the United Auto Workers (UAW) union and the Big Three automakers – Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Stellantis – in September 2023. “He heard the call and stood up and showed up,” UAW President Shawn Fain lauded Biden as he spoke at a picket line in Michigan. “This November, we can stand up and elect someone who stands with us and supports our cause, or we can elect someone who will divide us and fight us every step of the way. That’s what this choice is about.”
Survey: Owners of EVs report 266 problems per 100 vehicles
A unique selling point for selling electric cars is that they would “save the planet from greenhouse gasses.” However, the most attractive value proposition is that they are convenient – they require less maintenance than traditional gas-powered vehicles, no oil changes, less gunk and fewer moving parts. But a recent poll revealed problems that overshadow these said benefits.
Data analytics and consumer intelligence company JD Power recently conducted a survey and found that people who own internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles reported having 180 problems per 100 vehicles (PP100), while EV buyers have 266 PP100. According to the poll, the problems had little to do with the mechanics of EVs and almost entirely to do with the tech as they are essentially “giant computers on wheels.”
“Owners of cutting edge, tech-filled BEVs and PHEVs are experiencing problems that are of a severity level high enough for them to take their new vehicle into the dealership at a rate three times higher than that of gas-powered vehicle owners,” Frank Hanley, JD Power’s senior director of auto benchmarking, said in a statement.
Even Big Tech mogul Elon Musk’s Tesla, which typically performed better than legacy automaker’s EVs in past surveys, rated as poorly as the rest. JD Power attributes this to major design changes in Teslas, such as the removal of traditional feature controls like turn signal and wiper stalks.
The analytics firm also indicated that the major concern that came out of the study is that the auto industry is haphazardly racing to cram as much software into their models as possible. According to the report, customers get irritated about false rear-seat warnings and inaccurate and annoying alerts from advanced driver-assist systems, especially around new features like rear cross-traffic warnings and reverse automatic emergency braking. It has also listed that EVs had 30 percent more problems with “Features, Controls and Displays” than ICE vehicles.
“Customers most frequently experience difficulties connecting their phones to their vehicle or losing connection,” the findings further included. “More than 50 percent of Apple users and 42 percent of Samsung users access their respective feature every time they drive, illustrating that customers want their smartphone experience brought into the vehicle and also desire the feature to be integrated wirelessly.”
Head over to RoboCars.news to read stories related to electric vehicles’ disadvantages.
EXCLUSIVE: Economist Reveals How Gold, Silver, And The US Dollar Went Up After Assassination Attempt
UN Estimates it will Take at Least 15 Years to Clear Gaza of Bombing Debris
Clearing the rubble left from Israel’s sweeping bombardment of the Gaza Strip is expected to take 15 years and cost between $500m and $600m, the UN said on Monday.
The UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees (Unrwa) posted on X about the staggering cost and years needed for reconstruction, saying the debris are a potential threat and “harmful”.
“Debris poses a deadly threat for people in the Gaza Strip as it can contain unexploded ordnance and harmful substances,” Unrwa said, adding that it would take more than 100 trucks to clear rubble.
The values show how difficult it will be to rebuild Gaza, even as Israel continues to pummel the enclave.
Israel dropped at least 70,000 tonnes of bombs on Gaza between 7 October and 4 May, surpassing the World War II bombings in Dresden, Hamburg, and London combined, according to the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.
Unrwa cited a report from the UN environment programme released in June which said that 137,297 buildings had been damaged in Gaza, more than half the enclave’s total. It would take sprawling landfill sites occupying between 250 and 500 hectares to dump the rubble, the report said.
The report also said that Israel’s offensive likely set the Gaza Strip back 44 years in terms of the development of healthcare, education and wealth.
The report found that explosive weapons used in the war have generated around 39 million tonnes of debris, with every square metre of Gaza littered with more than 107kg of debris on average.
It also found that water, sanitation and hygiene systems in Gaza are almost entirely defunct, with the Strip’s five wastewater treatment plants shut down.US post-war Gaza plans collide with President Biden’s faltering campaignRead More »
“All of this is deeply harming people’s health, food security and Gaza’s resilience,” said UN environmental programme (Unep) executive director, Inger Andersen.
Israel’s war is exacerbating an already deteriorating environment in Gaza, where over 92 percent of water was deemed unfit for human consumption in 2020.
The UN report came as a result of a request from the Palestinian Environment Quality Authority in December, in which it called on Unep to look into environmental damages in Gaza.
Climate change and Israel’s attacks on environmental infrastructure have long plagued Gaza and other parts of occupied Palestine.
After the Nakba, which refers to the ethnic cleansing and destruction of Palestinian communities in 1948 by Zionist forces, the Jewish National Fund planted monoculture forests of pine trees, which destroy bio-diversity and indigenous lands, often on the ruins of Palestinian villages.
At least 38,664 Palestinians have been killed and 89,097 wounded by Israel’s war on Gaza since 7 October, the Palestinian health ministry said on Monday.
At least 80 Palestinians were killed and 216 wounded by Israeli forces in the past 24 hours, the ministry added.
EXCLUSIVE: Economist Reveals How Gold, Silver, And The US Dollar Went Up After Assassination Attempt
Zelensky: Russia Should Attend the Next Ukraine Peace Summit
In a notable shift, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has acknowledged the need for Russian representatives to attend the next international summit on the ongoing conflict.
He issued this call on July 15, telling reporters that he is in the process of organizing the next summit. Zelensky had previously refused to invite Russia to attend international summits where he was pushing his 10-point “peace formula.” One such summit held in Switzerland last month included representatives from 92 countries – but without Moscow.
“I set a goal that in November, we would have a fully ready plan,” the Ukrainian leader said. “I think that representatives of Russia should be at the second summit.”
Zelensky’s 10-point “peace formula” calls for a complete Russian withdrawal from Ukrainian territory before peace talks could ever happen, which is a non-starter for negotiations with Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin meanwhile stressed his terms before talks could begin: Kyiv must pull out all its troops from territory annexed by Russia, and must abandon its intention of joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Throughout the war, the only time a real peace deal was on the table was back in March and April of 2022. Talks were held in the Turkish city of Ankara to iron out a peace deal between the warring parties.
However, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson meddled in the peace deal. Consequently, the U.S.-led NATO bloc discouraged Ukraine from signing an agreement and promised to support its fight against Russia.
Zelensky’s July 15 comments came as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been pushing for a peace deal between Moscow and Kyiv. The Hungarian leader discussed his ideas in recent visits to Kyiv, Moscow and Beijing.
During his visit to the Ukrainian capital, Orban suggested Zelensky consider a ceasefire with Russia as a first step toward a peace deal. The Ukrainian president rejected the idea, but Zelensky’s recent comments about the possibility of Russia attending the next summit could signal a softening stance.
Zelensky’s foreign minister earlier stressed the need for Russia’s inclusion
The president’s comments appeared to echo that of Ukrainian Prime Minister Dmytro Kuleba, who stressed the need for Russia to be included in peace talks. He made this admission during the last day of the two-day Ukraine peace summit last month in Switzerland.
“The idea is that the next summit should be the end of the war. And of course, we need the other side at the negotiating table as well,” Kuleba said. “It is obvious that both sides are needed to end the war.”
(Related: Kuleba: Russia will eventually have to be involved in peace talks with Ukraine.)
According to the foreign minister, both belligerents in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war will have to sit down and negotiate at some point to reach a definitive peace. He added that Kyiv understands “perfectly well that the moment will come when it will be necessary to talk to Russia.” Until then, he reiterated that everyone backing Kyiv must “ensure that Ukraine is in the strongest position at that time.”
Russia Today (RT) meanwhile reported of the 92 countries who attended the peace summit, 78 left their signatures on the final communique. Fourteen other nations including Saudi Arabia did not sign the document.
Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud remarked that any meaningful progress toward peace will require “Russia’s participation,” as well as a “difficult compromise” between the parties. Riyadh did not sign the final communique, according to RT.
Head over to WWIII.news for more stories about the Russia-Ukraine war and efforts to end it.
Watch this interview from September last year where Volodymyr Zelensky is encouraging Donald Trump to share his peace plan.
EXCLUSIVE: Economist Reveals How Gold, Silver, And The US Dollar Went Up After Assassination Attempt
UN says Reduced Population Peak is a ‘Hopeful Sign’ Despite Looming Collapse
(LifeSiteNews) — The United Nations has claimed that predictions of population reduction offer a “hopeful sign” for the planet, without addressing the expected full-blown population collapse from which some demographers say the world will not recover.
According to The Guardian, new U.N. projections estimate that the world’s population will peak earlier and at a lower number than expected — 10.2 billion, which is 6 percent less than that expected a decade ago — giving U.N. officials “hope of reduced pressure on the environment.”
More than half of the world’s countries now have fertility rates at below replacement level, including the U.S., the U.K., and Australia, with “nearly a fifth” of countries at an “ultra-low” fertility rate of under 1.4 births a woman, according to the U.N. The current world fertility rate is 2.27 births per woman, fast approaching below-replacement fertility .
Li Junhua, the U.N. undersecretary general for economic and social affairs, said that the lower, earlier population speak “could mean reduced environmental pressures from human impacts due to lower aggregate consumption,” and yet still called for a reduced environmental impact of the “activities of each individual person.”
The idea that the world’s population must be restrained in order to sustain its existing people is hotly contested, and studies on the earth’s carrying capacity vary widely in their estimates. While 20 studies say it is 8 billion people or less (the current world population is about 8 billion), 14 studies peg the world’s carrying capacity at twice that amount, 16 billion, and 18 other studies notch that number way up, with seven studies estimating the earth can sustain as many as 64 billion people, and one study estimating it at 1,024 billion people.
Moreover, the recent UN report entirely fails to address the coming population collapse that demographers anticipate after 2100, which will have a devastating effect on economies and likely on quality of life. It also fails to address the morality of desiring a world with less people.
Dean Spears, an economist at the Population Research Center of the University of Texas, has noted that “if the world’s fertility rate were the same as in the United States today,” which is about 1.66 births per woman, “then the global population would fall from a peak of around 10 billion to less than two billion about 300 years later, over perhaps 10 generations. And if family sizes remained small, we would continue declining.”
Spears co-authored a paper rare for its estimation of world population projections beyond 2100, showing that in any of 3 scenarios in which the world population remains below replacement rate, the number of the world’s inhabitants would rapidly plummet to a “very small” number. Darrel Bricker and John Ibbitson, authors of the book Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline, have asserted that once global population decline begins, which they say will occur in three decades, “it will never end.”
“Even if below-replacement fertility is sustained only for a few centuries, the size of the global population could become very small,” Spears and his fellow authors maintain. This means that a whole slew of harmful effects to society will follow population decline, likely including a decline in basic services and infrastructure; unemployment; a decline in innovation; insufficient end-of-life care for the elderly; and a decline in mental health.
Even the World Economic Forum (WEF) has admitted that the effects of population collapse will be “severe.”
Jordan Peterson has noted in an interview with podcaster Chris Williamson that “dire predictions” about the state of the world by the year 2000 made by the globalist Club of Rome based on ideas of overpopulation have not only been way off the mark, but are the inverse of what actually happened. Peterson explained that the Club of Rome predicted “riots and mass starvation… and all the things you hear about climate change, because there’s too many people on the planet.”
Peterson continued, “That just didn’t happen at all… it wasn’t just wrong, it was anti-true. It was absolutely wrong. What happened instead was that everyone got way richer and the [poorest] section of the population… got lifted out of poverty.”
Eric Metaxas has noted that such false predictions were built on Thomas Malthus’s “iron law of population,” an idea cited by Charles Darwin, which states that population increases must of necessity outstrip food production.
According to environmental scientist Erle C. Ellis, history shows that populations have always been sustained that were “well in excess of what a strictly Malthusian calculation would have predicted,” due to technology. Ellis maintains that “there is no need to use any more land to sustain humanity” due to existing technologies, and that there “really is no such thing as a human carrying capacity.”
EXCLUSIVE: Economist Reveals How Gold, Silver, And The US Dollar Went Up After Assassination Attempt