Great news!

taking notesThe South Australian parliament has narrowly defeated a Bill aimed at legalising euthanasia.

The vote was taken at around 3 am in the morning and it came down to the casting vote of the Speaker... and he voted against it!

Now they are wanting to use Victoria to 'make a breakthrough'!

Read the ABC's article - click here.


Advocates of the continually changing morality we see all around us often claim to be 'progressive'.

Homosexual 'marriage', polyamorous relationships, sex outside of marriage, changing one's 'gender', pornography and more...

But is it really 'new'? Is it really 'progressive'?

In this insightful article, Eric Metaxas notes "Sexual progressives claim to be ushering in a “brave new world” of freedom. But their “new” morality is as old as the hills."

In fact, it is regressive rather than progressive!

Eric begins his article by writing,

"How often have you heard sexual progressives claim that those of us who hold to traditional sexual morality and marriage are “on the wrong side of history?”

But as one new book points out, it’s the proponents of the sexual revolution who are embracing a sexual morality that history left behind millennia ago—in the dusty ruins of the Roman Forum.

Yes, today Western civilization is undergoing a dramatic cultural shift. In just a few short years our society has fundamentally altered the meaning of marriage, embraced the notion that men can become women, and is now promoting the idea that grown men should be welcome to share a bathroom with women and young girls. Not unexpectedly, we’re also seeing movement toward the normalization of polygamy, pedophilia, and incest.

It’s precisely in times like this that we need some historical perspective. Which is why Lutheran pastor Matthew Rueger’s new book, “Sexual Morality in a Christless World,” is a timely godsend. In it, Rueger shows how Christian sexual morality rocked the pagan world of ancient Rome. The notions of self-giving love, sexual chastity, and marital fidelity were foreign, even shocking to the people of that time.

Citing existing scholarship, Rueger details the Roman sexual worldview that prevailed for hundreds of years. Women and children were viewed as sexual objects; slaves—male and female--could expect to be raped; there was widespread prostitution; and predatory homosexuality was common. Christian sexual morality might have been seen as repressive by the licentious, but it was a gift from God for their victims.

Rueger writes that “Claims in our day of being progressive and moving forward by accepting the ‘new prevailing views on sexuality and same-sex marriage' are horribly misinformed … Contemporary views about sexuality are simply a revival of an older and much less loving view of the world.”

Eric goes on to state,

"But they are also a revival of an older and impoverished view of human beings. Imagine the reaction of a pagan Roman slave girl who learned for the first time that she had value—not monetary value as a piece of goods to be enjoyed or discarded by her owner—but eternal value because she was made in the very image of God.

Or imagine the pang of conscience felt by an unfaithful Roman husband when he learned that God became incarnate, and took on human flesh, and that how he treated his own body and the bodies of others mattered to God. Mattered immensely.

Folks, we can’t look away and ignore this unholy revival of pagan sexuality and its cheapened view of human beings. But we also can’t wring our hands in fear or throw them up in defeat. As Rueger points out, Christ and His Church radically transformed a far more sexually cruel and chaotic world than ours...."

Read the rest of the article: click here.


How do we speak about the issues we deal with?

Often the debate is led by those pushing for change. In the development of drug policy, it's often those pushing for legalisation who set the tone and the 'narrative'. They talk of compassion and so on, but what are the real issues?

In this excellent Opinion article, Shane Varcoe of the Dalgarno Institute, argues for 'changing the narrative'.

He concludes, "Let us be very clear, we are not conducting a ‘war against drugs’. We are however fighting for the brains, potentials, and in many instances, the very future of an entire emerging generation. That for any caring civic minded human being is a fight worth having, and one worth joining!"

Read it here...

Drug Policy: Changing the Narrative

Opinion piece on current drug policy narratives and how they are used to interpret drug policy frameworks.
December 2015

Visit the Dalgarno Institute website - click here.



In recent weeks, there has been a huge focus on the Safe Schools Coalition Australia and the 'resources' they provide to schools to 'help them combat homophobia and transphobia'.

Under the guise of an 'anti-bullying program', member schools are encouraged to promote acceptance, and even endorsement, of homosexuality and gender diversity.

Started in Victoria in 2010 by the 'Rainbow Network' , an umbrella group of homosexual organisations, the program is run by homosexual activists and their supporters. The program was expanded to operate federally following an $8 funding grant just before Labor left office.

There are Resources on making your school 'safe', 'Kick starting your safe school', getting schools to run formals that include same-sex couples, a booklet 'OMG I'm Queer' and Stand Out groups for LGBTIQ youth and their 'allies' in schools. The SSCA works closely with Minus18, which is a youth support group for LGBTIQ youth - the Minus18 website has controversial material on topics such as 'chest binding' and 'penis tucking'!

Recent attention has focused on the new YEAR & curriculum called 'All Of Us'. This curriculum is NOT about bullying or even homophobia. It teaches 12 year olds about sexual and gender 'diversity' as though it is perfectly normal. Both sexual orientation and gender identity are depicted as being on a 'spectrum'. Teachers are told to recommend Minus18 as the primary resource when they talk to students - "For students, we recommend Minus18". 

The final three lessons (out of 8) focus on 'being an ally' where students are asked to sign a 'pledge' and then on being an activist to promote the acceptance of homosexuality.

Class activities include one where students are asked to imagine they are 16 with a same-sex partner and then answer questions.

Handouts provide information about sexual orientation and gender identity - including that it is fluid and changeable and that gender is "how you feel" - ideas that are really part of 'radical gender theory' that has previously only been seen in universities 'gender studies departments'!

Following concern expressed by pro-family groups, conservative MPs and some sections of the media (mostly The Australian) the PM has ordered a 'review' which will be completed by mid-March 2016.

The Family Council of Victoria believes that the program should be banned - and that genuine anti-bullying programs, which deal with bullying for ANY reason, should be implemented instead.


Several affiliates of the Family Council of Victoria have published information and are taking action regarding the Safe Schools Coalition Australia program...

Salt Shakers have published a Briefing on the SSCA and the Yr 7 curriculum, 'All Of Us' - click here.
They have additional reports on their front page blog and in their News Updates.

Australian Christians are holding a RALLY on 16 March and collecting signatures on a petition to present to James Merlino, the Victorian Education Minister - Vickie Janson also has a 12 minute video about the SSCA - click here for full details.

FamilyVoice has presented an Open Letter, with 14,000 signatures, to the Prime Minister and issued a media release expressing concern about the program and another one calling on the federal Education Minister to de-fund the program.


Marriage Statement - Family Council of Victoria

8 March 2016

At recent meetings the Family Council of Victoria has discussed the importance of marriage - and the need to commend 'marriage between a man and a woman, voluntarily entered into, for life'.

A Statement has been written and agreed to by the Family Council of Victoria:

Timeless, Compelling & Irrefutable Reasons for Protecting Marriage: Identity is Core

  1. Marriage between a man and woman is consistent with the biological reality that every life is by design the product of two significant people; a father and mother who are equally relevant to a child’s existence and their biological, ethnic and cultural identity.

    The natural environment of the child provided by biological parents, or those that represent that reality, should be protected to promote identity certainty and stability. The big questions common to all are ‘where did I come from’ and ‘who am I?’

    Whether parents are married or not, or are natural parents or adoptive parents, as men and women they represent the biological reality of how all children came into existence. If a child is deprived of a natural parent for whatever reason it is rightly considered a deprivation. While unfortunate circumstances occur, it should not be considered the right of an adult to impose this deprivation upon another. It should certainly not be the right of the state to legislate it.
  2. Ignoring biology to include any sexual orientation in the marriage mix is to ignore the special relationship that exists between a husband and wife and the children they create together. In 2013 past Prime Minister Julia Gillard in apologising for the forced adoption of babies referred to the ‘most primal and sacred bond there is: the bond between a mother and her baby’. A homosexual couple by nature cannot provide this.

    Likewise, past Prime Minster Kevin Rudd in his apology to the Stolen Generation noted these children were ‘human beings who have been damaged deeply by the decisions of parliaments and governments’. That’s a history not to be repeated. Identity is important and therefore biology is.

    President Obama has on many occasions publicly lamented the pain of not growing up with a father in his own house and pointed to the connection of fatherlessness and violent crime.
  3. The alarming research on the cost to children and society at large due to fatherlessness, children disconnected from their natural fathers for whatever reason, is requirement enough to support the current Marriage Act.

    Same-sex marriage will create by design the normalisation of fatherlessness and motherlessness. What children need is better fathers and mothers, not to have them legislated out of their life altogether.
  4. The equality and all inclusive argument is faulty. Redefining marriage to include same sex couples may be seen as exclusive rather than inclusive for the most vulnerable in families.

    Same sex marriage and parenting, which cannot be divorced from marriage, by nature excludes the right of children to the equal opportunity of a mother and father afforded to other Australians. There is no equality for the children.
  5. If legalised, same sex marriage would also legally exclude the general public from legitimately holding the view that all relationships are not equal. This goes directly to freedom of conscience, belief, speech and association; hallmarks of liberal democracy.

    While all people are and should be equal before the law, it does not follow that all relationships must be equal before the law. If based on that premise, redefining marriage to include same sex couples will reduce the legal protection to oppose every other relationship being legalised; whether polygamous, adult/child marriage or an incestuous marriage. A legal precedent of ‘all relationships are equal’ would have been set.

    Most Australians would argue that these relationships are inherently different with some being rightly judged as better for children’s identity formation and life outcomes. Redefining marriage will foster greater exclusion of those who simply believe both mums and dads are important to children.
  6. Marriage between a man and a woman offers natural diversity to children. Same-sex marriage would offer ‘two of the same’ contradicting the diversity argument. Only a woman can be a mother and only a man can be a father.
  7. The main argument proponents have for redefining marriage is freedom to marry who you love. As previously stated, this leaves the door open for any loving relationship to be included, including polygamy and incest.

    The love argument is based on a feeling of love alone while the traditional understanding of marriage is of love that makes both a commitment and a sacrifice. In the context of marriage and family, this is a personal sacrifice to potentially offer a child a mother and a father. Australian law treats all couples the same, whether married or de facto, heterosexual or homosexual. There is full relationship equality already. But marriage is a special institution for heterosexual couples that benefits children, reflecting the natural order; because all things being equal, couples naturally produce children.


People who support the current Marriage Act do so not because they are bigots or they hate others, but because the sustainable anthropological evidence that brings best outcomes for children is found in their relationship with natural parents, or those who represent father and mother. This is a unity of natural diversity that confirms ethnic, cultural and biological identity.

Many have sought to uncover their heritage for health and wholeness reasons and many have been hurt due to being deprived of the knowledge of this inheritance. Let’s not perpetuate identity confusion and add to anthropological instability.

                                                                Prepared by Vickie Janson.


“Gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose; They don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.”

Maggie Gallagher, National Organization for Marriage.


Vickie Janson is a member of the Family Council of Victoria Management Committee, and represents Australian Christians, an affiliate of the Family Council of Victoria.


Latest News

SA Euthanasia Bill DEFEATED
17 Nov 2016 SA Euthanasia Bill DEFEATED

Great news! The South Australian parliament has narrowly defeated a Bill aimed at legalising euthan [ ... ]

read more
Progressively Regressive Sexuality
10 Oct 2016

Advocates of the continually changing morality we see all around us often claim to be 'progressive'. [ ... ]

read more
Drugs - 'Changing the narrative'
28 Apr 2016

How do we speak about the issues we deal with? Often the debate is led by those pushing for change. [ ... ]

read more
Exposure of 'Safe Schools' and the Year 7 'All of Us' curriculum
08 Mar 2016

In recent weeks, there has been a huge focus on the Safe Schools Coalition Australia and the 'resour [ ... ]

read more
Marriage Statement - Family Council of Victoria
08 Mar 2016

Marriage Statement - Family Council of Victoria 8 March 2016 At recent meetings the Family Council [ ... ]

read more
Go to top