November 4th 2017

  Buy Issue 3008

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY National Energy Guarantee: lots of smoke, but no coal-fired power

EDITORIAL Popular revolt against the ideology of globalism

CANBERRA OBSERVED Paris still rules in the party room

ENERGY Renewables and gas conspire to push up prices

ENVIRONMENT Climate change did not cause California fires

ELECTRICITY Consumers will wake up only when there are blackouts: economists

ECONOMICS Something new under the sun from China

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Abbott gets brickbats for exposing house of straw

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Australia is far from fulfilling its potential

TECHNOLOGY Aussie scientists 'write' with adult stem cells

75TH ANNIVERSARY NCC: new challenges, kind of new adversaries

MUSIC All around the beat: the essential drummer

CINEMA Happy Death Day: Deja vu with a sharp edge

BOOK REVIEW Traditions under threat fight back

BOOK REVIEW Journey to freedom


ENERGY Coal-fired power needed to restore economic growth

Books promotion page


News Weekly, November 4, 2017

Future apologies

I read with interest Kevin Reed’s piece in the October 7 issue of News Weekly. I paused almost with mirth at the remarks of former ALP prime ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard regarding “stolen generations” and the ALP’s attempt at redress for these unjust past acts.

I use the word “mirth” not because the hurts that happened were funny but because of the false compassion of these two individuals. Their party’s views on social matters leave much to be desired.

The Labor Party, the party of these two “eminent” Australians, is the party that is pro-abortion, pro-same-sex marriage, pro-euthanasia. You name it, it is the death-facilitating party.

I particularly “loved” the words of Ms Gillard: “This story had its beginnings in a wrongful belief that women could be separated from their babies and it would all be for the best. Instead, these churches and charities, families, medical staff and bureaucrats struck at the most primal and sacred bond there is: the bond between a mother and her baby. To each of you who were adopted or removed, we say sorry.”

I wonder if Ms Gillard, Mr Rudd, and now Mr Shorten ever think that the same bond applies to mothers and their aborted babies? I wonder if ever in the silence of the night they might wonder what the severing of that bond by legally facilitating the intentional killing of her baby might do to the mother as life progresses, and I wonder if any leader of the Labor Party ever thinks that its policies on life matters have led to the rampant death culture we see today.

I also wonder if the ALP, with its same-sex marriage policy, will remember that for a same-sex male couple to have their own child, the body of a woman must be used to gestate the child and carry it to birth and when born the child removed from her? Just like the stolen generation whose primal bond was ruptured.

Or is this future stolen generation different because this stolen generation doesn’t involve the Church, charities, families, etc? This stolen generation is facilitated by the ALP’s own policies and with the approbation of its members.

The child conceived for the purpose of two male “parents” still has to be carried in utero, fed, nursed, protected and dialogued with by the child’s mother. Bonding will always occur because it is how nature has designed this relationship. Her cells and child’s cells will always be intermingled and united. The child will always have a memory of its mother’s heartbeat. A haunting echo of something remembered.

Anne Lastman,
Vermont South, Vic.


A child’s true needs

If the Labor Party and the Greens had allowed the original mandated compulsory plebiscite to proceed, the issue of same-sex marriage would have been settled by now.

Whether that plebiscite had been decided in the affirmative or the negative, the electorate, the people, would have accepted the umpire’s decision, and everyone could have got on with tackling the important issues of national debt and the energy crisis.

Those proponents of redefining marriage who wanted Parliament to decide the issue, fail to acknowledge one fact: that a major part of the electorate no longer trusts politicians. Thus we have seen the rise of minor parties and independents.

Every child has a basic right to both a mother and a father. My father died when I was very young and as I grew through my teen years, I was subject to discrimination and assaults, both verbal and physical, by teachers. I had a beautiful, caring mother, but as a boy I alone knew that that was when I needed the guidance and support of my father.

I eventually suffered a major depression, which an excellent professional psychologist traced back to the loss of my father in childhood, and matters that were relevant to those tender years. I would not wish any child, boy or girl, reared by same-sex couples or not, to suffer the deep, dark abyss of depression. Unfortunately, for some the ultimate result of this terrible affliction is just too tragic and painful to bear.

There has been one big casualty in this debate, and that is truth.

Kevin Forrest,
Gladstone Park, Vic.


Dairy against the wall

In the second week of September, two more dairy operators in the Beaudesert region ceased operations. They cannot compete with the pressures applied by the major retailers and the complacent uninformed public.

With the exception of advocates such as Barnaby Joyce and Bob Katter in his 2014 Levies Amendment (Dairy Produce) Bill of February 2014, only Peter Westmore, in his dairy industry crisis article in the June 18, 2016, edition of News Weekly, has attempted to address the causes that will see this essential agricultural enterprise consigned to the scrap heap of history.

Wake up, Australia, and put this life-promoting industry at the centre of the pending state and federal election campaigns.

Tom King,
Mansfield, Qld.


Vote in the dark

The question of the same-sex marriage survey is “should the law be changed” to “allow same-sex couples to marry?”

No law is needed to “allow” it, as same-sex couples are free to come together as long as they wish and I am sure the Government would arrange a certificate to that effect.

The Government will not say which law it will change, it won’t tell how, and we cannot see the legislation. It says that safeguards for religion will be placed in it, but will not say what they are.

It is obvious to me that the Government is saying, “Give us permission to legislate, then we will word it as we wish, you get no say”. It is a con. However, the Commonwealth cannot legislate in respect of religion under our constitution.

D. Egan,
Dubbo, NSW

Listen to
News Weekly Podcasts

All you need to know about
the wider impact of transgenderism on society.
TRANSGENDER: one shade of grey, 353pp, $39.99

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

ROYAL COMMISSION Hatchet job on Cardinal Pell breached basic principle of fairness

COVER STORY Gearing up to ditch free-trade policy

CANBERRA OBSERVED Regret over our rushed marriage to China

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Crucial to get Virgin Australia flying again

CANBERRA OBSERVED What's China's beef with our barley?

EDITORIAL Rebuilding industry won't just happen: here's what's needed

EDITORIAL Post-covid19, create a national development bank

© Copyright 2017
Last Modified:
April 4, 2018, 6:45 pm