Victoria, Australia, makes it illegal to not

[aztek]

 

Quote

 

Once signed by the Victoria governor-general for royal assent, new legislation passed by the Victorian parliament in Australia will prohibit anything other than full affirmation for child transgenderism.

 

Violators of the law, which will take 12 months to come into effect, could face penalties that include fines of up to $200,000 and up to 10 years in prison.

Even a priest merely praying for his parishioner might be deemed as an offender, which is what prompted Monica Doumit, the Director of Public Affairs for the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney, to write a column for The Catholic Weekly about how the new law will impact people of faith.

“A parent whose five year old son was insisting that he was a girl would be prevented from seeking any help – medical, psychological, behavioural, spiritual, social or otherwise – to assist their son in understanding and accepting that he was a boy,” she writes.

“Anything less than affirmation of him as a girl would be prohibited.”

 

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-10-victoria-australia-illegal-not-affirm-gender-dysphoria.html?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com

[+OverSword]

@Helen of Annoy More cancel culture affirmed into law, similar legislation already in Canada.  Soon coming to the EU, I almost guarantee it.

[Helen of Annoy]

21 minutes ago, OverSword said:

@Helen of Annoy More cancel culture affirmed into law, similar legislation already in Canada.  Soon coming to the EU, I almost guarantee it.

If it wasn't misinterpreted and grossly exaggerated, then someone lost their minds there. 

And I guarantee you such bizarre, irrational, childish perception can't be pushed on people in my part of the world. I'm actually certain that the theory of gender being something freely chosen and not depending on person's physical gender won't be accepted by medical community in Europe. 

If a person wants to play the role of the opposite gender, fine, let them, they've got rights, but their rights can't override everyone else's rights. In other words, prescribing the upbringing is bizarre already, but to prescribe it so it favours and thus promotes a very rare disorder... that's... I'm not speechless, I just don't want to be rude. 

Kids should play and imagine a lot. But the parents are there to guide them towards rational thinking, not to cement their childish imagination as something that can override reality.   

[+OverSword]

5 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

And I guarantee you such bizarre, irrational, childish perception can't be pushed on people in my part of the world. I'm actually certain that the theory of gender being something freely chosen and not depending on person's physical gender won't be accepted by medical community in Europe. 

Bet you a dollar......  And this is how it will be forced on you, Croatians (and people from every other country) may for the most part not agree with it but enforcing will be mandatory to maintain membership in the EU. 

[Helen of Annoy]

24 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Bet you a dollar......  And this is how it will be forced on you, Croatians (and people from every other country) may for the most part not agree with it but enforcing will be mandatory to maintain membership in the EU. 

I bet you the head of the imbecile who comes up with this propaganda that the EU won't make it mandatory for parents to raise children oblivious of their gender.

It reminds me of relatively recent hysteria where Istanbul convention, totally harmless and mostly just ritual agreement on protection of women's rights, was painted as some sort of satanic attack on family by the people who hope for crumbs off the Putin's table, may a whole ****ing table collapses on their greedy paws.  

 

[+OverSword]

Just now, Helen of Annoy said:

I bet you the head of the imbecile who comes up with this propaganda that the EU won't make it mandatory for parents to raise children oblivious of their gender.

It reminds me of relatively recent hysteria where Istanbul convention, totally harmless and mostly just ritual agreement on protection of women's rights, was painted as some sort of satanic attack on family by the people who hope for crumbs off the Putin's table, may a whole ****ing table collapses on their greedy paws.  

 

Then in ten years I'll owe you a dollar 

[spartan max2]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

“A parent whose five year old son was insisting that he was a girl would be prevented from seeking any help – medical, psychological, behavioural, spiritual, social or otherwise – to assist their son in understanding and accepting that he was a boy,” she writes.

I mean, why should a five year old have to go to therapy for this?

[Helen of Annoy]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

Then in ten years I'll owe you a dollar 

You don't have to pay it to me. Put it under the serpent tongue of the said head, so it can pay its fare to hell. 

All right, it's not that extreme, it was just one lovely retort I didn't want to waste.  

[Buzz_Light_Year]

38 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Bet you a dollar......  And this is how it will be forced on you, Croatians (and people from every other country) may for the most part not agree with it but enforcing will be mandatory to maintain membership in the EU. 

[Helen of Annoy]

3 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

 

No offense, but if you say so, then the reality is very certain to be the opposite.  

 

[+OverSword]

7 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

No offense, but if you say so, then the reality is very certain to be the opposite.  

 

Oh, who could be offended by that? 

[Buzz_Light_Year]

15 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

No offense, but if you say so, then the reality is very certain to be the opposite.  

 

Well I for one would definitely be terrified if I had to exist in your reality. Rod Serling had a series that explored that reality.

[Helen of Annoy]

14 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Oh, who could be offended by that? 

On a second thought, I'll PM you something. 

 

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by Helen of Annoy
not a severed head!

[ChrLzs]

As a person born in Victoria, I would simply offer the following, as I don't have time to research this in depth (I'll be back to defend my home state if necessary!..)

Did anyone stop to think why it might be that the original ad&popup-ridden link to this is NOT a mainstream media outlet, AND that it doesn't cite or quote the actual legislation and is instead peppered with people's opinions and scare-mongering....? 

Why didn't they link back to the legislation, so readers could look at it?  Here's my guess - the bill has been misrepresented.

Just briefly, here's a quick summary of what the legislation says in the opening sections:

Quote

 

The main purposes of this Act are:

• to denounce and prohibit change or suppression practices
• to establish a civil response scheme within the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission that will
  * promote understanding of the prohibition on change or suppression practices under this Act and matters relating generally to change or suppression practices
  * consider and resolve reports of change or suppression practices
  * investigate serious or systemic change or suppression practices
• to prohibit engaging in change or suppression practices, including through creating offences in relation to engaging in change or suppression practices and certain related activities
• to amend the definitions of sexual orientation and gender identity in the Equal Opportunity Act 2010
• to include sex characteristics as a protected attribute under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010
• to make consequential amendments to certain Acts.

 

Essentially, the proposed bill "makes it illegal to try to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity".  There are some sections in there that are a bit controversial, eg it will prohibit "carrying out a religious practice, including but not limited to, a prayer-based practice, a deliverance practice or an exorcism.”.

I see some are saying that it is anti-religion or anti-prayer, but frankly, I can't see how even a "prayer based practice" intended to change a person's gender issues, could do anything much but harm. 

 

Anyway, whatever your bent, maybe read the legislation and address what it actually says...  Here it is, in PDF form:

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/591143bab1.pdf

 

[+OverSword]

25 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Anyway, whatever your bent, maybe read the legislation and address what it actually says...  Here it is, in PDF form:

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/591143bab1.pdf

BORING.  You ruined a perfectly good time 

Actually it won't open for me I think my firewall doesn't like your government.

[Tatetopa]

Are you familiar with the American religious communal group the Shakers?  You might know them for their simple and sturdy furniture style.  They lived in communities and also believed in abstaining from sex. Older members died off and few joined to replace them.  Maybe sex attracts more people than even the finest furniture.

The lesson there is that beliefs that are too extreme or self-limiting or based on illogical concepts fade away. Not much consolation in the short term, and  difficult if that group controls society for any length of time.

@ChrLzs may have the right of it though, the  law might have been misreported to anger certain groups and make it even more out to be more heavy handed than it started out.  I guess we can find out.

 

[rashore]

47 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Anyway, whatever your bent, maybe read the legislation and address what it actually says...  Here it is, in PDF form:

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/591143bab1.pdf

 

Sorry to snip the rest out... but thanks for sharing the legislation language about this. It is showing up for me. I know nada that part of the worlds legal system, and more info is always good. 

[+OverSword]

So what does it say?  Is the article not true?

[Golden Duck]

19 minutes ago, OverSword said:

So what does it say?  Is the article not true?

From the Premier

Quote

The Bill denounces such practices as deceptive and harmful, reinforces that the ideology behind these practices is flawed and wrong.

...

The Bill also puts in place strong criminal sanctions for people who subject others to change or suppression practices that cause injury or serious injury – with up to ten years’ jail for the latter.

...

The Government pledged to make these landmark reforms to put an end to change or suppression practices in response to a report from the Health Complaints Commissioner. 

https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/banning-cruel-conversion-practices-good

The phrase "that cause injury or serious injury" raises a question of how that is determined.  It might be worth searching for this report from the Health Complaints Commissioner.

You'd hope the report was better than their case against Cardinal Pell.

[ChrLzs]

Still a bit time challenged, but here's another excerpt from the document itself...

Quote

Objects of this Act
(1) The objects of this Act are—
(a) to eliminate so far as possible the occurrence
of change or suppression practices in Victoria; and
(b) to further promote and protect the rights set
out in the Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities; and
(c) to ensure that all people, regardless of sexual
orientation or gender identity, feel welcome
and valued in Victoria and are able to live
authentically and with pride.
(2) In enacting this Act, it is the intention of the
Parliament—
(a) to denounce and give statutory recognition to
the serious harm caused by change or
suppression practices; and
(b) to affirm that a person's sexual orientation or
gender identity is not broken and in need of
fixing; and
(c) to affirm that no sexual orientation or gender
identity constitutes a disorder, disease,
illness, deficiency or shortcoming; and
(d) to affirm that change or suppression
practices are deceptive and harmful both to
the person subject to the change or
suppression practices and to the community
as a whole.

To me it seems that those intentions are correct and admirable.  I haven't looked at the nuts and bolts though..

[Knob Oddy]

Isn't it weird that the world has gone from classifying Gender Identity Disorder (GID) as a mental illness to now saying it's a crime to call the disorder a disorder.

5 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

(c) to affirm that no sexual orientation or gender
identity constitutes a disorder, disease,
illness, deficiency or shortcoming; and

And considering that suicide rates do not decrease after surgeries for people suffering GID, it seems like reaffirming someone's believes on this topic could be damaging. To put it in perspective, there are higher suicide rates of people with GID then there was among Jews in concentration camps in WW2 or even slaves in America pre emancipation. It seems life is torture to these people (one of my siblings has GID and has attempted suicide) and perhaps admitting that there is mental illness in their community might be a fitting starting point.

[aztek]

maybe thinking you are a boy while you are biological girl, IS a disorder, and suicides are the symptom of that disorder, not of a social acceptance or lack thereof

[ChrLzs]

1 minute ago, Hugh Mungus said:

Isn't it weird that the world has gone from classifying Gender Identity Disorder (GID) as a mental illness to now saying it's a crime to call the disorder a disorder.

Why is it weird?  We used to think lightning was the voice of vengeful Gods, until it got embarrassing that Churches were most often hit...  We grew up, got smarter.

1 minute ago, Hugh Mungus said:

And considering that suicide rates do not decrease after surgeries for people suffering GID...{snip}

Whoa...  That is an incredibly complex area and a few lines of opinion, with not a single cite or full consideration of all aspects, is exactly how these things get blown out of proportion.

[openozy]

I feel like a women sometimes, mainly on dark and lonely nights.

[Saru]

Thread closed for moderator review.