A TRANSGENDER ‘woman’ has been crowned ‘Miss’ New Zealand. But it’s 2020, so you just know there will be a twist to this story.
And, of course, there is. The beauty pageant winner is Filipino.
All of which means that this year’s ‘Miss’ New Zealand is a foreign-born, biological male.
Could there be a more fitting result in a post-Truth world where nothing is ever as it seems?
The mandated response, as we all know, is to applaud and to tell each other how lucky we are to live in a world where people are so open-minded and accepting that literally anyone can be the most beautiful woman in the room — even a man.
But how are we to live with such absurdity?
We have resolved the contradiction by agreeing that if we all say in unison that a biological man who believes himself to be a woman is in fact a woman, then he is. Or rather: ‘she’ is.
As you can see, it takes practice. But with the help of woke media and LGBTIQAX+ activists who threaten to punish those who stray from the narrative, you can get the hang of it quickly enough.
And hey presto! Faster than a beauty queen can say “world peace”, the contradictions dissolve.
‘Women’ can have a penis. ‘Men’ can be pregnant. And 26-year-old transgendered ‘woman’ going by Arielle Keil can be named ‘Miss’ New Zealand, less than 12 months after reportedly paying surgeons $15,000 to create his breasts and vagina.
The choice is always between the real King and false kings:
The reasons why people hate Christ, Christians and Christianity are many, but a major factor in this hatred is the fact that Christ sets himself up as a king – the one and only real king – and challenges all other false claimants to the throne.
The chief challenger is of course self: the Christophobe hates the claims of Christ because it means they have to surrender their false pretences of being the centre of the universe, of being god. Human pride – and delusion – makes us think we are all there is, and we can call the shots.
But the all-powerful state – and those slavishly devoted to it – is another and related false kingdom that far too many worship. And the easiest way to pinpoint one very contemporary illustration of this is simply to look at how the state has treated Christianity during the COVID crisis.
In many places churches are STILL closed down, including here in Victoria. Yes, a handful of folks can gather inside, and a few more outside. But overwhelmingly it seems most folks – and incredibly, most Christians – have no problem with this at all! There is complete silence.
Never mind that plenty of church structures are built to hold hundreds, if not thousands of worshippers. But we are allowed only 10 inside. Really? Yet the shops are packed with shoppers, and so on. In Brisbane the other day 30,000 screaming fans could cram into a sporting arena to watch a football game, yet the churches remain basically off-limits.
The fact that so little protest about this has been heard by the Christian community demonstrates that for too many, they have another king. They are far more willing to slavishly go along with whatever the state says, even if it means allowing churches to be shut down indefinitely.
And this is a perennial problem. Religious folks have long put the state ahead of devotion to Christ. We see that happening all the time in the Gospels and the book of Acts. Consider what I just read again this morning. In Acts 17:1-9 we read about what happened when Paul and Silas were in Thessalonica.
Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.” And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women. But the Jews were jealous, and taking some wicked men of the rabble, they formed a mob, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the crowd. And when they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some of the brothers before the city authorities, shouting, “These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also, and Jason has received them, and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.” And the people and the city authorities were disturbed when they heard these things. And when they had taken money as security from Jason and the rest, they let them go.
While I have long emphasised what we find in verse 6 about the early believers ‘turning the world upside down,’ here I want to emphasise what is found in the next verse: “they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.”
Yep, because they said that Jesus is Lord, that meant that all other lords and all other gods are in fact false kings, false rulers. That is not to say that there is no place for human rulers and civil government – there is. But no human authority dares to set himself up against the one true God. That is idolatry of the highest order, and never ends well.
These things are not just found in the New Testament. The attempt to challenge God and throw off his rightful place of rule goes way back to the book of Genesis of course. Our first parents, Adam and Eve sought to do it – with disastrous consequences – and folks have been seeking to do it ever since.
In Genesis 11:1-9 for example we read about the Tower of Babel episode. This was another direct challenge to God and his rule. That did not end well either. Whenever people seek to become fully autonomous, rejecting the rightful rule of God, they always end up in big trouble.
Of interest, just hours ago I found a book I had been looking for for a while (that is one problem with having a large library). The book was released the year I was born, and is penned by the German Catholic philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand (1889-1977). The volume is called The New Tower of Babel (Sophia Institute Press, 1953, 1994). Early on he says this:
The real conflict today is between Christianity on the one hand, and a thoroughly anti-Christian conception of life on the other. This struggle has reached a decisive stage and has become a radical clash between two worlds, embracing all domains of life and human existence. The liberal age was an age of compromise. Notwithstanding its anticlericalism and its contention against Christian doctrine in the religious and philosophical fields, it retained Christian elements in the moral, sociological, juridical, and cultural spheres. Our present age, however, reveals a consistent, anti-Christian conception in every domain of life on the part of the enemies of Christianity.
The mark of the present crisis is man’s attempt to free himself from his condition as a created being, to deny his metaphysical situation, and to disengage himself from all bonds with anything greater than himself. Modern man is attempting to build a new Tower of Babel.
The Message of Acts (Bible Speaks Today)by Array
Exactly so. The situation described in Acts 17 is simply more of the same. Let me offer some commentary on this. In his commentary I. Howard Marshall says this about the charge levelled at the disciples: “This is an apt description of the positive content of the gospel with its claim that Jesus is Lord (cf. 16:31); it indicates how the focus had shifted very naturally from the proclamation of the ‘kingdom’ in the ministry of Jesus to the proclamation of the ‘king’ in the evangelism of the early church.”
John Stott comments this way about the charge:
Since the emperor was sometimes called basileus (‘king’), as well as kaisar (‘emperor’), how could the attribution of basileus to Jesus (7) not be a treasonable offence? The ambiguity of Christian teaching in this area remains. On the one hand, as Christian people, we are called to be conscientious and law-abiding citizens, not revolutionaries. On the other hand, the kingship of Jesus has unavoidable political implications since, as his loyal subjects, we must refuse to give any other ruler or ideology the supreme homage and total obedience which are due to him alone.
I’ll leave N. T. Wright have the final word here:
Another king! Well, they really have got the message. Jesus is Lord and Caesar isn’t; the fundamental ‘decree’ or ‘dogma’ of Caesar is that he and he alone in the emperor….
So was Paul being a loyal Roman citizen, or wasn’t he? It all depends on what sort of a ‘king’ you think he thought Jesus really was. It is easy to quote Jesus’ famous saying, ‘My kingdom is not of this world’, but what John actually wrote was ‘My kingdom is not from this world’ (John 1 8.36), with the clear implication that, though derived of course from elsewhere, Jesus’ kingdom was definitely for this world. And it is easy to show that the charge Luke reports against Jesus, that he was claiming to be a king (Luke 23.2), was, like the other accusations hurled around at the time, at best deeply misleading.
But when we stand back from the present incident and look at the whole sweep of Acts as it unfolds before our eyes, we begin to see a pattern emerging, a pattern which will grow and swell until it leaves us . . . wondering what on earth happened next. In Acts 1—12 Jesus is hailed as Messiah, king of the Jews, until eventually the present king of the Jews tries to do something about it but is struck down for his pagan arrogance. Now, from Acts 13 onwards, Jesus is being hailed as ‘another king,’ ‘lord of the world’; but there already is a ‘lord of the world,’ and anyone who knows anything about tyrants, particularly ancient Roman ones, knows well that they don’t take kindly to rivals on the stage.
And they still don’t today. All the more reason for Christians to get their allegiances and loyalties right. As the state takes ever more powers for itself, the Christian will need to determine who it will ultimately serve. We need to decide now, before things get even worse.
HAVING gotten rid of their star black player, the Australian rugby team is set to take a knee at the start of their next game in support of Black Lives Matter.
The Australian Rugby Union chased Israel Folau out of the sport and eventually out of the country for his supposedly outdated minority views.
Now, with Folau out of the way, the woke Wallabies plan to signal their support for minorities.
Confused?
That’s because you’re thinking. To enjoy performative virtue you must be woke enough to feel, but never conscious enough to think.
Senior Wallaby Dane Haylett-Petty revealed this week that the team will consider taking a knee during the national anthem before the third Bledisloe Cup Test against the All Blacks on October 31.
“We’ve got a very diverse group and we see that as a big strength of ours,” he said.
Not strength enough to tolerate diverse views though, or Folau would still be playing for Australia rather than running around for the Catalans Dragons in France.
But again, you’re over thinking things. And that’s no way to enjoy politically correct sport.
Rugby Australia chairman Hamish McLennan said the Wallabies would be wearing their new Indigenous-designed jersey for the October 31 game.
“We’re very proud of our Aboriginal and Indigenous heritage, and we’re going to promote it proudly,” the proud chairman said with pride.
Except that no player of Indigenous heritage has been picked in the squad. He said,
“I think it shows that we’ve got to open more player pathways for indigenous rugby players, but what it also says is that we’re very committed to an inclusive culture.”
So there are no indigenous players included in the squad but the non-indigenous players will wear jumpers featuring indigenous squiggles to prove rugby has an inclusive culture.
It makes complete sense, provided you don’t think about it.
The Wallabies also made a big deal about the fact that new coach Dave Rennie has been encouraging players to embrace different cultures, even teaching them to sing Fijian and Tongan songs.
If this news makes you wonder how much better the Wallabies would be at singing Tongan ditties had they not punted their star Tongan player for expressing views commonly held in Tonga, stop it. You can’t square a circle any more than the Wallabies can beat New Zealand.
And there is no point wondering why, if our footballers are going to sing, they don’t instead learn the words to the Australian national anthem so that they can actually sing it before games rather than pretend.
Of course, the winless but very woke Wallabies could ditch all the virtue signalling and focus on winning rugby games.
But that thought doesn’t seem to have occurred to them for a long time now.
Fight fake news! The Good Sauce is bringing balance to the corporate media echo chamber. We are the first conservative source of videos and podcasts by so many independent voices from Australia. Our articles transparently distinguish between opinions and briefings: honest news without “progressive” agendas or euphemisms. Would you like to help us grow and produce more conservative new media? Become a Good Sauce supporter today and also enjoy extended interviews & bonus content.
James Macpherson is a sought after international speaker with a background in journalism at the Courier Mail and Daily Telegraph. He previously pastored a significant church in Australia and South Africa. James’ weekly Good Sauce podcast comes out every Tuesday. He also writes regularly for The Spectator.
In the middle of a pandemic and footy grand final fever the Queensland Premier announced, just two weeks out from an election, that if re-elected she will move to legalise euthanasia/ assisted suicide/ death camps. It doesn’t matter what you call it, it all ends up in tyranny of the powerful over those deemed “expendable.”
If you have a vote in the Queensland election, read this carefully before you vote.
From caldronpool.com
The Netherlands Pushes for Children to be Euthanised by Doctors · Caldron Pool
Children between the ages of 1 and 12 could soon be euthanized by doctors in the Netherlands, Health Minister Hugo de Jonge told Parliament last Tuesday.
Children between the ages of 1 and 12 could soon be euthanized by doctors in the Netherlands, Health Minister Hugo de Jonge told Parliament last Tuesday.
De Jonge said the new policy would see around five to ten terminally ill children legally executed every year.
According to the NL Times, doctors are presently only permitted to “give palliative care, like sedation, or withhold nutrition over an extended period of time until the patient dies.”
Doctors, who have been calling for more regulation, say there is a “grey area” between normal palliative care and active life termination.
The Health Minister said his proposal will protect the interests of children and will afford more transparency to the “grey area.”
The Netherlands became the first country to legalize euthanasia in 2002. Since then, the country has seen an increase in those requesting death by assisted suicide.
Cases include a man who was killed by doctors because he was an alcoholic; a 45-year-old woman, and a woman in her 20s, who had traumatic childhood memories; a 54-year-old woman who had a pathological fear of germs; and a 34-year-old mother who was chronically depressed.
It was also reported that a doctor in the Netherlands “euthanised” an elderly woman against her will.
In the first-ever case of its kind, Dutch authorities accused the doctor of performing euthanasia on an unwilling patient after a regional review board found the doctor had “overstepped the mark” by euthanising a 74-year old woman whose final will was “unclear and contradictory.”
However, a court in The Hague ruled that it is not necessary to obtain confirmation of the request when a patient is no longer able to express his or her wishes. The judges also noted that the doctor did well not to ask the patient herself if she wanted to die as it might have caused “agitation.”
In her final moments, the elderly woman reportedly struggled with hospital staff and attempted to prevent the doctor from giving her the lethal injection.
Euthanasia in the Netherlands is getting so out of hand that 200 Dutch doctors took out an advertisement in a major newspaper, which stated: “[Assisted suicide] for someone who cannot confirm he wants to die? No, we will not do that. Our moral reluctance to end the life of a defenceless man is too great.”
This morning I woke to the astounding news that biologists have discovered that the populations of frogs in areas “devastated” by last summer’s bushfires have rebounded, including some “threatened” species.
This follows earlier reports that koalas, snakes and other animals are doing OK despite “literally billions” of deaths last year. Also platypuses in the Peel River aren’t doing too badly now that the drought is over.
Amazingly, glow worms in the Blue Mountains that were thought to have been wiped out are doing well, having sheltered in a disused railway tunnel – ironic that, given that in modern times the greenies would not allow that tunnel to be built because it would be a threat to the environment, and probably the exact same glow worm population.
My favourite example is the giant pink slug which lives in the Mount Kaputar National Park, near Narrabri. It was only discovered 20 years ago, but the usual climate worriers panicked that the slug had been destroyed by fires. Surprisingly, the slug which has weathered droughts, bushfires, torrential rain, earthquakes, plagues of locusts and other natural disasters despite our total ignorance of its existence, managed to survive this event.
So this morning, after my usual outburst of “What is wrong with these people?”, I worked it out.
The pseudo-scientific discipline called ecology is founded on two fundamental doctrines:
The natural ecosystem is very complex, with many interacting species, and so it is potentially fragile as the disappearance of one species may cause the system to collapse.
People are always bad for the environment.
In actual fact, natural ecosystems are very resilient because they are complex. They can self-correct as different parts of the system adapt to change.
That is why bush environments regenerate after fires and droughts. They have been doing it for thousands of years without the assistance of humans.
The other factor that is generally ignored is that everything was created by an infinitely wise creator. He designed Australia with a warm, dry climate and the slugs, frogs, koalas to suit that climate.
Strangely, God is better at being God than people are.
The proposed appointment of Charles Moore, ‘Mrs Thatcher’s Vicar on Earth’ to head the BBC along with Paul Dacre, the left’s idea of what Lucifer might be like, as head of Ofcom, shows Boris has not lost his touch. These appointments, along with Brexit, will have consequences that will be with us long after Covid 19 is a footnote in history.
With the coincidental arrival of Laurence Fox’s anti cancel movement the two appointments should spell the demise of wokery, its works and its pomps. The success of a revolution depends on the electorate feeling they now have ‘permission’ to think thoughts which yesterday were considered utterly wicked.
Fox is that rather rare species, a film star who is not a political empty head, and the ‘halo effect,’ (people find it hard to resist believing that good looking people are not good) will ensure his success. He has already raised £5 million in donations. Let’s hope he makes wise use of it.
These events also spell the end of the ‘Boris has lost it’ myth. Emanating from Whitehall, this rumour is designed to have Boris ejected from office by the end of November latest, in order that a Remainer Tory can take his place and agree to the Brexit talks being extended by 12 months.
By the end of that period nothing will remain of the original agreement, and we will be a full colony of the EU.
Atheism can never just ‘coexist’ with Christianity. It is working to eradicate Christianity. The Democrat Party has embraced atheism, and has gone so far as to call it its biggest base.
Many are going to rail against this blog. But no one—no matter how outraged they become—will be able to controvert two facts: Atheism is proactively anti-Christian, and: Democrats have gone atheist.
We will take the second fact first. Here is what Democrats say about themselves:
“The Democratic National Committee (DNC) passed a resolution praising the values of “religiously unaffiliated” Americans as the “largest religious group within the Democratic Party.”
The resolution, which was unanimously passed at the DNC’s summer meeting on Aug. 24th this year in San Francisco, California, was championed by the Secular Coalition of America, an organization that lobbies on behalf of atheists, agnostics, and humanists on public policy. The group celebrated the DNC’s move as the first time a major party “embraced American nonbelievers.”
“Religiously unaffiliated Americans overwhelmingly share the Democratic Party’s values,” said the resolution, which adds that they should advocate for “rational public policy based on sound science and universal humanistic values.”
‘Sound science and humanistic values’ are their excuse to remove the civil rights of those who insist on believing in God.
You doubt me? Sarah Levin, director of governmental affairs for the Secular Coalition of America, praised it as a way “to ensure that policy is driven by science and evidence, not sectarian beliefs.”
That means that any part of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, considered by atheists to have come from “sectarian beliefs,” can be removed.
Result: No prayer. No worship. No church.
Again, do you doubt their intention about religious liberty? Right after ratifying their atheistic platform, Democrats took a shot at believers who use “religious liberty” to threaten the civil rights of LGBTQ Americans. What they really mean is the other way around. They will use this platform to not just threaten, but remove the civil rights of Christians.
Wake up! They want to overrule the Constitution to erase freedom of religion. Christianity is their target.
Now let’s look at atheism itself. The Bible is not vague about atheism. Psalms 14:1, “The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good.”
Why does the Word of God take such a harsh tone toward atheism? Simple, look at the fruit of atheism:
The taproot of Marxism is atheism. Marxism has killed 100 million people in the last century. Atheism provided the vacuum of conscience needed to ethnically cleanse Russia, China, North Korea and many other places where it operates as the engine of a culture. When the Bible says, “they have done abominable works,” it isn’t kidding.
Atheists suffer from elevated rates of depression and suicide, which they admit. Staks Rosch is a vocal atheist, humanist, and progressive. Writing in the Huffington Post he said, “Depression is a serious problem within the greater atheist community and far too often, that depression has led to suicide. This is something many of my fellow atheists often don’t like to admit, but it is true.”
Denial is not a new thing to the atheistic mindset. Atheistic Democrats claim to rely on science, but only when it suits them. Biology clearly and emphatically recognizes only two genders. Ludicrously, Gavin Newsom said that he based his decision to illegally close churches on science, but when confronted with biology, he noted that there are things more important than science.
The Democrat agenda blatantly believes many things are more important than science when it comes to climate, morality, equality and environmentalism. That is why the no-God-driven leftist policies of the West Coast are consuming entire states in wildfires, riots, addictions, and every misery known to man.
Democrats turn a blind eye to the scientific process when it comes to accountability. Their policies have imprisoned minorities in violence, despair and poverty. Do they rethink or reevaluate their catastrophic experiments as scientists would? Never!
It is time for every weak-willed Christian, sitting on the fence, to wake up to the agenda of atheism. Richard E. Simmons in his book Reflections on the Existence of God, compared Christianity and atheism by saying this: “They are not just two separate views of life; they are opposing, mutually exclusive, views, delivering opposite conclusions about the meaning of life and our existence as human beings.”
Atheism then, provides the necessary inhumanity required to justify dismembering a baby, in some cases cutting its vocal cords so that the team can’t hear it screaming. Atheism was the inevitable conclusion of a political party that needed a construct in order to live with blatant hypocrisy, complete fabrications of social conditions, and out and out hatred for American history and Judeo-Christian values.
And, indeed, if you vote for them, you are denying your faith.
There is a song that has been at the top of the billboard charts for several weeks now. The song is called WAP, sung by a couple of black women. I won’t tell you what the title stands for, as I would have to deep clean my computer afterwards.
The whole song is obscene in its lyrics, although feminists describe it as a brave and liberating statement of female sexuality.
I watched the video of the song yesterday, even though I had heard of the song’s tone.
I felt spiritually violated.
The video is probably not particularly explicit, nor more sexualised than other music videos.
But there is a spiritual malevolence in the video and in the song that will make you feel ashamed of being human, desolate, like you have taken part in a satanic worship ritual.
I believe that this song has been launched as a spiritual missile at the hearts of our young people. It is demonic in its nature.
I am not given to believing that all music since the 1950’s is of the devil. I love all forms of music. But this song is straight from the deepest pit of hell.
Parents of teenagers and pre-teens, you need to talk to your kids. You need to have a conversation about the things we allow to enter our hearts and shape our thoughts. You need to encourage them to delete the song from their phone, playlist, whatever.
Now I need to grab the holy water and garlic. Just writing this makes me feel polluted!
It is now clearer than ever that Sweden was justified in taking a liberal approach to Covid-19.
Last week, Sweden conducted a record number of tests for coronavirus (more than 120,000) but found a record-low proportion of infected people – just 1.2 per cent, according to a report from Reuters.
This is down from 19 per cent in the spring. What’s more, Sweden’s current position contrasts sharply with the surge in infections in countries like France and Britain.
The director-general of Sweden’s health agency, Johan Carlson, said: ‘Our strategy has been consistent and sustainable.’ He added that Sweden probably has a higher rate of Covid-19 immunity in the population when compared to other countries, adding that, ‘I think we benefit a lot from that now’.
Sweden did not enforce lockdown, and yet its death rate has been lower than that of a number of countries which did, such as Spain, Italy and the UK. Its rate of spread of coronavirus is also now the lowest in Scandinavia.
Another boost for Sweden’s no-lockdown policy came last week, as Johann Giesecke, a prominent opponent of lockdown and one of the behind-the-scenes architects of Sweden’s policy, was given a major position at the World Health Organisation.
spiked has consistently argued against lockdown as a means to defeat Covid – and has challenged the attempts by lockdown fanatics to talk down Sweden’s liberal approach.
As many other European countries start to re-tighten their restrictions as we head into winter, it looks as if Sweden’s sensible, measured and sustainable approach is working.
New Life Narrabri 
