qolon

Church Board & Church Pastor
Seventh-day Adventist Church

Sale Victoria 3850

25 October 2005

1. I have recently returned to the Wellington Shire region after an absence
of some 27 years.

2. It is unlikely though that I will again seek to attend the Seventh-day
Adventist Church or any other religious gathering, whilst the Seventh-day
Adventist Church remains reluctant to provide an apology for past instances
of child ***ual abuse by a former elder of the church-a Mr. Bill Hughes,
since deceased.

3. The substance of the matter was conveyed several years prior at a meeting
convened at the Victorian Conference offices, Nunawading with Mr. Richard
Berry as head elder and retired clergy Mr. Dean Giles. At the time, there
was exhibited a vehement disdain for my life-cir***stance which has, with
fidelity, been singularly of a homo***ual orientation. And given that the
perpetrator of those alleged abuses had already seen his last days within
the comfort of a church based aged care facility; it simply provided further
opportunity for apathy as failure in giving adequate attention to my
complaint.

4. It is my experience after some 10 years of public Internet based
discourse within Seventh-day Adventist and other Christian identifying
www-based, list-server and newsgroup forums, that this unreasoned clime of
vehement disdain, societal exclusion and public excoriation isn't just a
parochial demur, but a pervading culture as antagonism being due to the
natural consensus as ill-informed presumption, that such values in varying
degrees are pre-requisite to any claim of religious belief.

5. The Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission had, with respect to a
complaint concerning the refusal of membership by the North Fitzroy
Seventh-day Adventist Church at a Board Meeting of 11 February 1998,
suggests that: "The reasons as to why your application was refused do
indicate that your ***ual orientation was a factor. However, the Seventh-day
Adventist Church appears to be covered by an exception provided in section
75(2)(b) of the Equal Opportunity Act 1995. This section allows the Church
to discriminate against a person where it is necessary to avoid injury to
the religious sensitivities of the people of the religion. The Church has
submitted that your position on homo***uality will divert members from the
purpose and goal of the church. It would appear that section 75(2)(b)
applies." [Letter from Diane Sisley, Chief Executive, Equal Opportunity
Commission of Victoria 26 April 2001]

6. My objection concerns not only the Constitutionality of such reasoning,
but the degree to which the free and lawful exercise of any discretion by
people of religion remains in accordance with the epigrammatic expression as
foundational principle as sovereign and autonomous right of our justice
system: 'If God is my right, why then am I being subject to injury by people
of religion?'

7. Firstly the consideration that religious belief, thought and conscience
as a sovereign and autonomous {ie. autos / one's true self, the soul + nomos
/ Torah; containing its own principles of self-governance} values expression
consistently understood by Seventh-day Adventists as Christian community of
faith being established upon the transcendent and chronological principle of
Nature known as the 7th day Sabbath of the Decalogue, are somehow
antagonistic to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles of good
governance as 'certain powers, functions, and authorities' declared to be
vested within 'the office of Governor General and Commander in chief over
Our said Commonwealth of Australia' and to whom, according to paragraph 8 of
the letters patent to the Australian Constitution of 1901, 'all other the
inhabitants of Our said Commonwealth [are] to be obedient, aiding, and
assisting', may be considered absurd.

8. Such a chronological expression of religious belief, gnosis and
cosmologic order as governance proposes not only a teleological argument for
the basis of our understanding of the existence of God, but conveys by
expression of a relationship between the LOGOS and INFINITY as the Common
Law (Koinos Nomos) of the Stoics, a universal Christological, taxonomical
and chronological statement which is intrinsic to and remains consistent
with the Scripture's underlying Genesis cosmology and cosmogony:

72J + 3(3²+1)/2 [2W1D] = 457 BCE
72J2W1D + 490 years = 33 CE

12 x 6J {an implied Wednesday 20 March equinox/new moon cycle as 294 year
'oth [24 x 7 x 13 = 2184] priestly cycle} = 72J as 472 BCE
72J + 9(9²+1)/2 = 103 BCE
72J + 10(10²+1)/2 = 33 CE

ARCH = 22/7 as 3W1D with an implied Wednesday 20 March equinox/new moon as
294 year 'oth [24 x 7 x 13 = 2184] priestly cycle
#[X] = + 9(9²+1)/2 as #369 with 7 x #41 centre (#41 = 13 to 17 September
2001)
TELOS = Solar eclipse Monday 25 December 2000 (122J3W1D) + 6 days = 20 x 6J
+ 2J + 3W1D (22 years)

- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/nous1.jpg>

Within DAOIST thought the great virtue of Heaven as Yang: male has mastery
over the great beginning of things [#32, #28, #14, #44 - Moderate Values/
Setting Up Precepts, #15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse/ The Revealers of
Virtue, #30, #44, #43, #36] and Yin: Earth as female brings things to
completion [#2, #47, #10, #50 - Fantasies of Avoiding Death/ The Estimation
of Life, #9 - The Inconstancy of Achievement/ Practising Placidity, #47, #7,
#14, #77] is called 'generation' when things are Zhun [Birth Throes] born:

vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic Homoiotic Noumenon Entry: (33CE - INR)
#3 - Prescriptions for Politics/ Keeping the People Quiet,
#20 - Left without Language/ Different From the Vulgar,
#52 - So What?/ Returning to the Origin,
#73 - Employing Deeming/ Daring to Act,
#79 - Recognizing Agreements/ Keep Your Obligations,
#1 - To Guide with Names/ Reason's Realisation,
#16 - Being a Guide/ Returning to the Root,
#35 - Great Guiding Signs?/ Virtue of Benevolence,
#7 - Intentional Reversal/ Dimming Radiance

As number 'Zhuan' meaning to enumerate or calculate using the Kabbalistic
techniques of Notarikon and Gematria for the Latin: I (#9) N (#40) R (#80) =
129 % 81 = #48 - Forgetting/ Forgetting Knowledge as Jesus of Nazareth, King
of the Jews [Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; John 19:19; Luke 23:38] which
becomes embodied in them [#47, #68, #67, #26 - Ambiguous Reversals/ The
Virtue of Gravity, #37 - Non-Deeming Action/ Administration of Government,
#25, #52, #55, #3].

The usage of 81 elements to represent the calendar as 364.5 day (+
intercalation) appraisals occurred during the Han dynasty (206 BCE - 220
CE). The sifen (quarter remainder) calendar, which began about 484 BCE, was
the first calculated Chinese calendar, so named because it used a solar year
of 365.25 days, along with a 19-year = 235-month Rule Cycle, known in the
West as the metonic cycle. Thus the technique is perhaps older than its
articulation with the 'Canon of Supreme Mystery' (T'ai hsuan ching) by Yang
Hsung (53 BCE - 18 CE), which first appeared in draft form around 4 BCE.

8. Historically within Australia, there was not opposition to the inclusion
of a specific religious clause as expression of liberty that was adopted as
Section 116 of the Australian Constitution of 1901 as the foundational
do***ent conveying the Principles of Natural and Regulative Philosophy
articulated by the Letters Patent to said Australian Constitution of 1901:

a) "The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion:
Nature contains Nature {Nature amended in its Nature},

b) or for imposing any religious observance: Nature rejoices in its Nature
{Act of Nature},

c) or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion: Nature surmounts
Nature {Form of Nature},

d) and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office
or public trust under the Commonwealth: Nature amended in its Nature
{Engendering Nature}" [Section 116 -- The Australian Constitution of 1901,
Chapter V - States, as in force on 1 July 1999]

9. A view could therefore be formed, that Section 116 of the Australian
Constitution of 1901 manifestly expressly prohibits any Australian
Government from establishing, imposing, prohibiting or ensuring compliance
to religious values such as the practice of peddling 'hymeneal mysticism and
Sunday Sacredness' as the malaise and complacency of a Religion of State
which advances a social agenda as claim to piety that is otherwise
indistinguishable from Adolf Hitler's religious philosophy as expressed by
his 4 Nuremberg Laws introduced from 1935, which gave legislative authority
to fascism. Anglican Archbishop Dr. Peter Jensen at the annual session of
the Sydney Diocese Synod held on 10 October 2005 advances such an
ecclesiastic social agenda when he falsely implies that Sunday as the basis
for 'Christian Fellowship', not only has sanctity but is a mandate: "Sunday
and Christian fellowship seems to be an optional extra".

10. Such sentiments are symptomatic of a dishonest, fraudulent religious
dialog of exclusion and irreconcilably against our sovereign, autonomous,
moral, metaphysical and therefore Australian Constitutional and Democratic
right. That the "invention and carry out of political Constitutions
independently of religion" is in point of fact shown to be a complete
fallacy by the historical reality of the Church of England Act No. 45/1854.
Which was an Act enabling the Bishops, Clergy and Laity of the United Church
of England and Ireland in Victoria to provide for the regulation of the
affairs of the said Church.

11. According to Georg Hegel's (1770-1841 CE) observations, this 'folly' as
the pretending to carry out political Constitutions independently of
religion arises in part due to, the Catholic confession, although sharing
the Christian name with the Protestant, not conceding to the State an
inherent Justice and Morality-a concession which in the Protestant principle
is fundamental. Therefore the tearing away of the political morality of the
Constitution from its natural connection, is necessary to the genius of that
religion, inasmuch as it does not recognize Justice and Morality as
independent and substantial-But thus excluded from intrinsic worth, torn
away from their last refuge, the sanctuary of conscience, the calm retreat
where religion has its abode, the principles and institutions of political
legislation are destitute of a real centre, to the same degree as they are
compelled to remain abstract and indefinite. [cf: Hegel 'Introduction - The
Philosophy of History', ISBN 0-87975-631-4, p 52]

12. The organization is no doubt aware of my capacity to articulate a
religious belief thought and conscience as values expression (see do***ents
on enclosed CD ROM titled 'GRAPPLE') represented mathematically by a
sevenfold vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic 9(92+1)/2 = #369 Matrix, 8th -
Transformative Plane as 'Heterosquare (Spirogyra Order)' and the 9th -
Autonomous Plane as Chinese Daoist 'Solar Year Mystery Transitions' of 4 BCE
as regime of religious/political governance deployed by the Han Dynasty of
206 BCE to 220 CE, being the basis for a theological, metaphysical
philosophical and chronological retort-A 369 day chronological and
mathematical matrix known from antiquity as the Merkabah (ie. Kabbalistic)
mystical (transcendent and metaphysical) foundation for a perennial
solar/lunar [ie. 9(92+1)/2 (#369) - 3(32+1)/2 (#15) = 354 lunar cycle] and
organizational philosophy uniting reason and faith and mechanism for
governance as the natural, regulative, metempirical and jurisprudent
philosophical principles underpinning our Australian Constitution and
legislative framework [#51, #66, #77, #37 - Non-Deeming Action/
Administration of Government, #31 - Military Strategies as Guides/ Quelling
War, #62, #40, #57, #21].

- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/nous.gif>

13. This vMeme / Moment Kabbalistic Paradigm is a biopsychological and
ethical theological model, which as homoiotic noumenon, is the
trans-experiential object onto which to map time-based phenomenon and offers
a heuristic for empirical inductive or metaphysical deductive intuition and
rational decision-making. As such an 'a priori' based teleological argument
transcends and negates any rational and un-substantiated claim to religious
and corporate belief that the practice of Institutional religious belief can
make.

14. Such a comprehensive theology as pre-eminent and autonomous claim to a
religious belief is substantive enough to fall within the legislative
definition of Victoria's (Australia) Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001
Act No. 47/2001 which provides that "religious belief or activity" means-

(a) holding or not holding a lawful religious belief or view;
(b) engaging in, not engaging in or refusing to engage in a lawful religious
activity;

This legislation makes religious vilification unlawful, in that Section 8
grants that it extends the "engaging in conduct" provision to include the
use of the Internet or e-mail to publish or transmit statements or other
material:

(1) A person must not, on the ground of the religious belief or activity of
another person or class of persons, engage in conduct that incites hatred
against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of, that
other person or class of persons.

Note: "engage in conduct" includes use of the Internet or e-mail to publish
or transmit statements or other material.

(2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), conduct-

(a) may be constituted by a single occasion or by a number of occasions over
a period of time; and
(b) may occur in or outside Victoria.

15. Thus it raises the possibility, given the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) 17 December 2004 ruling [#72, #63, #75, #4 -
Using Guidance/ Sourceless, #81, #5, #10, #38, #81] that an Evangelical and
Fundamentalist (ie. Pentecostal) Christian Community of Faith known as
'Catch the Fire Ministries' who also fielded an unsuccessful senate
candidate for the Family First party in the Federal Election of 9 October
2004, vilified Muslims.

16. And may therefore also provide a legal precedent that is sufficient to
bring an end to the rampant religious vilification of male homo***uals as a
pretext to piety. That a prima facie prerogative to an anti 'homo***ual'
interpretation of the Judaeo-Christian Biblical narrative as claimed
dogmatic religious belief and grounds for societal exclusion and public
flaying, may simply be said not to apply to Sabbath observant
Judaeo-Christians. Who would find such charactisations hostile, demeaning
and derogatory of their God Yahweh, Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah and the
Prophet/Apostle Paul.

17. Accordingly I look forward to having the following considerations being
addressed by the Church board of the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

a) A formal apology provided by the Seventh-day Adventist Church for their
failure as duty of care, to adequately investigate the misconduct of a
church elder engaging in ***ually offensive behavior towards children.

b) My expression of the comprehensive theological metaphysical paradigm as
the basis of religious belief and gnosis, is compliant with the principles
of our Australian Constitution and legislative framework, therefore section
75(2)(b) of the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 which 'allows the Church to
discriminate against a person where it is necessary to avoid injury to the
religious sensitivities of the people of the religion' cannot be said to
apply in the matter as consideration of intrinsic being.

c) Correspondence dated 26 April 2001 from Diane Sisley, Chief Executive,
Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission of Victoria, expressed the
view that ".the Church has submitted that my position on homo***uality will
divert members from the purpose and goal of the church." This is in fact a
slanderous and false characterization, which as fascist apologetics
expresses the Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission's essential
character.

Consequently I am seeking substantiation or retraction of the vexatious
claim made by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, "that my position on
homo***uality will divert members from the purpose and goal of the church."

18. As these matters will require a detailed consideration by the Church
Board in compliance to your rules of Association, I don't expect that you
will be able to respond by 30 April 2006. Following such time, should your
considerations be deemed fruitless and inadequate, further legal advice will
be sought with the view of advancing a claim related to duplicitous denial
of justice and an unconscionable infringement of autonomous and
Constitutional rights.

Yours Sincerely


- dolf
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/sybilline.html>

russell g.

Dolf --

The Austrailian courts have already said that "freedom of association"
within a religious group is based upon their rules. That trumps your
so-called "constitutional right" to become a member of the church.

Following your logic, a Satanist could become a member of the
church, even though espousing views utterly contrary to the church's
stated goals.

Even should the state DEMAND your admittance to the church, the
member's could resist by NOT placing your name on the roles and
ignoring the edit's of a court that is NOT supposed to make rulings
regarding religious observance or practice.

You've been flogging this poor horse for quite a while. How about
letting it go?

Oh, BTW -- God is your RIGHT, but you don't have the right
to impose your will upon a church or church body. God is also
your right within your mind and your practices. I DO NOT have
to agree, endorse or allow you to become a member of a church
that disagrees with you and your practicing of your religion.


Russell G.

qolon

Are you a Seventh-day Adventist Russell G?

If not then it isn't your place to commenting on obligations related to
the lawful conduct of sectarian associations?

A legal precident has already been established within the USA which
allows the use of the name Seventh-day Adventist by a kinship group.

- dolf

qolon

Are you a Seventh-day Adventist Russell G?

If not then it isn't your place to be commenting on obligations related
to the lawful conduct of sectarian associations?

A legal precedent has already been established within the USA which
allows the use of the name Seventh-day Adventist by a kinship group.

- dolf

alanm

Dolt

Why didn't you just send this letter through the post instead of splattering
it all over the internet ?

Had you followed the normal protocol there's a chance the intended recipient
would have read the letter - a slight chance maybe, but a chance.

qolon

Do you have a religious belief Alanm? You ougt to take note that, that if
God is my right, why then am I being subject to injury by people of
religion?

- dolf

Why didn't you just send this letter through the post instead of splattering
it all over the internet ?

Had you followed the normal protocol there's a chance the intended recipient
would have read the letter - a slight chance maybe, but a chance.

barry ogrady

Dolf is desperate for attention like the little child he is mentally, and he finds he
gets attention by being annoying.

The intended recipient knows that Dolf is an annoying nut case so is likely to
ignore him.

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

qolon

The views Barry OGrady expresses as their claim to religious belief {ie.
whether holding or not holding a lawful religious belief or view}, is an
impunity of autonomous, sovereign and constitutional rights--being
indistinguishable from fascism, it is unlawful!

I thought it important to remind you since your fascist conduct conveys the
truth that ANZACS died in vain, is the view that if under the Australian
Constitution, God is also my right, why then am I being subject to injury by
people of religion {ie. whether holding or not holding a lawful religious
belief or view}?

- dolf

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:31:04 GMT, "alanm" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote:


Dolf is desperate for attention like the little child he is mentally, and he
finds he
gets attention by being annoying.

The intended recipient knows that Dolf is an annoying nut case so is likely
to
ignore him.

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

barry ogrady

Someone should write a Dolf interpreter so we can read his posts.
I don't know if I should be insulted since I don't know what Dolf is
saying.

Maybe Dolf is a script using a buzzword generator.


Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

qolon

If God is also my autonomous, sovereign and constitutional right, it neither
requires your permission, nor are such rights a casualty of your failure to
understand the semantics of discourse over those rights, in the hope they
don't exist--as your contempt for them conveys.

- dolf

Someone should write a Dolf interpreter so we can read his posts.
I don't know if I should be insulted since I don't know what Dolf is
saying.

Maybe Dolf is a script using a buzzword generator.

QOLON NTOE:
The views Barry OGrady expresses as their claim to religious belief {ie.
whether holding or not holding a lawful religious belief or view}, is an
impunity of autonomous, sovereign and constitutional rights--being
indistinguishable from fascism, it is unlawful!

I thought it important to remind you since your fascist conduct conveys the
truth that ANZACS died in vain, is the view that if under the Australian
Constitution, God is also my right, why then am I being subject to injury by
people of religion {ie. whether holding or not holding a lawful religious
belief or view}? - dolf
"Barry OGrady" <atheist.***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:nep4m1hrt1oa78uli90q33rlm1piqbqjlu@4ax.com...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:31:04 GMT, "alanm" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote:


Dolf is desperate for attention like the little child he is mentally, and he
finds he
gets attention by being annoying.

The intended recipient knows that Dolf is an annoying nut case so is likely
to
ignore him.

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og