Op 30 September 2020 het André Bekker die NG Kerk aangekla oor diskriminasie teenoor pedofiele. Hieronder is die aanklag wat ook die volle agtergrond gee van die aanklag.

************

Postnet Suite 328 Private Bag X1 Florida Hills 1716 +27 (0)71 326 8034 VOTV@Protonmail.com www.votvsa.org

Directors: Prof Dr J Bosman PhD (NWU); JL Engelbrecht BA, LLB (RAU) A A ARB; EH Kimme BSc IT (Hons) (UFS); A Bekker BA (UP) “Speak up for people who cannot speak for themselves. Protect the rights of all who are helpless” Proverbs: 31:8

NPC 2019/478576/08

“IN A TIME OF UNIVERSAL DECEIT, TELLING THE TRUTH IS A REVOLUTIONARY ACT” – GEORGE ORWELL

30 September 2020

Gauteng Provincial Manager
The South African Human Rights Commission
2nd Floor
Braampark Forum 3
33 Hoofd Street
Braamfontein
2001

RE: DISCRIMINATION ON GROUND OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND INFRINGEMENT ON DIGNITY

Dear Mr Buang Jones

Introduction, purpose and methodology

Voice of the Voiceless Advocacy (VOTVA) is a human rights advocacy organization, which advocates for the Constitutional Rights of marginalised sexual minorities, not advocated for by LGBTQI+ activists.

VOTVA wishes to lodge a complaint of unfair discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, and an infringement on pedophiles’ right to dignity, against the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC). Not being clear on what constitutes hate speech at present, the South African Human Rights Commission (which will be referred to as The Commission in this letter) is kindly requested to consider the evidence presented, and assess if hate speech has been committed too.

VOTVA states unequivocally that this complaint is not in support of criminal conduct, nor does it promote such conduct in any way. It also does not align itself with any group advocating for the lowering of age of consent. The sole purpose is to assure equal humanity and justice for all.

The Commission, being an independent and impartial institution to promote respect for and a culture of human rights, is further requested to ensure that Commissioner André Gaum will in no way be involved in the investigation of this matter. With his family ties to the Gaum family, who is taking a leading role in the same-sex relationship controversy within the DRC, there exist a conflict of interest, which may jeopardise justice in this matter.

Please bear in mind that the majority of the twenty plus media reports and other correspondence involved in this complaint, are in Afrikaans. I have only translated the relevant portions into English.

I will only focus on three events to state my case. The first event will be discussed comprehensively to inform the Commission of the details and background related to this complaint. Apart from these three, the rest of the articles’ content will not be discussed in any detail. In footnotes I will refer to the obsessive media coverage this propaganda campaign received over a period of more than a month.

The run-up to lodging this complaint

The author of this letter is a former homosexual pedophile. As such, I have noted the events, described in this letter, as they unfolded in the public domain, through the media. I was left with a 2 deep disturbing impression that pedophiles’ rights were infringed upon. I addressed my concern in a LETTER to the DRC, which they acknowledged RECEIPT of. I wrote this letter in an attempt to solve the matter within the structures of the church. I followed up on this letter with a SUMMARY of the first letter and a FOLLOW-UP email as a reminder that I am awaiting a response. After still not receiving a response, I wrote another LETTER requesting an appointment with the leadership of the church, hoping to solve this matter. On August 20, 2020, I received a REPLY from the General Secretary of the DRC, indicating that the church was not going to respond to my letter nor is it going to afford me an appointment. I am therefore compelled to lodge a complaint with the Commission.

Background to the complaint

In a SERIES of twenty plus media reports and other correspondence between September 17, 2018 and October 27, 2018, repeated statements were made, which promoted unfair discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation against pedophiles, a marginalised sexual minority group in society. It furthermore violated their right to human dignity and deepened the already raging stigma and hatred towards them. These statements were made in the public domain by prominent and influential pedophobic leaders, lecturers and ministers, representing the liberal grouping within the DRC. As will be seen, the tragedy is that they even made use of the Season of Human Dignity initiative to discriminate against this marginalised group.

The SEASON OF HUMAN DIGNITY is a joint initiative of the DRC family to recommit itself to human dignity and respect. It stems from a concern the church had regarding the basic value of respect for each other, which has been largely destroyed in our society, and leads to the violation of the rights of individuals and communities.

In 2013 the General Synod of the DRC decided to have the conversation on same-sex relationships within the framework of the values of the Season of Human Dignity namely respect, listening, embracing and love.[1]

During the 2016 synod meeting, The General Synod, among other things, “emphasized that no human being should be treated as being inferior, but on the contrary, that all people should be treated with love and be respected, being image bearers of God. We recognize the equality of all people regardless of sexual orientation and re-commit ourselves to the promotion of the God-given dignity of all people and call on all members to accept one another with the love of Christ, regardless of sexual orientation.“[2]

VOTVA supports the church’s noble goal: to seek to restore the human dignity of all people in the wider community, by reaching out to one another, and caring for one another in love, as described in the Introduction to Loop Saam.[3] It is a booklet written to equip DRC ministers and congregants to give effect to the Season of Human Dignity.

Ironically, Dr van Wyk, who is accused of having committed hate speech (a matter that will be discussed in detail soon), is the author of this booklet and two others, Maak Kontak and Jesus-Verhale van Menswaardigheid, published by Bybelkor, and widely used in the DRC. This fact strengthens my conviction that the hate speech complaint, lodge with the Commission against Dr Van Wyk, is a malicious act, serving a political agenda.

The series of media reports and other correspondence mentioned above, originated from statements made in two separate articles. The first ARTICLE [7] was published in Kerkbode,[4] written by the Moderator of the DRC, Rev. Janse van Rensburg, September 17, 2018. His article followed, after he informed the leadership of the DRC of his wish, to make his personal conviction about same-sex relationships known. His conviction came as a surprise, if not a shock, to many within the DRC, because it was contrary to the denomination’s stance, he has so far strongly defended.

Two weeks prior, he still fiercely defended it in the media. In an interview with the journalist Izak du Plessis on RSG, he said:[5] This is not about people’s personal rights. This is about the church’s position on sexual relations. And the church is currently at the point where we say we are not in a place where we want to condone or affirm same-sex relationships in the church.

For the first time it became publically known, that his personal conviction is not in line with that of his denomination. That, of course, was a matter of concern, seeing that he held the highest leadership position within the denomination, but could no longer, honestly and with integrity, represent it. Jean Oosthuizen writes,[6] A new storm is brewing in the Dutch Reformed Church over homosexuality. This follows after the church’s moderator, Rev. Nelis Janse van Rensburg, took a public stand against his church’s latest synod decision in 2016 that homosexual relationships are a sin.

Rev Janse van Rensburg’s disclosure prompted a RESPONSE [7] from, Dr Chris van Wyk, to whom this news was also new and a surprise. He wanted to publish it in Kerkbode, but the editor, Mr Neels Jackson, a gay rights activist refused to publish it. Dr Van Wyk then published it on Kerbode’s Facebook timeline, but Mr Jackson also removed it from there. The reason he said he removed it, was the result of legal advice he received, because it is dangerous to drag pedophilia into conversations about homosexuality. Van Wyk exposes himself to a complaint of hate speech.[8] Dr Van Wyk eventually published his response on his own Facebook timeline on September 18, 2018.

Both Rev Janse van Rensburg and Dr Van Wyk were in leadership positions within the DRC, but now on opposite sides of the divide regarding same-sex relationships within the denomination.

Rev Janse van Rensburg wrote in his article about this divide, The division in the church over the core of the issue [same-sex relationships] is profound. … Our division represents two streams of thought about hermeneutics, about ethics and about following Christ …. On the one hand there is the so-called “gospel-minded approach” or Murray/Hofmeyer tradition, and on the other hand the more “rational” or “Neo-Calvinistic” approach. The two traditions run like the two tracks of a train track side by side to form one track.

The first track is also known as the conservatives, with whom Dr Chris van Wyk associates, and the latter as the liberals, with whom Rev Janse van Rensburg now associates.

For the purpose of this complaint I am arguing that Dr Van Wyk’s response was maliciously twisted and abused by gay rights activists within the liberal grouping of the DRC, to further their own selfish political interest. They made extensively use of the media for their propaganda campaign. In the process they infringed on the human rights of pedophiles. This was an orchestrated opportunistic effort in pursuit of executing the Gay Agenda. It is therefore imperative to sensitize the Commission to the existence of such an Agenda.

The Gay Agenda[9]

The ‘born-gay’ deception is the brainchild of Marshall Kirk and Dr Hunter Madsen. Marshall Kirk graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard University in 1980, with a major in Psychology and has since become a writer and researcher in neuropsychiatry.

Dr Hunter Madsen received a doctorate in politics from Harvard University in 1985. He excelled in public persuasion techniques and social marketing. He designed commercial marketing in Madison Avenue.

In 1985, Kirk and Madsen wrote an article The Gay Agenda, and published it in a pro-gay magazine, Christopher Street. The article aimed to highlight the strategic importance that the central focus of the homosexuals debate must shift from homosexuality as something one does, to a pseudo sexual identity, called gay.

The aim of the Agenda was to force opponents into a position where they are seen as disrespecting the rights of gay citizens, instead of opposing anti-social behaviour.

It also formulated the falsehood by which people would be convinced in the future that gays are born that way and therefore cannot change.

At first, the ideas contained in this article were not enthusiastically accepted by the gay community. An event in 1986, however, changed things. In a court case, Bowers v. Hardwick, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the status quo is upheld, that individual states in America have the right to criminalize sodomy. This ruling led the gay activists to take action.

The idea was born that if they could come up with a convincing argument that one is born gay, having innate and immutable characteristics, they might be able to gain minority status, as a Suspect Class, under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Strict scrutiny is applied to government actions that affect groups that fall under a “suspect classification.” The US Supreme Court has mentioned a variety of criteria that, in some combination, may qualify a group as a suspect classification, but the Court has not declared that any particular set of criteria are either necessary or sufficient to qualify. Some of the criteria that have been cited include:[10]

• The group has historically been discriminated against or have been subject to prejudice, hostility, or stigma, perhaps due, at least in part, to stereotypes.
• They possess an immutable or highly visible trait.
• They are powerless to protect themselves via the political process. (The group is a “discrete” and “insular” minority.)
• The group’s distinguishing characteristic does not inhibit it from contributing meaningfully to society.

Kirk and Madsen immediately wrote a follow-up article, The Overhauling of Straight America and published it in a pro-gay magazine, Guide. It outlines a step-by-step strategy on how to convince Americans that a person is born gay. Kirk and Madsen writes:[11]

When, in a 1985 Christopher Street article, we presented a blueprint for a national propaganda effort, doubters derided the proposal as irrelevant or impotent, the methods as demeaning and fraudulent, and our intent as reactionary. In February 1988, however, a “war conference” of 175 leading gay activists, representing organizations from across the country, convened in Warrenton, Virginia, to establish a four-point agenda for the gay movement. The conference gave first priority to ‘a nation-wide media campaign to promote a positive image of gays and lesbians.’

In 1989 Kirk and Madsen expanded the article The Overhauling of Straight America to a 380-page book, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gays in the 90s. The book became the blueprint for the Gay Agenda. The authors state:[12]

The gay revolution has failed…. What has gone wrong? And what can we do about it? This book is about hope and dread. It explores the dire necessity – and the real possibility – of reconciling America to its large, oppressed and inescapable minority: gay men and women. It proposes a practical agenda for bringing to a close, at long last, the seemingly permanent crisis of American homosexuality.

The agenda was aimed, among other things, at presenting homosexuality as a natural and normal variant of human sexuality. This would be achieved by:[13]

• Eliminating the idea that homosexuality is a sin.
• By arguing that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
• By proving that people are not recruited to be gay.

A great effort has been launched to desensitize the public regarding gays and gay rights. It is achieved by implementing The Strategy of ‘Waging Peace’: Eight Practical Principles for the Persuasion of Straights. These principles can be found on pages 172 to 191 in After the Ball.

It is of utmost importance to understand that this Agenda would be communicated largely through the media. This explains the intense media coverage this event, discussed in this letter, received, and it strengthens my conviction that it was an orchestrated smear campaign to further the Gay Agenda. Kirk and Madsen don’t mince words when they declare:[14]

We have in mind a strategy as calculated and powerful as that which gays are accused of pursuing by their enemies … It’s time to learn from Madison Avenue, to roll out the big guns. Gays must launch a large-scale campaign – we’ve called it the Waging Peace campaign – to reach straights through the mainstream media. We’re talking about propaganda.

The term ‘propaganda’ applies to any deliberate attempt to persuade the masses via public communications media. Such communication is everywhere, of course, being a mainstay of modern societies. Its function is not to perpetrate, but to propagate; that is, to spread new ideas and feelings (or reinforce old ones) which may themselves be either evil or good depending on their purpose and effect. The purpose and effect of pro-gay propaganda is to promote a climate of increased tolerance for homosexuals. And that we say is good.

I would like to point out four aspects from these eight principles, which are relevant to this complaint. The first is from Principle 3. Keep Talking. It is understood that mainstream values are embodied in public opinion and religious authority. With conservative churches rejecting homosexuality, they suggest two things need to be done:[15]

While public opinion is one important source of mainstream values, religious training in childhood is another. Yet two things can be done to confound the homohatred of the moderately religious.

First, gays can use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalization that ‘justify’ religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards. This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teaching. It also means exposing the inconsistency and hatred underlying antigay doctrines…

Second, gays can undermine the moral authority of homohating churches over less fervent adherents by portraying such institutions as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology. Against the atavistic tug of Old Time Religion one must set the mightier pull of Science and Public Opinion (the shield and sword of that accursed ‘secular humanism’). Such an ‘unholy’ alliance has already worked well in America against churches…. With enough open talk about the prevalence and acceptability of homosexuality, that alliance can work for gays.

Noteworthy is the fact that the liberal grouping within the DRC has been infiltrated and captured by the gay rights movement, and became the vehicle through which this principle is executed.

The second is from Principle 5. Portray Gays as Victims of Circumstance and Oppression, Not as Aggressive Challengers. Gays should be presented as victims in need of protection. Any organization such as e.g. North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) which advocates relationships between adults and children should be kept in the background as anything that would imply child molestation would not arouse sympathy. In their own words:[16]

It cannot go without saying, incidentally, that groups on the farthest margins of acceptability, such as NAMBLA, must play no part at all in such a campaign. Suspected child molesters will never look like victims.

This explains the irrational behavior of the gay rights activists towards pedophiles. However, pedophiles are not consumer objects to be used by the gay community to further their goals at the cost of pedophiles’ human rights.

Furthermore, the idea of a person being born gay should be propagated:

The mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference. The message must read: “As far as gays can tell, they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or white or black or bright or athletic. Nobody ever tricked or seduced them; they never made a choice, and are not morally blameworthy. What they do isn’t willfully contrary — it’s only natural for them. This twist of fate could as easily have happened to you!” [17]

They argue that, for all practical purposes, gays should be considered to have been born gay – even though sexual orientation, for most humans, seems to be the product of a complex interaction between innate predispositions and environmental factors during childhood and early adolescence. [18]

They knew a person is not born gay – last paragraph. This gives expression to the Hitler quote: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

The last Principle I want to emphasize is Principle 8: Make Victimizers Look Bad.[19]

The Object is to make homohating beliefs and actions look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from them. We also intend, by this tactic, to make the very expression of homohatred so discreditable that even Intransigents will eventually be silenced in public.

This principle explains the fierce attack on opponents, as it is evident in the events to be discussed.

This brings me to the first event. In this discussion the content of the complaint which Mr Pienaar lodged with the Commission, will be scrutinised.

Mr Pienaar’s Complaint

Mr Pienaar is a candidate for the ministry in the DRC and a member at the Blanco congregation in George. He is a self-professed gay man and gay rights activist. He founded Queers without Borders in 2017. This organisation consists of volunteers and is in affiliation with The Centre for Moral Leadership, University of Stellenbosch. The movement is a social pressure group that makes society aware of mainly LGBTQI+ issues, and who fights for and defends the rights of queer sexualities.

Mr Pienaar felt duty-bound to lodge a COMPLAINT[20] of hate speech against Dr Van Wyk, with the Commission’s Eastern Cape Provincial Office, after Dr Van Wyk responded to Rev Janse van Rensburg’s article.

Mr Pienaar begins his complaint with introductory remarks and outlines the background of his complaint. He explains that Dr Van Wyk made his statement publicly, and that it was supported by his supporters, that the statement was widely shared on Facebook, and commented on.

In addition, Mr Pienaar wrote, One of his [Dr. Van Wyk’s] supporters is a so called X-Homosexual, Mr. Andre Bekker. After Van Wyk’s public letter he [Mr. Bekker] wrote an OPEN LETTER to the writer of this complaint [Mr Pienaar] in which he confesses that he is a homosexual pedophile and that he was cured by God. He also suggests a comparison to homosexuality and pedophilia.

It is deplorable that Mr Pienaar can still, after 26 years of Democracy, refer to the author of this letter in a derogatory manner as a so-called X-Homosexual. This reflects something of the liberal grouping within the DRC’s failure to embrace ex-gays, and to show them compassion, care and respect, and to honour their dignity in line with the Season of Human Dignity, they so eagerly promote and defend. It emphasises their intolerance to diversity, ex-gays’ right to self-determination and their right to the highest attainable standard of health. It gives substance to my argument that Mr Pienaar is serving his own interest in pursuing the Gay Agenda and not justice for all. It does not seems like he believes his own organization’s slogan, an injustice to one, is an injustice to all.

False propaganda, that one is born Gay, contributes to homosexuals, who are converted through a religious experience, being exposed to gays and their supporters’ unloving actions and ridicule. It does not promote human dignity and respect, nor ex-gays rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It also hampers their right to freedom of opinion, expression and association. This is because, as was discussed in the Gay Agenda, the mere acknowledgment that an ex-gay exists, would mean that gays acknowledge that sexual orientation can change. By doing so, they will undermine their own Agenda. Something they need to take to heart, is what someone rightly said: Demands for tolerance by one group can never justify intolerance or ridicule of another.

Professor Diamond,[21] attached to the Department of Psychology at Utha University, researches the fluidity in sexual and gender expression among women and men. She believes that the fact must be accepted that a person’s sexuality can change during the course of his life, and says:[22]

It is time to just take the whole idea of sexuality as immutable, the born this way notion, and just come to a consensus as scientists and as legal scholars that we need to put it to rest. It’s unscientific, it’s unnecessary and it’s unjust. It doesn’t matter how we got to be this way. As a scientist, I think it’s one of the most fascinating questions out there and one that I will continue to investigate. As a lesbian and a progressive, I think it’s totally irrelevant and just politics.

What the gay community needs to make peace with, is the fact that God is able to transform gay people into new creations, and to give them a new identity in Christ, as I can TESTIFY.

Mr Pienaar also mentions that, He [Mr. Bekker] also suggests a comparison to homosexuality and pedophilia. This is a false accusation. Paragraph eight of my OPEN LETTER to Mr Pienaar refers to a link and not a comparison between homosexuality and pedophilia. This statement emphasizes Mr Pienaar’s malicious intent.

Homosexuality is a sexual gender orientation while pedophilia a sexual age orientation. Both are separate sexual orientations, which also has a link to each other. Soon more will be said about this differentiation and the link between the two.

My apparent comparison of homosexuality to pedophilia lead Mr Pienaar to conclude, This just more evident of the harm and confusion Van Wyk’s public opinion causes not only to people who do not support his viewpoint, but also to people who do. Mr Pienaar is misinformed. Having struggled with my sexual orientation for at least 34 years, I studied scientific literature and theological perspectives on this subject. I derived my opinions and conclusions from it long before I knew Dr Van Wyk, as this 2013 LETTER to the DRC proofs. Dr Van Wyk had no influence on my thinking regarding this matter.

With the foregoing clarified, let’s continue to examine the evidence more closely. The opening sentence of Dr Van Wyk’s article states the intent of his response, namely to have an open discussion about the General Synod’s 2016 decision on same-sex relationships. This came after Rev Janse van Rensburg made his personal conviction known which now was no longer in line with that of his denomination. Dr Van Wyk wrote, Brother Nelis Janse van Rensburg, I appreciate the honesty with which you, as chairperson of the Moderamen of the Dutch Reformed Church, make your views on same-sex relationships known. This paves the way for an open conversation on the reasons and implications of the General Synod 2016 decision.

He continues, your own point of view deviates from that [the General Synod 2016 decision]. And I do not hear that you base it on the Scriptures and the Confessions. You base it on your own assumption about God and what his will is for sexuality. I would like to say a few things about it for the sake of conversation.

Same-sex relationships are a thorny issue to discuss in a conversation, because it involves morality. To complicate the matter, Rev Janse van Rensburg and Dr Van Wyk does not hold the same views.

Rev Janse van Rensburg is convinced that sin should be measured by how we live, not by our sexual orientation. Sin is, among other things, when an act or action harms someone else, takes advantage of him, hurts him, exploits him, abuses him and thus affects one’s dignity.

For Dr Van Wyk, sin is to transgress God’s law and living in His world as if God does not exist.

Rev Janse van Rensburg’s view of sin is described on a human level, while Dr Van Wyk sees sin as directly related to a person’s relationship with God.

Our thinking about sexual orientation necessitates engagement with science, therefore it is beneficial to understand something very basic about the interaction between science and morality. Dr Satinover, a psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and physicist explains: [23]

Science – with its rigorous need to restrict itself to data, logic, mathematical precision, and probabilistic conclusions – can say nothing about morality. For morals have to do with how things should be, whereas science can at best tell us how things are.

Furthermore, once we begin to consider how things should be, we find ourselves in the domain of religion. Notwithstanding the fuzzy modern impression that morality can be contrived apart from transcendent absolutes, religion is the originator of all morality. As Fyodor Dostoyevsky in “The Brothers Karamazov” had his most reflective character observed, “Without God, all things are permissible.”

There are further more two existing world views regarding the understanding of and engagement with sexual orientation, which is associated with a person’s view on morality and doctrine. The first focuses on the person’s psychological experience which leads to sexual orientation being a social construct and the second on a person’s biological reality. Rev Janse van Rensberg and the liberal grouping in the DRC associates with the first and Dr Van Wyk and the conservative grouping with the second. Being so, an overview of these two World Views is in order.

Dr. Nicolosi, a clinical psychologist contrasts these two World Views with each other:[24]

‘It is our feelings and desires that tell us who we really are.’ These words summarize the foundational assumption of the gay and transgender movement.

According to this philosophy, if a woman says she feels like a man inside, then she must be a man, and we must begin to address her as ‘he.’ Similarly, if a man feels homosexually attracted, then he must be gay. Destiny has simply created such people to be different, and we must celebrate that differentness and never question it.

But there is a different worldview, supported by millennia of tradition as well as decades of clinical observation that paints a very different picture. Our bodies tell us who we are….

The Judeo-Christian concept of humanity and traditional psychodynamic psychology share the same understanding: the concept that human nature is supposed to ‘function according to its design.’ Traditional psychology and the Judeo-Christian worldview both envision humankind as part of a universal heterosexual natural order, where some people will always struggle with same-sex attraction (SSA), but SSA is not intrinsic to who they are. In fact, many such men will heed the call to ‘come back home’ to their true nature – the nature made plain to them by their biological design.

In the following example Dr Van Wyk emphasizes the moral implication sexual orientation holds for religious communities. As would be discussed below, there is ample proof to suggest that pedophilia should be treated as any other sexual orientation. Being the case, Dr Van Wyk states, One should therefore describe pedophilia then also as a good gift from God. Something that can be difficult to do in a faith community. Rev Janse van Rensburg has set the stage for this open conversation, when he wrote in his article, For homosexual people to thrive, their sexuality must, in my view, be considered equivalent to heterosexuality. The same standards and values regarding “leer en lewe” must apply to all persons, regardless of their sexual orientation.

In lodging his complaint, Mr Pienaar conveniently ignored the fact that both Rev Janse van Rensburg and Dr Van Wyk equally exercised their rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as their rights to freedom of opinion, expression and association, and that, all within the boundaries of the Constitution.

Two statements of particular importance gave rise to Mr Pienaar’s complaint. In his article Rev Janse van Rensburg made the statement, “I am convinced that sexual orientation is a good gift from God that we may receive with gratitude and cherish with care.”

Dr van Wyk’s response caused the uproar, when he stated in his article, “If you are still convinced that sexual orientation is a gift from God, you will have to also accept pedophilia – sexual attraction to children – in a similar way.”

As a result of the later statement, Mr Pienaar wrote, He [Dr Van Wyk] argues that it is difficult and indeed not really possible to see sexual orientation as a gift from God. Should it be considered in such a way, then, if the Church wants to be consistent it will later have to accept pedophilia as just another sexual orientation as well. It is here where he crosses the line and makes himself guilty of hate speech by making a moral comparison between same-sex relationships and pedophilia.

It is significant that a close examination of Dr Van Wyk’s article, reveals no evidence of any comparison, let alone a moral comparison, made between same-sex relationships and pedophilia.

I am drawing the Commissions’ attention to the subtle twist Mr Pienaar made to his conclusion, and in so doing, he distorted the statement Dr Van Wyk made. Mr Pienaar starts off with the true information as it is derived from Dr Van Wyk’s article. It then seems like he concludes that Dr Van Wyk crosses the line and makes himself guilty of hate speech, based on the given information, but not so. He changes the content of his conclusion to mean something Dr Van Wyk never intended.

Mr Pienaar took the generic term Sexual Orientation and substituted it with same-sex relationship, and in so doing he laid words in Dr Van Wyk’s mouth he never said. In Dr Van Wyk’s response, he speaks generically about sexual orientation, as was Rev Janse van Rensburg. This is clear from the context in which this term is used in both articles. In so doing it is used as an umbrella term, including all possible sexual orientations.

Dr Van Wyk confirms this conclusion in a news report[25] on October 7, 2018,

I did not draw a comparison between same-sex relationships and pedophilia. I said if all sexual orientations are a gift from God, like Rev. Nelis Janse van Rensburg maintains, he had to include all sexual orientations, such as pedophilia, to be consistent in his argument.

I only pointed out his erroneous logic. It is clear from my letter that I did not refer to homosexual orientation as such.

From a Human Rights perspective, Dr Van Wyk in effect directed Rev Janse van Rensburg’s attention to the fact, that if he accepts sexual orientation in general as a gift from God, he cannot exclude pedophilia, as a specific sexual age orientation from that gift. In this statement a pedophile’s rights to equality and non-discrimination is taken into account. Dr Van Wyk cautions Rev Janse van Rensburg unwittingly, to adhere to the requirements of the South African Bill of Rights.

Mr Pienaar goes further, by attaching a meaning to pedophilia, which Dr Van Wyk never expressed. I will first examine Dr Van Wyk’s stated understanding of pedophilia, and then Mr Pienaar’s version.

Dr Van Wyk, in his response, clearly stated in which sense he understood the term pedophilia: sexual attraction to children. His next sentence clarifies it further. He writes, Pedophilia is currently described as a sexual orientation by psychologists. In other words, his understanding of pedophilia is, it is a variation in sexual orientation regarding age.

In spite of the STATEMENT[26] (notably bias towards Mr Pienaar’s and the liberal grouping’s views) by The Psychological Society of South Africa, Mr Pienaar could have taken in account peer reviewed scientific data, which supports Dr Van Wyk’s view, that pedophilia is a sexual orientation. It is not hidden information. However it seems like it was more important for Mr Pienaar to be selective and to take advantage of this opportunity to further his gay activism and politics. In so doing he was abusing pedophiles and infringing on their Constitutional Rights. It also magnifies his pedophobia.

One such source of information he could have used, is a book written by world renown academic and researcher, Dr Michael Seto, Pedophilia and Sexual Offending against Children, Second Edition (2018). This book is published and distributed by the American Psychological Association, which emphasizes its credibility. Dr Seto is well qualified to be an authority on this subject matter.

Of Dr Seto it is said, [He] is a Canadian forensic psychologist, sexologist, and author. He is director of Forensic Rehabilitation Research at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, where he says his research focuses on pedophilia, sexual offenses committed against children, child pornography, risk assessment, offenders with mental disorders, psychopathy, and program evaluation.[27]

He is editor in chief of Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, the official journal of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, and an associate editor of the Archives of Sexual Behavior, the official journal of the International Academy of Sex Research. He also serves on the editorial board for the journal Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society, as well as the Journal of Sex Research. He is an associate professor at the University of Toronto and holds cross-appointments to Ryerson University, Carleton University, and the University of Ottawa.[28]

Dr Seto explains[29] that, pedophilia can be understood as a variation in sexual orientation regarding age, just as hetero-, bi- or homosexuality are variations in sexual orientation regarding gender. This suggests pedophilia may manifest not only in sexual interest in children but also in sexual identity (how one labels and defines one’s sexuality), romantic attractions, and social behaviour. It is also suggests that pedophilia emerges early in adolescence, with the onset of puberty, and is stable over time.

Historically sexual orientation was understood as a sexual attraction of one adult towards another. The focus was on the gender of the people involved. So for example, a man who is attracted to a woman is referred to as heterosexual. ʼn Man who is attracted to ʼn man is referred to as homosexual, and a man who is attracted to a man and a woman, is referred to as bisexual. Dr Seto regards it as variations in sexual orientation regarding gender. [30]

Traditionally sexual attraction of an adult to a toddler, a prepubescent, or pubescent would not have been considered a sexual orientation. However, research suggests that this narrow view, did not do justice to the complexity of sexual orientation. It reveals that not all individuals have a preferred sexual/romantic attraction to an adult. Dr Seto notes,[31]

We have an incomplete understanding of how human sexuality is oriented if we focus only on gender as the important dimension; there are other dimensions to consider, of which age is important as well.

Dr Jahnke observes,[32] Pedophilia, that is, a sexual attraction to prepubescent children, has drawn a lot of scientific attention in recent years. Consequently, our understanding of this particular sexual makeup has evolved rapidly. First, the idea that pedophilia may be best understood as a sexual orientation, which, akin to homo- or heterosexuality, starts early and remains stable over the course of life, is now gaining acceptance amongst the scientific community.

Dr Seto, in his 2017 article, The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias,[33] suggests a helpful definition of sexual orientation, which more fully addresses the complexity of human sexuality:

In this article, I more broadly define sexual orientation as a stable tendency to preferentially orient—in terms of attention, interest, attraction, and genital arousal—to particular classes of sexual stimuli (see also Chivers, 2015; Sell, 1997). If we accept this broader definition, then we can imagine that individuals actually have multiple sexual orientations rather than a single sexual orientation, corresponding to their sexual preferences along a variety of different dimensions, including age.

Age is the second most studied target variation after gender. After using the same criteria, used to determine sexual gender orientation, Dr Seto concludes:[34]

Pedophilia can be viewed as a sexual age orientation based on the more limited evidence available regarding its age of onset, associations with sexual and romantic behavior, and stability over time. Though there are clearly differences in some respects, there are also striking similarities in the research literature on pedophilia.

Grundmann et al. conducted a study[35] examining self-reported arousal to sexual fantasies involving children in a clinical sample of pedo-/hebephiles. In Study 1, retrospective self-reports on the age of onset and duration of sexual interest in minors were examined. In Study 2, the stability and variability of self-reported arousal to sexual fantasies involving children were evaluated prospectively. They conclude that the results support the conceptualization of pedo-/hebephilia as a sexual age orientation in men.

Based on findings from retrospective interviews, Freund and Kuban[36] presumed sexual gender orientation and sexual age orientation to manifest in temporal succession during puberty, with gender orientation manifesting first. It was found that in a substantial proportion of pedophiles the occurrence of age orientation is predetermined at a very early developmental phase. A further finding is that at least in gynophiles the erotic appeal of children of the preferred sex ceases by about the time of puberty. This may be an indication that there exists a process of active devaluation of the nonpreferred age bracket, culminating at puberty.

Money[37] refers to the possible age variations to which a person may feel attracted to, as Chronophilias. Dr Seto uses the following categories for variations in sexual age orientation.[38]

The youngest category is nepiophilia, referring to a rare preference for infants or toddlers. It is followed by pedophilia, referring to a preference for prepubescent children. Hereafter follows hebephilia, referring to a preference for pubescent children and ephebophilia, a preference for sexually maturing but not yet mature adolescents. This is followed by teleiophilia, referring to the species-typical sexual interest in young adults – typical 20-30, mesiophilia, a sexual interest in middle-aged persons – typical 40-50, and gerontophilia, a sexual interest in elderly persons – typically 60 and older.

From a sexology perspective, what is to be understood about sexual orientation, is that people have both a sexual gender orientation and a sexual age orientation.[39]

To illustrate. Having same-sex attraction (being homosexual) is a person’s sexual gender orientation, while being attracted to a prepubescent child (pedophilia) is a person’s sexual age orientation. This person’s sexual orientations could be referred to as a homosexual pedophile.

Of interest is that any gender orientation can combine with any age orientation, to present a person’s sexual orientations. In general a person does not choose his sexual orientations.

This brings me to Mr Pienaar’s version. He first distorts Dr Van Wyk’s stated understanding of pedophilia as being a sexual age orientation, by stating as a fact, as you know pedophilia is considered a pathology. Again, he is advancing his political agenda, to the detriment of pedophiles.

A careful reading of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM5),[40] reveals that a distinction is made between a pedophilic orientation (sexual interest) and a pedophilic disorder.

A person has a pedophilic orientation (sexual interest) when he has a longstanding attraction to prepuberal children BUT does not wish to act on them AND does not feel great distress about it AND has never sexually interacted with prepuberal children.

In other words, a person has a pedophilic orientation (sexual interest) when he merely has those feelings, but they do not worry him or cause psychosocial problems, nor have the feelings led to sexual interaction with prepuberal children. This is not considered a disorder.

A person has a pedophilic disorder when he

• does feel sexually attracted to prepuberal children AND has sexually interacted with them, OR
• has a longstanding attraction to prepuberal children, AND has not sexually interacted with them BUT feels distress about the feelings anyway

In other words, a pedophilic disorder exists when the feelings cause distress/psychosocial problems, or when sexual interaction has occurred.

Psychology Today SA summarizes it as follows:[41] For the condition [pedophilic disorder] to be diagnosed, an individual must either act on their sexual urges or experience significant distress or interpersonal difficulty as a result of their urges or fantasies. Without these two criteria, a person may have a pedophilic sexual orientation but not pedophilic disorder.

An observation deserves mentioning. The fact that the DSM-5 makes a distinction between a pedophilic orientation and a disorder based on the fact that a person acts on his attractions or not, makes logically no sense. The fact that a person would act on his attractions cannot change the reality that a person has a sexual age orientation to a prepuberal child. One could rather see it as a kind of confirmation that he has such an orientation, which caused him to commit a crime. The same irrationality is also true if he were to experience distress or psychosocial problems. It rather confirms his orientation and the distress is as a result of his orientation. The DSM-5 thus contributes to the stigmatization of pedophiles.

Pedophilic disorder is thus seen as a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12, criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13. This of course conflates attractions to prepubescent (pedophilia) and pubescent (hebephilia) minors, another shortcoming of the DSM-5.

The DSM-5 is also inconsistent in nature, considering the fact that neither nepiophila nor hebephilia are deemed to be disorders, yet both, like pedophilia includes minors.

A person must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilic disorder.

The DSM-5 requires that the gender of the sexual object to which one feels attracted, must be specified as male, female or both sexes, i.e. a pedophile can therefore have a gender orientation of heterosexuality, homosexuality or bi-sexuality. This is a clear link between homosexuality and pedophilia.

A further requirement is to clarify whether the prepubescent, to whom a person is attracted to, is a family member. This brings the aspect of incest to the fore.

A pedophile can be of the exclusive type, whereas the individual is only attracted to children, the nonexclusive type, whereas the individual is attracted to children in addition to mature individuals or his attractions could be limited to incest.

At the time of this event Mr. Neels Jackson made a big fuss in Kerkbode about the fact that the American Psychiatric Association issued a STATEMENT[42] in 2013, saying that they made a mistake to describe pedophilia as a sexual orientation, and that the wording in the online edition and the following printed editions of the DSM-5 will be corrected, and will in future read sexual interest. What should be noted, however, is that the wording is changed, NOT because new scientific data had emerged, proving that pedophilia is not a sexual orientation, but because the public has made largescale objection to the use of the word orientation. It was a diplomatic maneuver, to keep the public at peace, who was not yet desensitized enough and ready to accept pedophilia as a sexual orientation. Dr Berlin’s article, Pedophilia and DSM-5: The Importance of Clearly Defining the Nature of a Pedophilic Disorder is informative in this regard.

Mr Pienaar then further distorts Dr Van Wyk’s stated understanding of pedophilia as being a sexual age orientation, by stating as a fact, you know pedophilia is considered a criminal act. Dr Jahnke has this to say,[43] There is an emerging consensus among researchers that having pedophilic interests is not synonymous with child sexual abuse or other amoral behavior. Nevertheless, misconceptions about pedophilia are highly prevalent among the general public and mental health practitioners.

In popular usage, the word pedophilia is often applied to any sexual interest in children or the act of child sexual abuse. This use conflates the sexual attraction to prepubescent children with the act of child sexual abuse and fails to distinguish between attractions to prepubescent and pubescent or post-pubescent minors. Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided, because although some people who commit child sexual abuse are pedophiles, child sexual abuse offenders are not pedophiles unless they have a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children, and some pedophiles do not molest children.[44]

Separating behavior from attraction is essential. It is generally assumed that those who commit child sexual abuse are pedophiles by extension; contrary to this belief, they often are not.[45] In most samples, they make up the sizable minority, not majority, of offenders.[46] Anecdotal evidence suggests that many pedophiles do not act sexually with children or adolescents, but it is not known how many do not.[47] Bailey, Bernhard, & Hsu (2016) found that of the 1,102 pedophiles they surveyed, 85% had never been arrested for or convicted of sexual offenses, though they also noted the figure may have been elevated due to potential unknown offenses.[48]

A well-known South African clinical sexologist, Dr Marlene Wasserman (Dr Eve), who is influential and respected in her field, and represents South Africa in international forums,[49] explains, “There’s still confusion on what the difference between a paedophiliac and a child sex offender is. She explained paedophilia was a sexual orientation and those with paedophilia disorders have a mental disorder in which they cannot control their urges to have sexual relations with minors.[50] The big differential between a pedophile and someone who has a pedophilic disorder is that a pedophile is very intent on not acting out sexually. Pedophiles are aware that they have what’s called sexual orientation.[51]

To return now to Mr Pienaar’s distorted version of Dr Van Wyk’s statement, it is revealing to note the complexity of Mr Pienaar’s statement, on which he based his complaint.

He starts of by limiting the generic use of the term sexual orientation, as it was used by both Rev Janse van Rensburg and Dr van Wyk, to only same-sex relationships.

Then he argues that Dr van Wyk made a moral comparison between same-sex relationships (which are homosexual relationships, a sexual gender orientation. However, he does not state which sexual age orientation he refers to) and pedophilia (here he singles out one of the seven possible sexual age orientations. However, he does not state which sexual gender orientation he refers to).

The logical conclusion a person derives from this, is that Mr Pienaar argues that Dr Van Wyk morally compared all the possible homosexual orientations (excluding pedophilia), with pedophilia, which again includes all heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual persons who have a preference for prepubescents.

This immediately raises the question why Mr Pienaar does not exclude nepiophilia, and hebephilia, both sexual age orientations involving minors, with pedophilia. Is he so desperate to nail pedophiles?

His argument marginalises heterosexual, homosexual and bi-sexual persons, who have a sexual preference for prepubescents (pedophiles), and portrays such persons’ sexual orientations as inferior to that of persons who have any other homosexual orientation. This is to infringe on a pedophiles rights to equality and non-discrimination, to unfairly discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation.

A further conclusion is that he argues that the above comparison, constitutes hate speech against people in homosexual relationships.

In Mr Pienaar’s reasoning, a pedophile becomes an object of hate against which other sexual orientations are measured, to establish if hate speech has been committed. This reduces a pedophile to a second-grade citizen, disrespecting him and infringing on his right to dignity.

Commentary: Mr Pienaar, without compassion, maliciously discredited pedophiles, by calling them disordered and criminals. He seems to forget that not so long ago, homosexuality was deemed a paraphilia and classified as a disorder. He needs to be reminded that homosexuality was not removed from the DSM because of scientific justification, but because of political interference and pressure.[52],[53] He is also oblivious to the fact that homosexuality was, until very recently criminalized in South Africa.[54]

His politics made him give a distorted view of pedophilia, so he could dissociate from anything that might suggests child molestation in the minds of the general public, in line with the Gay Agenda. It was more important for him to gain their sympathy than to be humane. He could not even be honest enough to acknowledge that homosexuals can also be pedophiles.

He willfully and deceitfully created a scenario to try and portray hate speech. By so doing, he unashamedly abused the Commission and the judiciary to try and silence his opponents.

Mr Pienaar claims rights for himself and those he advocates for, but through pedophobic behaviour, showed no respect to pedophiles; he blatantly infringed on their right to dignity, and unfairly discriminated against them. Neither did it concern him that his actions caused increased hatred and deepened stigma. He is too short sited to grant pedophiles the same rights he is fighting for.

Mr Pienaar should consider having the same integrity as the honest gay researcher and sexologist, Dr Cantor,[55]

Speaking as a gay man. I believe we SHOULD include the P [for pedophilia in LGBTQ+]. To do otherwise is to betray the principles that give us our rights.

Yes, I know. We want not to be discriminated against for sex/gender attractions we did not pic, but we want to discriminate against others for the sex/gender attractions they did not pic.

Before I briefly discuss the second incident, in the words of Mr Pienaar himself, at the close of his complaint, I urge the commission to protect our society of people like Mr Pienaar, who make themselves guilty of opinions and arguments that cause harm and discriminate against our lands diverse and beautiful people.

Theologians’ Press Release

On September 28, 2018, a PRESS RELEASE[56] was published in Kerkbode. Before it was published, it had to be signed by like-minded ones. This procedure was seemingly COORDINATED by Prof Charlene van der Walt, Dr Nadia Marais and Prof Alphonso Groenewald. It was eventually signed by 61 pedophobic DRC members, who are ministers, and lecturers. They are all associated with the liberal grouping within the DRC. The signatories’ names appear at the bottom of the Press Release.

The statement was made because they believe that the conversation in the DRC regarding samesex relationships came to a crossroads. Following is the complete statement translated into English.

DRC THEOLOGINS RESPOND

As DRC members, those who are legally admitted to the ministry, ministers and lecturers who engage full-time in the academics, theology and training of prospective ministers and religious leaders, we are concerned to read and hear, how from certain ecclesiastical ranks, statements are made with great confidence about LGBTQI + persons and same-sex relationships, in the name of ‘theology’.

We find this particularly strange because we were under the impression that the Dutch Reformed Church – within the broader Dutch Reformed Church family, was already on a journey with the Season of Human Dignity sins 2013 -, which stipulates that all discussions regarding so-called “same-sex relationships” would henceforth be discussed within the framework of a number of values. The spirit of the Season would find expression in a life-giving vocabulary that would give meaning to values such as compassion, care, respect and a willingness not to condemn what is unknown from the outset, but rather to listen with care and to compassionately create space for more to be included.

At present, however, this is not happening. There is a marked dehumanization of the other by the use of fear-driven normative rhetoric, especially when willful and indefensible links are drawn between same-sex relationships, pedophilia and bestiality. Statements in the media comparing consensual adult relationships between people of the same sex to the life-depriving and harmful practices of pedophilia and bestiality are irresponsible and simply unacceptable.

As DRC theologians, we reject this way of talking and thinking about LGBTQI + persons, not only as flagrant and violent, but also as theologically unjustifiable.

The academic recklessness of this kind of rhetoric does not belong to any respected and selfrespecting theologian of the Dutch Reformed Church. In fact, these deliberate attempts to create suspicion and division could perhaps even be legally investigated within the guidelines of the Dutch Reformed Church.

Although ecclesiastical discussion spaces regarding sexual diversity are important and necessary – and often also created and maintained with great patience and careful caution – we have reached a point in this conversation where we need to position ourselves unequivocally by declaring that we distance ourselves collectively from these kinds of statements made by a few church leaders in the media. We reject it in the strongest possible terms. We realize that – by not doing so, by not taking a stance – we could create the false impression that this kind of use of language and discourse is acceptable within theological circles.

We are not prepared to accept that a next generation of theologians and ministers might think it is okay to talk about people like that, as if they have the right and ability to determine who can be considered worthy of being a human, or to make decisions on behalf of people. This confident point of departure and complacent leadership style have led us in dubious, and even sinful, theological paths in our recent past.

The direct consequence of this was that DRC theologians theologically justified apartheid.

We, from theological ranks, are also not prepared to leave the impression that this kind of dealing with the Bible, which expresses itself in taking a stance in this complacent manner, is in order. Such selective use of Scripture has cost the Dutch Reformed Church dearly in the past.

We are individually and collectively facing the same crossroads again. Our Season of Human Dignity urges each of us to acknowledge and respect the defenceless humanity (weerlose menslikheid) of others. Our theological integrity requires that we make it clear that hate speech is unjustifiable, and should even lead to judicial inquiry. Those who are guilty of this do not speak on our behalf and are contrary to the values and pursuits of the Season of Human Dignity.

Sol iustitiae illustra nos. (May the Sun of Righteousness Enlighten Us)

28 September 2018

Commentary: This is a typical propaganda Statement in line with the Gay Agenda, with the media as the channel for propaganda. Here again pedophiles are abused to the advantage of pedophobes.

The Implementation of Principle 3. Keep Talking, aims at making the opponents’ theological stance suspect.

They also make use of Principle 8: Make Victimizers Look Bad to discredit Dr van Wyk, though his name is not mentioned, everybody knows who they are talking about.

It is part of an orchestrated campaign, using the same phrases and reasoning as in Mr Pienaar’s complaint. It also assumes hate speech, like Mr Pienaar and Mr Jackson, the editor of Kerkbode has done, Our theological integrity requires that we make it clear that hate speech is unjustifiable, and should even lead to judicial inquiry. They also create the illusion that their opponents cannot defend their stance, by stating, indefensible links are drawn between same-sex relationships, [and] pedophilia.” Note again the shift in focus from the generic use of sexual orientation to the specific focus on same-sex relationships, just as Mr Pienaar did. They also imply Mr Pienaar’s distorted version of pedophilia being a disorder and criminal in nature, disregarding the fact that Dr Van Wyk sees pedophilia as a variation in sexual age orientation.

Of very great concern is the wording used in the following sentence: There is a marked dehumanization of the other by the use of fear-driven normative rhetoric, especially when wilful and indefensible links are drawn between same-sex relationships, pedophilia and bestiality.

What these theologians are saying is that pedophiles are lesser/something else than human beings. That is the only way a homosexual person can be dehumanized in this context. It infringes on pedophiles right to respect and dignity.

Reading the following sentence with the previous one brings a person to the startling realization that in the minds of these theologians a pedophile is not included in their thinking about the Season of Human Dignity. It states, The spirit of the Season would find expression in a life-giving vocabulary that would give meaning to values such as compassion, care, respect and a willingness not to condemn what is unknown from the outset, but rather to listen with care and to compassionately create space for more to be included. At present, however, this is not happening.

The next sentence is none the better, Statements in the media comparing consensual adult relationships between people of the same sex to the life-depriving and harmful practices of pedophilia and bestiality are irresponsible and simply unacceptable.

It emphasizes the disturbing fact, that the compilers and signatories of this Statement do not regard pedophiles as humans or people with dignity, not even those who are attracted to the same sex. Rather, they are caricatured as hate objects, who are lesser than human beings, against which adult same-sex relationships are weighed. It encourages hatred against and stigmatization of pedophiles.

This is not only disrespectful but an infringement on the dignity of a pedophile. It is a violation of a pedophile’s right to equality and non-discrimination. Imagine how different it would have been, if these pedophobes had willingness not to condemn what is unknown from the outset, but rather listened with care and compassionately created space for more to be included.

It is shameful, and a disgrace that these theologians themselves don’t honour the 2013 and 2016 Synod decisions regarding the Season of Human Dignity themselves, but demands it from others. In their own words they need to address themselves, we can’t talk about people like this, as if [we] have the right and ability to determine who can be considered worthy of being a human. Those who are guilty of this, act contrary to the values and pursuits of the Season of Human Dignity.

The compilers and signatories of this Statement need to give serious thought to their own reprimand, Our Season of Human Dignity urges each of us to acknowledge and respect the defenceless humanity (weerlose menslikheid) of others.

A reminder from President Mandela, nails it for the pro-gay supporters:[57] For to be free is not merely to cast off one’s chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.

I will now continue to briefly discuss the last event. It is a statement made by a group of pedophobic ministers associated with the liberal grouping within the DRC.

Statement by DRC Ministers

Dr André Bartlett and Dr André Agenbag took the initiative to distribute an EMAIL with an attachment HOU BY WAARDES VAN SEISOEN VAN MENSWAARDIGHEID, VRA PREDIKANTE [58], and eventually recruited 175 pedophobic ministerial colleagues, to sign it in solidarity with them. This statement was published October 2, 2018 in Kerkbode with the names of the recruited pedophobes written underneath. It ends thereafter with, Other ministers who wish to identify with this can contact Dr André Bartlett at andre.bartlett@up.ac.za. Following is the complete statement translated into English.

KEEP TO THE VALUES OF SEASON OF HUMAN DIGNITY, ASK MINISTERS

We are a group of ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church who over the last number of years have strongly identified with the values of the Season of Human Dignity (listening, respect, love and embracing) and also with the commitment of the General Synod of 2013 to deal with same-sex relationships in the light of these values.

In light of this, we have taken note with dismay of conversations on especially the social media, in which relationships of love and fidelity between people of the same sex are judged on the same level as matters such as pedophilia and bestiality. We believe that such utterances further deepen and promote injustice and discrimination against persons with same-sex orientation. Not only is this contrary to the recognition of persons’ human dignity, but in our opinion it is contrary to the gospel.

We realize that there are serious differences of opinion and divergent views in the Church about same-sex relationships and that they must therefore be handled with great care and sensitivity. These kind of statements referred to above do not, in our opinion, meet this requirement, but rather contribute to greater polarization and division within church ranks.

We urge the leadership of the Dutch Reformed Church to distance themselves unequivocally from these hurtful statements and to confirm that they are still committed to the values of the Season of Human Dignity in this matter as well.

Regardless of the different views on same-sex relationships, we believe that the values of the Season of Human Dignity have the following implications:

• Love: that one watches over hurtful utterances and actions that jeopardize the dignity of people, and strives for all utterances and actions to bear witness to the principle of love;
• Listen: that not only are people talked about when it comes to their life situation, but that they are involved as far as possible as equal partakers in the conversation;
• Respect: that all people are treated with great respect and that what is said about people will testify to respect for their humanity;
• Embrace: to guard against any utterances and actions that may create an impression that people are excluded from full membership of the Dutch Reformed Church on the basis of their sexual orientation.

We re-commit to these values, also to the way we discuss difficult issues with each other in the Church. In light of this, we regret that people in the current conversation are being made suspicious and their views are distorted in an unacceptable manner.

Commentary: In line with the Gay Agenda, here again pedophiles are used as objects to accomplish the pedophobes’ political agenda.

The content confirms that it is an orchestrated campaign, using the same phrases and reasoning as used by Mr Pienaar, with the focus on same-sex relationships, and pedophilia being something bad.

Again the emphasised portions in the statement above dehumanizes pedophiles and alludes to the disrespect these pedophobic ministers have towards them. They are infringing on pedophiles’ dignity and violates their right to equality and non-discrimination.

The compilers of this statement incite and encourage unfair discrimination against pedophiles, and deepen and promote hatred and stigma towards them.

It is also observed that pedophiles are excluded in the thinking of these ministers from the Season of Human Dignity. In this way their own actions contradict their utterances. If they are serious and not playing politics, they will have to apply the values of the Season, set out above under the four points, Love, Listen, Respect, and Embrace, to pedophiles.

Mr Mandela has a word for these pedophobes:[59] It is not our diversity which divides us; it is not our ethnicity, or religion or culture that divides us. Since we have achieved our freedom, there can only be one division amongst us: between those who cherish democracy and those who do not.

Conclusion

The Commission must take in consideration that this intense public media attack, that lasted more than a month, has largely contributed to a further deepening of the stigma, which is already clinging to pedophiles who are at the furthers fringes of society. The common stereotypes that they are dangerous and criminal have been further reinforced. It provides impetus for further marginalization, isolation, pain, suffering, fear and anxiety. They are forced to stay “in the closet”, which in turn leads to them not reaching out to much-needed professional help. This in turn increases the risk of children being harmed. The liberal grouping within the DRC is complicit in all of this.

Unfair discrimination based on sexual orientation was incited and promoted, and pedophiles dignity was violated. It is disgraceful that it has been committed by the gay rights activists within the DRC’s liberal grouping. The same people that are fighting for their rights has no respect for other sexual minority’s rights. Instead of showing compassion, they abused the situation. This loveless, unconstitutional treatment of pedophiles should be an embarrassment to the DRC, as these actions run counter to its own proposed and accepted values, as contained in the Season of Human Dignity, with which it aligns itself, and prides themselves off.

It is VOTVA’s wish that the DRC’s leadership should be held accountable for the actions of its highprofile members and take ownership of the injustice done to pedophiles. Accountability should be proportionate to the seriousness of the violation, therefore, the minimum that could be required is that the leadership, in the spirit of the Season of Human Dignity, offers pedophiles an appropriate public apology, in Kerkbode and the mainstream media, in which these injustices were committed. At the same time a written undertaking should be given to VOTVA, in which the leadership commits itself to rectify these injustices within the denomination, detailing how it will be done.

Better than any others, the gay rights activists know what marginalised sexual minority’s experience, yet this painful knowledge and their own experiences could not move them to compassion nor selfrestrain, in their power hunger pursuit for their own selfish goals. From 2013 the church also had in place the Season of Human Dignity, to which they recommitted itself again at the 2016 General Synod meeting, to continue to respect all human beings and acknowledge their inherent dignity. Although these gay rights pedophobes claim the benefits of it for themselves, they do not have the integrity to afford it to others. The church was also given an opportunity to acknowledge and rectify its misconduct, but had no desire to do so. In my estimate the foregoing are aggravating circumstances. I therefore request the Commission to consider a fine it deems fit, as a further effective, adequate and appropriate remedy. The proceeds of the fine should go to the organization, Freedom Of Religion SA.

I am looking forward hearing from your office soon.

Kind Regards

André Bekker

Chief Executive Officer

Footnotes

[1] Gesprek Op Sosiale Media Oor Selfdegeslag Verhoudings, http://kerkbode.christians.co.za/2018/09/29/gesprek-opsosiale-media-oor-selfdegeslag-verhoudings/.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Van Wyk, C, Simpson N, (2016), Loop Saam: Ontwikkel ’n gemeenskap van volhoubare vriendskappe, Bybelkor.

[4] Kerkbode is the official newspaper of the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa https://kerkbode.christians.co.za/.

[5] Nuwe storm in NG Kerk oor homoseksualiteit, https://voertaal.nu/nuwe-storm-in-ng-kerk-oor-homoseksualiteit/.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Jana Marx reports on this article in Beeld, September 17, 2018, DS. NELIS: SEKSUELE ORIËNTASIE ’N GAWE VAN GOD, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/ds-nelis-seksuele-orientasie-n-gawe-van-god-20180917.

Jean Oosthuizen discuss this article in Voertaal, September 19, 2018, Nuwe storm in NG Kerk oor homoseksualiteit, https://voertaal.nu/nuwe-storm-in-ng-kerk-oor-homoseksualiteit/.

Werner Beukes discuss this article in Netwerk24, September 20, 2018, Konflik wat gay-gesprekke in kerk uitlok, onafwendbaar, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/konflik-wat-gay-gesprekke-in-kerk-uitlokonafwendbaar-20180920.

Johan Eybers discuss this article in Raport, September 23, 2018, Eers Gays, dan ook pedofiele, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/eers-gays-dan-ook-pedofiele-20180922.

Jean Oosthuizen discuss it again in another article in Voertaal, October 3, 2018, Storm woed in NG Kerk na pedofieluitlatings, https://voertaal.nu/storm-woed-in-ng-kerk-na-pedofieluitlatings/.

Jana Marx discuss it yet again in Netwerk24, October 4, 2018, ‘Geen finale antwoorde in gay-debat’, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/geen-finale-antwoorde-in-gay-debat-20181003.

Jana Marx write yet another article in Netwerk24, October 4, 2018, ‘Prima Facie-Saak’ teen kerkman oor pedofilie, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/prima-facie-saak-teen-kerkman-oor-pedofilie-20181004.

[8] Eers gays, dan ook pedofiele, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/eers-gays-dan-ook-pedofiele20180922

[9] Sorba, R, 2007. The ‘Born Gay’ Hoax. Wilmington De: Ryan Sorba Inc. p. 28-36.

[10] Suspect classification, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspect_classification.

[11] Kirk, M. & Madsen, H. 1989. After the Ball: How America will conquer its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90’s. New Yourk: USA. Doubleday, p.163.

[12] Ibid. p. iii.

[13] Ibid. p. 26-45.

[14] Ibid, p. 161-162.

[15] Ibid. p. 179.

[16] Ibid. p. 184

[17] The Overhauling of Straight America: Waging Peace, Part Two, Marshall K. Kirk & Erastes Pill, Guide Magazine, November 1987.

[18] After the Ball: How America will conquer its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90’s, 184-185.

[19] Ibid, p. 189.

[20] Jana Marx write yet another article in Netwerk24, October 4, 2018, ‘Prima Facie-Saak’ Teen Kerkman Oor Pedofilie, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/prima-facie-saak-teen-kerkman-oor-pedofilie-20181004.

Jana Marx writes an article in Netwerk24, October 7, 2019, Dominee van haatspraak aangekla oor pedofilie-uitsprake, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/dominee-van-haatspraak-aangekla-oor-pedofilie-uitsprake20191007.

[21] Lisa Diamond Ph.D, https://psych.utah.edu/people/faculty/diamond-lisa.php.

[22] Grossman, L, & Diamond, L 2015, ‘Time to lay ‘born this way’ to rest’, New Scientist, 227, 3031, pp.18-19

[23] Satinover J, 1996. Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Hamewith Books:Grand Rapids, p. 121.

[24] Should Human nature “function according to its design?” http://www.josephnicolosi.com/collection/2015/5/28/should-human-nature-functionaccording-to-its-design.

[25] Dominee van haatspraak aangekla oor pedofilie-uitsprake, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/dominee-van-haatspraak-aangekla-oor-pedofilie-uitsprake20191007.

[26] Neels Jackson discuss this statement in Kerkbode, September 29, 2018, Sielkundevereniging Reageer Op “Wanvoorstellings” http://kerkbode.christians.co.za/2018/09/29/sielkundevereniging-reageer-op-wanvoorstellings/.

[27] Michael C. Seto, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_C._Seto.

[28] Michael C. Seto, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_C._Seto.

[29] Seto, M.C. (2018). Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children, Washington: American Psychological Association, (p. 15).

[30] Seto, M.C. (2018). Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children, Washington: American Psychological Association, (p. 15).

[31] Seto, M.C. (2017). The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 3-22. doi: 10.1007/s10508- 016-0799-y.

[32] Jahnke, S, (2018), The Stigma of Pedophilia: Clinical and Forensic Implications. European Psychologist 23(2):144-153.

[33] Seto, M.C. (2017). The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 3-22. doi: 10.1007/s10508- 016-0799-y.

[34] Seto, M.C. (2012). Is Pedophilia a Sexual Orientation? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(1), 231-236.

[35] Grundmann, D. (2016). Stability of Self-Reported Arousal to Sexual Fantasies Involving Children in a Clinical Sample of Pedophiles and Hebephiles, Arch Sex Behav, 45(5), 1153-62.

[36] Freund, K.,& Kuban, M. (1993). Toward a testable developmental model of pedophilia: The development of erotic age preference. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17(2), 315–324.

[37] Money, J. (1986). Lovemaps: Clinical concepts of sexual/erotic health and pathology, paraphilia, and gender transposition of childhood, adolescence, and maturity. New York, NY: Ardent Media.

[38] Here I make use of Dr Seto’s categories, Seto, M.C. (2017). The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 3-22.

[39] Seto, M.C. (2012). Is Pedophilia a Sexual Orientation? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(1), 231-236.

[40] It is a publication by the American Psychiatric Association for the classification of mental disorders using a common language and standard criteria.

[41] Pedophilia https://www.psychologytoday.com/za/conditions/pedophilia.

[42] Neels Jackson discuss this statement in Kerkbode, September 29, 2018, Pedofilie is ’n versteuring, sê APA, http://kerkbode.christians.co.za/2018/09/29/pedofilie-is-n-versteuring-se-apa/.

Marietjie van Loggerenberg discuss pedophilia as a disorder in Kerkbode, November 6, 2018, Seksuele Diversiteit: ’n Uitdaging vir die kerk, http://kerkbode.christians.co.za/2018/11/06/seksuele-diversiteit-n-uitdaging-vir-die-kerk/.

Marietjie Gericke discuss this statement in Netwerk24, October 23, 2018, ‘Vergelyking Tussen Homoseksualiteit, Pedofilie Is Haatspraak’, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/vergelyking-tussen-homoseksuele-pedofilie-ishaatspraak-20181003.

[43] Jahnke, S., Philipp, K., & Hoyer, J. (2014). Stigmatizing attitudes towards people with pedophilia and their malleability among psychotherapists in training. Child Abuse & Neglect, 40, 93-102.

[44] Pedophilia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia.

[45] Bailey, J.M., Bernhard, P.A., & Hsu, K.J. (2016). An Internet Study of Men Sexually Attracted to Children: Correlates of Sexual Offending Against Children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(7), 989-1000.

[46] Beech, A.R. & Harkins, L. (2012). DSM-IV paraphilia: Descriptions, demographics and treatment interventions. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 527-539.

[47] Hall, G. C. N., Hirschman, R., & Oliver, L. L. (1995). Sexual arousal and arousability to pedophilic stimuli in a community sample of normal men. Behavior Therapy, 26, 681-694. Okami, P. & Goldberg, A. (1992). Personality correlates of pedophilia: Are they reliable indicators? Journal of Sex Research, 29, 297-328. Bailey, J.M., Bernhard, P.A., & Hsu, K.J. (2016). An Internet Study of Men Sexually Attracted to Children: Correlates of Sexual Offending Against Children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(7), 989-1000.

[48] Ibid

[49] Who is Dr. Eve? https://www.dreve.co.za/who-is-dr-eve/. Why Dr. Eve? The many facets of Dr. Eve https://www.dreve.co.za/skills-expertise/.

[50] Clinical sexologist, Dr Marlene explains the difference between a paedophiliac and a child sex offender, https://reviewonline.co.za/267431/minor-attraction-can-be-prevented-from-becoming-a-crime/.

[51] Why pedophiles are different from child molesters (Dr Eve explains) http://www.capetalk.co.za/articles/261647/why-pedophiles-are-different-from-child-molesters-dr-eve-explains.

[52] Task Force questions critical appointments to APA’s Committee on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders (28 May 2008), https://web.archive.org/web/20110302024605/http://www.thetaskforce.org/press/releases/pr_052808.

[53] Bayer, R. (1987). Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, The Politics of Diagnosis, Chickester:West Sussex. Pricerton University Press.

[54] LGBT rights in South Africa, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_South_Africa.

[55] See the WORDS of a Canadian clinical psychologist, sexologist, and associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Medicine, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cantor.

[56] Jana Marx discuses it in Netwerk24, October 2, 2018, NG dominees ‘moeg vir skadelike gay-debat’, https://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/ng-dominees-moeg-vir-skadelike-gay-debat-20181002.
Jana Marx posted another article in Netwerk24, October 2, 2018. This post refers to the article in the Kerkbode, September 28, 2018, NG Teoloë Reageer.

[57] Nelson Mandela quotes. https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/367338.Nelson_Mandela.

[58] Kerkbode, October 2, 2018, Hou By Waardes Van Seisoen Van Menswaardigheid, Vra Predikante, http://kerkbode.christians.co.za/2018/10/02/hou-by-waardes-van-seisoen-van-menswaardigheid-vra-predikante/.

[59] Nelson Mandela Quotes, https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/367338.Nelson_Mandela.