Carl Trueman once remarked that when he asked the above questions at conferences it often elicited laughter from the audience despite it being a serious question.
Still, my soul be stillWords and Music by Keith & Kristyn Getty & Stuart TownendStill my soul be stillAnd do not fearThough winds of change may rage tomorrowGod is at your sideNo longer dreadThe fires of unexpected sorrowGod You are my GodAnd I will trust in You and not be shakenLord of peace renewA steadfast spirit within meTo rest in You aloneStill my soul be stillDo not be movedBy lesser lights and fleeting shadowsHold onto His waysWith shield of faithAgainst temptations flaming arrowsStill my soul be stillDo not forsakeThe Truth you learned in the beginningWait upon the LordAnd hope will rise As stars appear when day is dimming
Dear Unilever,We find the advertising used to promote Lynx products offensive, sexist, and degrading. It encourages men to see women as objects for their use and pleasure rather than human beings of equal value. It gives young men unhealthy and unrealistic expectations of women and relationships.We wish to inform you that we will not only never purchase any Lynx products, but also, since the release of your “Lynx Lodge” campaign, we have decided to never purchase any products that are owned by Unilever.This is for several reasons:1. The Lynx Lodge is little more than a glorified Brothel. Even though we have read statements from your company stating that the women who work at the Lodge are safe, we are highly concerned for the long term physical and mental well-being of any woman working in such a degrading job.2. Unilever owns Dove, which claims to promote a healthy body image for women. We find it extremely hard to understand how a company that is aiming to help women with their self esteem can be undermining their own goal to such an extreme with one of their other brands. Even if Lynx advertising is not aimed at women, they are still exposed to the images of bikini-clad super thin models who men desire. The message from Lynx has a detrimental effect on women that more than undoes any positive messages Dove might be trying to communicate. The inconsistency within your company leads us to wonder if your goal with Dove is to truly help women improve their self esteem, or simply to make money out of them.3. Unilever is willing to use sex to sell products. Surely if your products were of a high quality, this would be unnecessary, as you would be able to advertise them based on their performance rather than eye-catching campaigns. All we know about Lynx is that it is supposed to turn women into crazed sex-driven animals – and in reality this is certainly not the case. Your advertising conveys nothing about what actually makes your product superior to its rivals. While we are aware that this is how most of your competitors behave, surely it is better to stand out as a quality product that does not need to degrade women and deceive men in order to create sales.4. Your company has displayed through these behaviours that it is incredibly irresponsible with the power it has through the media. Unilever appears to be a company that is concerned solely with self advancement and profits, not the wellbeing of its customers.For these reasons, we find it impossible to continue to endorse any of your brands, and we are morally compelled to make our friends aware of the significant lack of ethics and decency demonstrated by your company. We hope that the outcry sparked by your Lynx Lodge campaign will urge you to reconsider the values your company holds, and make some changes to the way you advertise. Unilever is in a position of significant influence over our society, and we hope that you will start to use that power for good and not for your own gain. If these changes were to occur, we would happily purchase Unilever brands.J&J.W.
Dear Mr and Mrs W.Thank you for your feedback and the opportunity to address your concerns regarding our marketing activations.While acknowledging the raised points I would like to take the opportunity to outline Unilever's practice standards regarding the marketing activities involving our products:We take marketing responsibilities very seriously and are committed to responsible marketing.In all cases we follow the regulatory guidelines, while being respectful of differing views, and taking care not to offend.Unilever adopted a global guideline to prevent the use of 'size zero' models or actors in its advertising to ensure that our advertising does not promote 'unhealthy' slimness.We follow explicit guidelines about direct advertising to young children.Unilever has a wide portfolio of everyday consumer brands, offering products to consumers that address different needs. Each of our brands talks to its target consumers in a way that is relevant and that communicates the brand's own unique proposition. Sometimes that proposition is serious and informative; at other times it is light-hearted and amusing.Lynx communicates to its consumers through a series of light-hearted and tongue-in-check advertisements that feature fantasy situations that rarely happen for guys in the real world. Lynx strives to create marketing campaigns and promotions that make women laugh as much as men, and the women featured in our advertising are always in on the joke.The campaign for Lynx aims to build the confidence of young men. For Lynx, it is about the "Lynx effect" - the boost that using Lynx can give to the confidence of young men that often find themselves daunted by the dating game.We do take the concerns of consumers very seriously and thank you for your feedback.Again, we apologise for any offence caused and thank you for taking the time to contact us.Yours sincerelyConsumer Relations Departmentwww.unilever.com.au
If you still say ‘I will vote Labor’ that is your choice. That’s the freedom we enjoy in a democracy, but I must say you definitely cannot be a Christian who has a proper relationship with Jesus if you vote this way.
Peter Jensen: The thing that impresses me about the two who are leading up our respective larger parties at the moment is how similar they are. That may sound odd to you.Monica Attard: How are they similar?Peter Jensen: They're Aussies. They're Australians. They're passionately committed.Mr Abbott shows his commitment very strongly. But I wouldn't think if you ran a commitment-o-meter over the two of them you would find the same thing.Furthermore they're committed to much the same things, and many of those things are good things. So the first task of government is to provide justice. I believe they're both committed to justice.And there's many ways we have a choice between two goods. And I think we need to recognise that. Yes, there are differences. Of course there are, thank goodness for that. And there will be differences of party philosophy. But there's a lot of similarity, too....Monica Attard: Now, three out of four Australians identify themselves as being affiliated with Christianity, though only around fifteen per cent, I believe, of those people attend weekly church services. Do Christians necessarily vote from the viewpoint of faith, do you think?Peter Jensen: Yes, we do. And fortunately in Australia it is perfectly possible, even across the range of options, to vote from faith and to vote differently. You cannot say to a Christian in Australia I think you must vote for such and such a person. It's a matter of balance. You will work out which way you want to go.There are certain things about the genius of the Liberal Party which are very attractive to Christianity, there are certain things about the genius of the Labor Party that are very attractive to Christianity, because they both come from Christian sources....Monica Attard: And you're not concerned having a Christian lobby participate in the political process so directly is kind of tearing down that whispering wall between religion and politics?Peter Jensen: We're pretty robust in this area. One of the ways in which we have got on with each other is for Christian leaders, on the whole, not to reveal voting preferences, and certainly not to urge people to vote one way or the other.I would hope never to do that. And I would hope nothing I would say would favour one side or the other. That's how we've got on and it's a good system.It means that the unfair advantage that a church may have is not brought to bear on the voting system. And we recognise the worth of both major parties, for example. That's worked over the years.The difficulty is, however, that now that Christians - active Christians - make a minority of the population, active Christians want to know more about what parties are saying. And the ACL operates as a group to bring to the surface what parties are actually saying, and to create a sense of accountability by the parties to Christian people.Could it go too far? Well, not yet. But we need to keep an eye on it.Monica Attard: At what point would it make you feel uncomfortable?Peter Jensen: Oh, I think if the Australian Christian Lobby or any group, any church, actually said, oh, in this current federal election, Christians, you must vote for this party.I think as Australians we've been through some difficult times. The dismissal of Mr Rudd I think caused a shiver of apprehension about the nature of Australian life and politics. I can't feel that it was well done, though those in position felt it should be done.But God be thanked that, whatever happens after this election, that we will have an Australian who can lead this country as prime minister.
