Bernard Gaynor wins landmark case against defence force

Bernard Gaynor wins landmark case against defence force

LAST UPDATED // Monday, 07 December 2015 12:52 Written by // Cec Busby

Former Katter Party candidate and ex-soldier Bernard Gaynor has won a landmark court case against the Australian Defence Force (ADF) after making allegedly homophobic comments regarding Defence Force personnel marching in Mardi Gras.

Gaynor, who served in Iraq, was discharged by the ADF for saying its members should not be able to march in Sydney’s Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras in uniform.

In March of 2013 Gaynor had his commission with the Army Reserve terminated by (then) Defence Force General David Hurley, after sending out press releases protesting the ADF participating in Mardi Gras in uniform. In the press release Gaynor suggested the army was discriminating against Christians and described Mardi Gras as morally decadent.

Gaynor wrote: “[The army is] happy to accommodate the views of gay members but is actively discriminatory against Christian members who make public comments about their faith.

“Defence gave approval for its proud uniform to be paraded through the streets of Sydney during the mardi gras, sharing the road with pimps, prostitutes and purveyors of moral decadence.”

Gaynor was also disendorsed from the Katter Party following the comments.

Gaynor appealed his dismissal from the ADF and called for his Army Reserve commission to be reinstated.

In this week’s ruling, Federal Court judge John Buchanan has found in his favour and said Gaynor was sacked for “publication of his private views about political matters”.


Cec Busby

Cec Busby

Cec Busby is the news editor of SX and online editor of

Comments (14)

  • Jez Smith

    17 December 2015 at 14:43 |
    1. For the people who have never heard of Luke McKee, he is well known as an anti gay, anti jew, anti black. paedophile obsessed moran, who's claim to fame is he reckons he is wanted by Autralian Police due to some half assed story that goes back nearly 10 years that the NSW police gay workforce forced him out of Australia.

    The truth is, his years of abuse of many non hetro people and the fact that he reckons all gays are paedohiles, shows his obbsession with trying to attrack the lime light. So much so he has been banned from all social media platforms, and many Australian talk back radio shows...

    Apart from McKee's unfortunate Asperger's Syndrome, does not give him the right to be obsessed in wiping out all gays... His stalking abilities is one of his big turn ons, so I will be his next target instead of Garry Burns, however I need to tell the gay community to be very careful and not contact McKee...

    2. Garry Burn's has been wrongly vilified by the gay media. His hard work supporting the rights of ALL gays in our community has been wrongly judged..

    Stories of Garry taking people to court to make money is ridiculous. Garry spends his own money on all vilification cases, and if he wins any sort of compensation, the money is donated to charities within the gay community.

    It is time the media sat down and spoke to Garry to get a better understanding on why he continually stands up for the rights of the gay community...



  • KID

    16 December 2015 at 17:21 |
    This is interesting as it directly contradicts at least two recent court rulings on public servants voicing political views as private individuals on social media. The most well known was a woman who worked at the Dept of Immigration who criticised Australian refugee policy on Twitter, using an account which did not have her real name. She still lost her job when they found out her identity.

    It's interesting the angle he took on appeal. He was repeatedly insubordinate and refused to adhere to official Army policy. I notice he didn't bring that up.


  • Jenifer

    15 December 2015 at 22:39 |
    Hopefully this decision is appealed and overturned. Anti-gay bullies do not need more attention.


  • Garry Burns

    13 December 2015 at 07:08 |
    Mr.GayNor's win against the ADF will have no bearing on the legal action I've taken against this Anti-Islam , Anti-Homosexual , Un -Australian failed political candidate under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
    Private views and political matters cannot be used as a defence by Mr.GayNor to alleged homosexuality vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 in the NSW Civil Administrative Tribunal ( NCAT ).


    • Luke McKee

      14 December 2015 at 05:27 |
      Garry, it's not the anti-discrimination Act 1977 anything. It's Clover's Moore's (who you worked for 2 years ago) amendment that got in 1993 by the power of a single vote from Ted Pickering, a Liberal MP who lived in my hometown Stanwell Park and his dog mauled my late brother, that I later dispatched.

      Here's my father's educated comment on the matter.
      Geoffrey McKee
      DECEMBER 10, 2015
      I have just read this news, from overseas. Bernard Gaynor and his lawyer Robert Balzola have had a heroic victory, judging from this personal summary by Bernard.
      Both Australians have suffered the most staggering, despicable, personal attacks by the homosexual lobby.
      These attacks have, in the main, been led by an unemployed male mental disability pensioner (who shall remain nameless) but who many believe is acting as a de-facto ex-officio officer of the Anti Discrimination Board of New South Wales.
      These attacks have educated us about the vexatiousness of that lobby. These attacks have educated us about the dark underbelly of the homosexual lobby, filled with perverted sexual innuendo. Because they aim to “normalise” homosexual behaviour and acts, and because they have no convincing arguments, they rely on mockery, by suggesting that their target must be a “covert homosexual” or his supporters “kiddie fiddlers”. It is quite pathetic and designed to incite hatred and contempt, but instead it can shine a light on where their mind is at. They do all these public attacks on Bernard with a false sense of impunity, courtesy the NSW Anti-Discrimination (Homosexual Vilification) Amendment Bill 1993.
      That piece of Orwellian legislation was pushed through the NSW Parliament with the narrowest of margins by the then Member for Bligh and now Mayor of Sydney, Ms Clover Moore. It is a classic, text-book example of anti free-speech legislation pushed through by a sophisticated and clever homosexual lobby group that has no concept of the Christian teachings about love of one’s neighbour.
      This teaching can be summed up in the line “love the sinner, hate the sin”. This in turn stems from the belief that every person has a soul.
      Under this piece of legislation a person has no soul. Public statements on a blog that expose or condemn human behaviour or actions, from a child-protection point of view (such as lewd homosexual behaviour) are deemed no different to vilifying the person or group itself. Hence it is deemed “hate speech” and unlawful.
      This legislation is “too clever by half”. It was passed in parliament using deception and propaganda by the homosexual lobby groups who know that the Christian philosophy, that is able to separate homosexual acts from the homosexual person, is very dangerous to their cause.
      The worst crime in their book is to publicly articulate your Christian beliefs about homosexual acts, homosexual behaviour, and the homosexual political agenda. That is becoming dangerous, as Bernard has learnt by bitter experience.
      This positive decision by the Federal Court has been bought about by the sheer human courage, patience, persistence and endurance shown by Bernard, and his lawyer. For those of us who understand what marriage and family is about, such bitter, twisted and evil attacks against the husband do hurt the wife equally, and this can turn a marriage into a struggle of choice for the wife, a struggle between truth and peace. That is why those of us who have followed Bernard’s plight at the hands of the homosexual aristocracy in New South Wales empathise with Bernard’s wife and mother of his children. This fight, when it all boils down, is about two important values: freedom of speech and protection of family created by husband and wife. These are two fundamental bedrocks upon which our society is built. The homosexual political lobby groups are out destroy those two traditional values, through deception and propaganda about “equal love”, “diversity” and “marriage equality”.
      Good folk are cowed into silence by the “homophobia” lie that they cannot see through.
      Thank you Bernard – and your lawyer Robert Balzola – for making this legal precedent and contribution, that will help to protect us all.


      • Julia

        15 December 2015 at 15:52 |
        More lies from Mr McKee. Your supposed fight is about two things: You're ability to vilify and discriminate against LGBT people under the guise of "freedom of speech" and the maintainence of the false position that only heteronormative family structures should be recognised by the state. Neither should be considered bedrocks of our society. The high court has consistently upheld the validity of the provision against the implied right of poltical communication. The fact that you have to refer to the legislation as "Orwellian," a comparison to a work of fiction and hence irrelevant demonstrates there is no real argument in this statement. People who seek to discriminate against LGBTs cannot simply vale their disgusting vilifying statements in theology or pretend to be "separating actions and persons."

        The truth of the matter is that Mr. Gaynor has made horrific, lying and bullying comments about the LGBT community and in particular nasty defaming statements about Cate McGrergor. His wins in court so far have been on a technicality due to jurisdiction. Mr Burn could easily pursue him under the Queensland vilification provisions. He is not a hero or in any way brave or courageous. He has made bullying statements against an oppressed minority and should answer for it.


        • jez smith

          17 December 2015 at 14:52 |
          Hi Julia

          Yes, you are right, GayNor's unfounded, disgusting and hateful comments regarding the gay community and the Islam community within Australia make GayNor a biggoted piece of shit....

          I am sure all Australian's will show GayNor what they think of him in the next Federal election and not vote for him to be a Senator of Australia.

          GayNor, why don't you go and piss in Trump's pocket, and leave Australia for good with that very beautiful wife and dozen kids...


        • Tristian

          15 December 2015 at 16:11 |
          There's no substance to this article at all. It's just the typical conservative mantra. Vilify LGBTs and denigrate their entire personhood to sex acts, make false claims about family and marriage being social bedrock, tell lies and vilify others and above all cry free speech and refuse to take your lumps when called out.

          It's shameful because this sort of posion rhetoric has negative impacts on the mental health and wellbeing of LGBTs, incites the bullying and discrimination of vulnerable people, aims to deny people their civil and political rights and falsely makes the claim that the discriminators are somehow disadvantaged.

          It's a disgrace. Do not be deceived. People like this are the true bullies. Thank-you to Mr. Burns for his courageous stance against homophobic bullying and the traditional values and free speech lies of bigots. You've got me scared mate. Good luck to you in future litigation.


          • John Ryan

            17 December 2015 at 05:52 |
            Discrimination and vilification impacts on all of us.
            Mr.Gaynor published on his Twitter : ( sic )
            "Same -Sex Marriage is about 2 men wallowing in their own excrement , that's not sex".
            How is that statement free speech or Mr.Gaynor expressing his Christian belief ? A vilifying opinion not based on reasonable grounds is unlawful.
            Mr.Burns is appealing the decision of Burns v Gaynor ( 2015 ) NSWCATAD 211 and is confident the appeal will be allowed because the Member didn't apply the Dow Jones and Company v Gutnick 210 CLR 575,which resulted in him incorrectly finding my application under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 ( NSW ) was misconceived because , in his view , Mr.Gaynor did not perform a public act in NSW.
            So Mr.Gaynor may well have to come back to have Burn's alleged vilification complaints against him reheard.
            It doesn't matter what you may think of Burns. He doesn't give up and he makes people accountable in the court for vilifying unlawfully homosexual Australians.
            Burns deserves more support from the gay community but is mostly shunned as an outsider and a trouble maker. But look at his long list of successful case law. Burns gets no public funding like ACON. Burns Website address is ;


  • Trev

    07 December 2015 at 20:23 |
    I commend Bernard for his courage and dedication.


    • Tristian

      15 December 2015 at 16:02 |
      No courage from Mr. Gaynor. Bullying, vilifying and running smear campagins against the LGBT community then refusing to take your lumps for doing so is an act of cowardice not bravery.


  • Angel

    07 December 2015 at 19:15 |
    He is a disgusting anti-lgbt, anti-muslim bully who will no doubt just be sacked again!


  • carlos

    07 December 2015 at 09:42 |
    At least this decision will give Mr Garry Burns something to think about and no doubt write and complain about. Congrat's to Mr Gaynor for his stance and win.


  • Tristian

    17 December 2015 at 07:45 |
    I fully agree with you. I have read the decision in Burns v Gaynor. My understanding of it is that Mr. Gaynor is attempting to escape the vilification allegations on a technicallity. He's arguing since he wrote the message in Qld, it's not a public act in NSW.

    I didn't say that Mr' Gaynor's conduct amounted to free speech. It doesn't. The Twitter statement is clearly intended to incite hatred or at least severe ridicule of LGBT persons. It does not cite any theological basis for that claim. The freedom of Speech/It's my religion argument is a deflection many who oppose LGBT rights use as a cover to defend vilifying statements as an attempt to demonise those who challenge them and create the perception that they themselves are the victims when in fact they are the opposesors. I have long said this narrative needs to be challenged.

    I very much admire Mr. Burns for the work he does, mainly because I he shows a lot of courage and restraint in challenging anti-LGBT bigotry and he works within the law to do so.


Leave a comment

You are commenting as guest.