About time we restarted the discussion. Good to see an educated and rational analysis rather than a racist one. As a woman even I get a little scared when I see a Burqa.

Phil calls himself and "educated man"; however, 'arrogant' could suit him better. I don't know if their is a God anymore than people 'know' there is a God. I simply don't know; it seems impossible, but we humans may not be a smart and all-knowing as we think we are. I'll stick with agnosticism until I find out one way or the other - and there's only one way that can be done. And, as an atheist, Phil's opinions of the Christian religion are presumptuous and of no interest whatsoever. Hillsong is hardly the place to start!

On the positive side, Phil's comments on the over-representation of Muslim males in criminal activities is spot on. There is also the small matter of terrorism, although females are increasingly involved in that, too.

Burquas are, of course, completely unacceptable in a civilized, open society, and should be made illegal. The same applies to any medieval garments.

There is absolutely nothing but evil in Islam, and there is no chance of reformation. Politicians who allowed, even encouraged, Muslim immigration to Australia should be treated as traitors, and dealt with accordingly.

ttbn,

"Burquas are, of course, completely unacceptable in a civilized, open society, and should be made illegal. The same applies to any medieval garments"

Have a go at the Burga all you want but leave my shirt and trousers alone.

From Wikipedia,
"The world's oldest preserved garment, discovered by Flinders Petrie, is a "highly sophisticated" linen shirt from a First Dynasty Egyptian tomb at Tarkan, c. 3000 BC: "the shoulders and sleeves have been finely pleated to give form-fitting trimness while allowing the wearer room to move. The small fringe formed during weaving along one edge of the cloth has been placed by the designer to decorate the neck opening and side seam."

and

"The oldest known trousers are found at the Yanghai cemetery in Turpan, Xinjiang, China, dated to the period between the 13th and the 10th century BC. Made of wool, the trousers had straight legs and wide crotches, and were likely made for horseback riding"

And I suppose that means my codpiece has got to go?

Oh yes and the lack of orange and elephants in churches is a thing I have often deplored.

Good luck with a reformation of Islsm along 'New Testament' lines, btw. You're going to need it. (Hint: just read the Koran and hadith.) You've got Buckley's.

That TTb bloke is a nonconformist, and a far right Abbott worshipper.

What you say is fair comment, I do not like the burqua it should not be worn in Australia. In Australia they must conform to our basic laws no matter where they come from.

Unless this happens trouble will always be at hand. Australia will not be changing our way of life to conform to an oppressive life of our women.

There is no room for extremist behavior here. Those that follow that sort of life would be best served going back to where they came from. Change should be coming from the mufty to officially tell the people that they must conform to Australian life and assimilate into society.

If they can not bypass the parts of the Koran that does not fit with our laws, they will have to leave and live where they can be with likeminded people. Australia is home to a whole host of different nationalities and never before have a single nationality of people caused so much controversy.

Muslim women must be allowed to publicly speak, and work, or their tenure here will not be satisfactory

Would someone like to put forward an explanation for the nature of the burqa?

'. While I may think that nearly all of these systems are devoid of common sense, some are more palatable than others. Islam'

and this from an educated man. I would say more like one bound to blind secular dogma totally devoid of any moral base to make a rational decision. Phil displays a total ignorance of the old testament being ignorant to the fact that believers in Jehovah God and His Son have brought more freedom to mankind than the big bang beleivers. Phil turns a blind eye to see that secularism has led to massive drug use, gross immorality, promotion of perverted lifestyles, teenage suicide, emasculating of the male population.

We are increasingly sensitised these days to pervasive, oppressive and violent misogyny around the world, but we are at the same time confronted with the historically novel prospect that empowering women has the potential to produce a seismic shift in favour of human wellbeing. So I can understand why Phil Dye should be speculating in this OP that progressive Moslem women could become increasingly instrumental in influencing interpretations of Islamic theology, and it could just be that demographic and secularising factors may assist the process:
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/humanisms-rise/.

Mr Opinion,

The burqa exists to hide from the world the lousy choice that the groom' parents made for him, it also exists to give the fat and the ugly a decent chance in life.

//Would someone like to put forward an explanation for the nature of the burqa?//

They're designed to make people look silly. It's a common theme in religions the world over. The tonsure haircut, the mitre, the habit, payot, burqas, saffron togas etc. are all designed to make the wearer look daft. Which just goes to show that religious people do have a sense of humour.

The only ones with any dress sense are the Mormons, although their tendency to dress in uniform and the fact that you never encounter a solitary Mormon is a little creepy... I reckon Mormons share some sort of hive mind.

//Have a go at the Burga all you want but leave my shirt and trousers alone.//

Your shirt and trews are fine - if wikipedia is correct, they're pre-medieval. You can still wear shirt and trousers, and I can still wear my preferred casual attire of thongs, loincloth, cloak and stag antler headdress without upsetting anybody's delicate sensibilities. Because this is Australia and people should be free to wear what they want to wear. As long was what they want to wear doesn't come from the medieval period.

Good on you, Phil Dye. For a self confessed lefty, your article was well reasoned and accurate. If you can keep up the objective reasoning, you may become smart enough to morph into a right wing racist like me.

A couple of points of order, Phil.

Islam is already undergoing a reformation. Christianity was began by a pacifist and morphed into a very violent religion. it reformed itself when the Bible was translated into the national languages of the Christians, and disseminated to the ordinary people by the new technology of the printing press.

Islam was created by a warlord to make his soldiers invincible in battle, and to justify military conquest. Muslims are confounded that their people have become the most poverty stricken and technologically backward civilisation in the modern world. The stupid dummies think that the reason for that is because Allah has deserted them because they are not religious enough. That is why they are having a "reformation" too. They are returning to the original texts of the Koran and hadiths and they say "Keeell the eenfedel" "Enslave them" "Take their property". "Improve the progeny of their women."

Got it now?

Then there is the concept of the "moderate Muslim." Lotsa luck on that one. It has been done before and much less violent sects have arisen in the past, but they have almost always been exterminated by the mainstream Muslims. Even if "moderate" Muslims exist, and even if they are the majority, they are totally within the control of the supposed "minority" of "fundamentalist" Muslims. They will do what their leaders tell them to do.

Islam probably can not be made relevant to the modern world because Mohammad said that it was already perfect in it's 6th century form and it can never change. And it will never change while the world's leaders refuse to concede that the problem with Islam is Islam's own religious scriptures.

@ RobJ, Is Mise, 579, Mr Opinion, laxspirate, Toni Lavis & Phil Dye,
Q, How did the world's richest .001% train the sheeple to be willfully, ignorant, stupid idiots?
Q, How did the world's greediest capitalists fool us?
Q, Why do many sheeple choose, evil over good, wrong over right, ugly over beautiful, profane over profound & the behaviours that lead to failure over those that lead to success?
Q, How did the Australian mind close itself to reason & rationality? A, one of Americas most left wing comedians explains our foolishness.

"the Unified Field Theory of Dumb & Dumber" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDb3sTwD_vA

@ LEGO, if you have not seen the above speech or read the book you may appreciate it too & your correct about the possibility of Islamic reform, as well as the Christian enlightenment. Jesus teachings were perfect 2,000 years ago. Even the word "reformation" is misleading when referring to it because it was really about the Roman Catholic Church becoming corrupt & it needed enlightened, conservative, protesting Christians to clean out the corrupt individuals, their corrupt interpretations.

ISIS leader Al Baghdadi #1, has 4 or 5 degrees in Islamic studies from on of the most prestigious universities in Islam. When you read some Islamic scripture for yourself it easy to see that the terrorists are moderate in their reading of the Quran, but we must allow the PC Thought Police to suggest that it might be possible & see from the evidence that an Islamic reformation WILL fail.

You people have very little knowledge about the history and practice of Islam. I asked a simple question about what is the nature of the burqa and could not get a correct answer. It's no wonder that Australia's politicians and business leaders have been able to pull the wool over your eyes for the past thirty years allowing them to sell off Australia to China. They already have an ignorant population to rule over; all they have to do now is maintain a large Muslim group in the country with jihadic tendencies to keep the population in a state of fear. They keep you busy looking out for terrorists while they continue down the road of selling off Australia to China.

The burqa has nothing to do with ethnic diversity and everything to do with a war against women. Those who wear it, and those who insist it be worn, subscribe to an ideology in which women are inferior sexual temptresses, whose female form is a problem and must be covered. This is based on the contradictory proposition that men are both superior and yet unable to control their sexual urges if they see women in their natural human state. If this wasn't deadly serious, it would be funny.

//I asked a simple question about what is the nature of the burqa and could not get a correct answer.//

Are you saying they don't make people look silly?

Thanks 579.

It's good to see that there's someone else on Forum with some real knowledge.

I don't give a fig if any woman wants to wear a Burqa, always providing it is solely her choice and not that of a controlling other.

Not all that long ago, a christian lady wouldn't go to church unless wearing a traditional scarf. And some of the early esoteric christian traditional garb replete with head coverings and veils, wouldn't look out of place in a mosque.

Moreover, early christian Leaders were a bloodthirsty lot, often seen as warrior bishops and popes, a the head of this or that medieval christian army.

WE haven't moved very far, with some folks still believing, God will sanctify the taking of a human life, if certain pre conditions, beyond basic self defense, are met?

That said, some women and some blokes only look "desireable" with a bag, bucket or full face bike helmet, over their head?

Does the term, a face only a mother could love, comes to mind, as does, something that resembles the north end of a south bound camel, and a good reason to hide it?

How would the average muslim handle a nude beach?

With say a full face covering; and or, standing to attention permanently ?

Pole vaulting could take on a whole new and potentially embarrassing. waitawhile new meaning and lots of crossed legs?

Seriously, we come into this world wearing nothing but a very disturbed facial expression (not this place again?) and if that's good enough for the creator, so also should it be for the rest of us, who often view his creation with undying shame because of our mental attitudes. [Moreover we can take nothing with us when we leave and the land we thought was ours claims us a its!]

And our attitudes are only ever the result of the thoughts we care to entertain/allow in our minds.

Get over your medieval maxims and yourselves; and welcome to the 21st. century.
Rhrosty.

Toni,

"....saffron togas etc"

I'd be hopin' tha' yer not includin' th' safron kilt in that lot.

579,
Who is TTb? If you cannot type ttbn, you are hardly a force to be reckoned with.

Mr Opinion, there are a number of theories about the Burqa & 579 knows nothing about any of them because he is a communist & therefore knows nothing about anything.

1, the Burqa is VERY similar to what Arabian men wear in the desert to suit the climate. this would have been the case in the Arabian Peninsula before islam, before christianity, before Judaism when the Tribesmen of Arabia were Pagans & it is still traditional Arabian dress today.

2, After Islam arrived the:-

"rightly guided" caliphate ended with the passing of Ali, the fourth of them, may Allah's peace and blessings be upon them all. The first four Caliphs after the Prophet Muhammad are known as the Rightly Guided Caliphs (Rāshidūn); Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and 'Ali.

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-the-Rightly-Guided-Caliphs-Rashudin-caliphs-called-so

These Sheiks took to grabbing any woman for the Harem that LOOKED attractive to them so ordinary muslims took to hiding their wives & daughters from the Sheik.

Your right about China too BTW.

@ RobJ, Is Mise, 579, laxspirate, Tony Lavis & Phil Dye, no reply so that means you MUST have agreed with my earlier comment.

imacentristmoderate

”RobJ, Is Mise, 579, laxspirate, Tony Lavis & Phil Dye, no reply so that means you MUST have agreed with my earlier comment .... [among others?]... Islamic reformation WILL fail.”

Patience, mon vieux. Life is short, too many unexamined assumptions behind your scattergun questions.

There is, you may have noticed, a vast history of ideas from which we lucky dip to form our particular individual profile of hits and misses, errors and biases.

I bring to bear on your claim to omniscience that there is no single coherent theory of cultural evolution or transmission that has perfect predictive power over future contingencies. Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s The Black Swan is a cautionary tale about predictive hubris, bringing prophecy perilously close to profligacy.

Who, even 100 years or so before the event, predicted the Protestant Reformation, the abolition of slavery, the Internet or the discovery of DNA? Sleep on. I have an affinity with David Deutsch’s beginning of infinity in terms of human creativity.

//I'd be hopin' tha' yer not includin' th' safron kilt in that lot.//

Of course not. Kilts don't make people look silly, they make people look awesome.

I was introduced to the saffron kilt fairly late in life, at a piping competition where an Irish-Australian band appeared (oddly enough, playing Highland pipes - but I guess Uillean pipes aren't an instrument for a marching band, although they do sound even nicer than Highland pipes). Their nice orange kilts and green jackets certainly stood out from the black jacketed and tartan kilt wearing bands.

I'm a big fan of non-bifurcated male leg garments. They are more practical, more comfortable and more stylish. Certainly better than trousers. So let us celebrate their awesomeness with a nice sing-along:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2fizeoT22g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8x39dxgPiU

Kilts are also safe from the injunction against medieval clothing - they're post medieval. So wear your kilt with pride, and more power to your elbow if it's orange.

//RobJ, Is Mise, 579, laxspirate, Tony Lavis & Phil Dye, no reply so that means you MUST have agreed with my earlier comment.//

I'd explain to you about false syllogisms but I don't think you'd be bright enough to grasp it. Suffice to say that no reply might just mean that people are ignoring you and hoping you'll go away, which is what people generally do when faced with people who couldn't see sanity with the Hubble telescope but who seem harmless start ranting in public.

lasxpirate, Why have Patience with 100% evil, recalcitrant criminals, who are determined to continue abusing children? Life is short, the criminals must be punished, why don't you understand simple questions in plain English? Are you illiterate, insane or evil?

There is, you may have noticed, a vast history of ideas from which we observe, well documented, scientifically proven failure & reject those ideas. Insanity is defined by repeating failed experiments while praying for different results & something leftists do. The scientific philosophy of common sense realism has no biases, you just accept the settled science.

I bring to bear on your claim that there is no single coherent theory of cultural evolution or transmission that has perfect predictive power over future contingencies the scientific fact that both failure & success can be observed, proven. Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s The Black Swan is a cautionary tale about predictive hubris, bringing self fulfilling prophecy perilously close to self delusion, or cognitive dissonance & you display ALL the symptoms.

Who, even 100 years or so before the event, predicted the Protestant Reformation, (actually enlightened conservative people did) the abolition of slavery, (actually enlightened conservative people did) the Internet (did) or the discovery of DNA? (& did) Sleep on. I have an affinity with David Deutsch’s beginning of infinity in terms of human creativity because of enlightened, conservative, protesting Christianity & you have blind faith in the negative religion of communism.

Toni Lavis, I'd explain to you about false syllogisms but I KNOW that you are bright enough to grasp it & are a sociopsychopath. Suffice to say that i know that no reply might just mean that people are ignoring the inconvenient truth and hoping it will go away, which is what repeat offenders like you generally do when faced with evidence of their own insanity, but who seem at first to be harmless while ranting in public, until we realise that YOU are coming after our children.

Dear imacentristmoderate,

I think 579 is more correct in his or her definition of the use of the burqa than the explanation you have put forward. But then I can be easily led. After all, I only have degrees in anthropology, sociology and history.

Imacentristmoderate, thank you for quoting me with decibels added. The unadorned debate is still, at least in part, about better or worse predictors of cultural change. Phil introduced biology in a way I related to evolutionarily acquired attraction/avoidance mechanisms. A recent article by Massimo Pigliucci suggests that it might be time to dispense with the idea of ‘cultural evolution’ because change and adaptation in biological evolution, its analogical model, is problematically different in culture.

http://www.philosophersmag.com/index.php/footnotes-to-plato/83-the-trouble-with-cultural-evolution

While it might take thousands of generations in biology for a random phenotypical behaviour to occur that may subsequently spread successfully through a population, the problem that Pigliucci discusses (at the risk of over-simplification) is that predictability in culture cannot readily be referred to the same kind of theoretical and empirical constructs. Our sophisticated metacognitive capacity no doubt plays a crucial role in rate of change.

This question of relative predictability in biology and culture (1) supports the view that the Protestant Reformation is by no means a good predictive model for Islam (that, I take it, would be your view and that of some other contributors), but (2) makes it equally unwise to make unsupported categorical assertions about what processes of cultural change will or won’t impact on Islam.

I included a link in an earlier post to an article by Matt Ridley, who offers rational arguments that might be held to predict (pace Taleb) future change in the Islamic worldview. Although it’s of no particular relevance to the import of the article, Ridley is not a communist (neither, incidentally, am I), but a conservative peer in the British House of Lords.

imacentristmoderate,

There are a number of reasons why I haven't replied, first and foremost is that I'm waiting to see the depths of your ack of manners, the second is that my computer is down and I.m using my wife's one.
Her's has an old fashioned and tiresome 'qwerty' key board that I find 'qwerty' irksome to use.

There's no legal or constitutional requirement in Australia compelling anyone to speak English.

Language is very pragmatic. People use it to whatever effect they think useful.

In choosing to express oneself, in whatever manner one desires, to achieve a certain goal, is otherwise known as 'free speech' or 'freedom of expression'.

If I could say something in an exotic language with the deliberate intention of irritating the narrow minded and myopic likes of Phil Dye, then I probably would.

Phil Dye, a devout atheist, says he visited a Hillsong church service, for what reason exactly?

Was it his intent to look for orange elephants?

Is Mr Atheist secretly obsessed with religion? I find that almost quaint.

We might presume he attended the church service in order that he could look down his nose on the ignorant classes, the less informed, and less educated; to sit in Almighty judgement on anyone who might dare to think a little differently to himself.

Dan s demerenque

Not going to be a very cohesive society are we,
If millions of us don't understand what the other millions are talking about.

Don't come to this country and try to set up another country,
Within this country.

That is the road to violence,bloodshed and civil war.

Mr Opinion, have you studied any islamic history? i have & without the burden of a left wing university education, have no bias.

lasxpirate, Q, are you familiar with words & dictionaries?

A #1, the christian reformation never at any stage involved re-writing the Bible or re-interpreting the Bible. 500 years ago the Roman Catholic church had a lot of dogma that never was in the Bible that they had just made up as they went along. The Protestants simply pointed that out when they had copies of the bible in their own language to read for themselves. The reformation involved simply reading the Bible as it was originally written & following the true teachings of Jesus as originally intended.

A #2, Muslims have always studied the Quran, Sirah & Hadith as originally written. ISIS is REAL islam, REAL muslims accurately following the REAL teachings & example of Muhammad. Muslims have 2 choices continue following the islamic scriptures as originally written or reject islam & convert to another similar, negative religion like ANTI-socialism or maybe even a positive one like Christianity.

Is Mise, typical feminist communist deflection or avoidance tactic. you really have a problem with settled science don't you?

Dan S de Merengue, another ANTI-socialist who wants more women & girls raped, mutilated.

CHERFUL, go girl, maybe one day you will even accept that enlightened, conservative, protesting Christian men never were your enemy. ANTI-socialism & islam clearly are.

Dear imacentristmoderate,

Anybody can say that they have a knowledge of history. But without a degree in history how does one prove it? Without formal training in history all one can really claim is that he or she has quasi-knowledge or pseudo-knowledge of history.

As for your question 'Mr Opinion, have you studied any Islamic history?' I respond by saying that I have degrees in anthropology, sociology and history. I think that speaks for itself.

I encourage everyone to read on these subjects but when untrained people like you get a bit of knowledge they start to think that they know all the answers and know how to fix all of the world's problems. What a joke!

Mohammed was an armed forces general, that is where the sloppy side of islam comes from.

ima whatever,

"s Mise, typical feminist communist deflection or avoidance tactic. you really have a problem with settled science don't you?"

as I said, learn some manners.

Dear 579,

It is even more complex than that. He who's name we cannot say (sounds like something out of a Monty Python movie) used violence against polytheists, Jews and Christians. He who's name we cannot say was held by the Arabs who converted to Islam to be the last of the prophets who had been given the true message from God prior to the end of the world. And Muslims ever since believe that they have a sacred duty to God (jihad) to use violence against unbelievers. Just like the one who's name we cannot say.

The Life of Muhammad:
An Inconvenient Truth
Timeline of Muhammad's Life (A.D)

570 - Born in Mecca
576 - Orphaned upon death of mother
595 - Marries Kadijah - older, wealthy widow
610 - Reports first revelations from angel at age of 40
619 - Protector uncle dies
622 - Emigrates from Mecca to Medina (the Hijra)
623 - Orders raids on Meccan caravans
624 - Battle of Badr (victory)
624 - Evicts Qaynuqa Jews from Medina
624 - Orders the assassination of Abu Afak
624 - Orders the assassination of Asma bint Marwan
624 - Orders the assassination of Ka'b al-Ashraf
625 - Battle of Uhud (defeat)
625 - Evicts Nadir Jews
627 - Battle of the Trench (victory)
627 - Massacre of the Qurayza Jews
628 - Signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiya with Mecca
628 - Destruction and subjugation of the Khaybar Jews
629 - Orders first raid into Christian lands at Muta (defeat)
630 - Conquers Mecca by surprise (along with other tribes)
631 - Leads second raid into Christian territory at Tabuk (no battle)
632 - Dies

"Muhammad is a narcissist, a pedophile, a mass murderer,
a terrorist, a misogynist, a lecher, a cult leader, a madman
a rapist, a torturer, an assassin and a looter."
Former Muslim Ali Sina offered $50,000 to anyone
who could prove otherwise based on Islamic texts.
The reward has gone unclaimed.

To Dan S de Merengue
"In choosing to express oneself, in whatever manner one desires, to achieve a certain goal, is otherwise known as 'free speech' or 'freedom of expression'.

Oh OK - I'd like to express myself by shooting lot's of bad drivers who honk constantly or don't indicate when turning. I'll defend myself in court with your 'free speech' and 'freedom of expression' line. Get real!

If the writer of the piece is myopic you are even more so by failing to read that he states leaders should use English "when speaking in public". If you don't agree with this I suggest you only buy Newspapers in Mandarin, listen only to SBS radio and attend only non-English public performances or rallies. Wait - why aren't you writing in Udu?

An honest study of the Quran shows that groups like ISIS act in complete defiance of the injunctions of Islam. The persecution and disorder on earth as an even worse offense (2:217). It lays emphasis on peace, justice and human rights. It champions freedom of conscience and forbids worldly punishment for apostasy and blasphemy.
A study of the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad also demonstrates that he warned us of the rise of religious extremism in this age in astonishing detail.
1,400 years ago, he prophesized that a time would come when nothing would remain of Islam but its name, nothing of the Quran but its word, and that many "Mosques would be splendidly furnished but destitute of guidance" (Mishkatul Masabih). In these latter days, the true spiritual essence of Islam would be lost, and religion, for the most part, would be reduced to a ritualistic compulsion. He foretold that the clergy would be corrupt and be a source of strife during these times.
How true this is of the extremist clerics in parts of the Muslim world that abuse the pulpit to preach division and hate.
He also went on to describe terrorist groups such as ISIS that would try to hijack the Islamic faith. At this time of dissension, he said there would appear "a group of young people who would be immature in thought and foolish." They would speak beautiful words but commit the most heinous of deeds. They would engage in so much prayer and fasting that the worship of the Muslims would appear insignificant in comparison. They would call people to the Quran but would have nothing to do with it in reality. The Quran would not go beyond their throats, meaning they wouldn't understand its essence at all, merely regurgitating it selectively. The Prophet then went on to describe these people as "the worst of the creation."

Re the Burqa:

Tom Robbins (if you haven't read him you haven't lived) once opined that the women of the ancient middle east must have been the most beautiful, the most licentious, the most lascivious women of all time since their men had to create three religions to keep them in check.

The burqa is a control mechanism. It evolved from the millennium-old practice of veiling women of status into a way for the male 'owners' to remove the women from society. Its sanctioned in Islam but isn't core-Islam. Neither is it cultural since it exists in many different Islamic cultures. If it has to be categorised, its political as in its a way for some in the society to exert control and display control over others in that society.

The problem with an Islamic reformation is that there is no obvious viable path for it.

The fundamental difference between the Bible and the Koran, at least as regards this issue, is that, in the Bible, the parts that a modern liberal society want to reject (the Old Testament) were written first and the more liberal sections (New Testament) later. The Bible's focus (Jesus) was a relatively (for that time) gentle soul who enjoined his followers to "do unto others..", "love one another", "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to cast a stone" and so on. So the path for the Christian reformers was laid out since much of the old ways were rescinded by the more recent Jesus/Paul and their successors.

Not so with Islam. The opposite in fact. The gentler more liberal parts of the Koran came first. The more war-like, blood-thirsty, doctrinaire parts came later and were the last written. They, according to the Koran itself, supercede the earlier pronouncements.

Christianity could reform without rejecting or downgrading Jesus. But an Islamic reform has to reject vast swaths of their prophet's acts and pronouncements. That's a much tougher call especially since the very core of Islam states that Mohamed was perfect and everything he said and did was both correct and to be emulated.

Hersi Ali calls for Islam to adhere to the Meccan Koran and reject the Medinan Koran and that would be good for Islam and the world. But how Islam gets there is unknowable. How does Islam reject and/or ignore half of its texts, and the most recent half, and remain Islam?

Il existe, dans le monde, un grand nombre de langues différentes, dont aucune n'est dépourvue de sens. Mais si j'ignore le sens des mots utilisés par mon interlocuteur, je serai un étranger pour lui, et lui de même le sera pour moi.

Supposons que je parle les langues des hommes et même celles des anges: si je n'ai pas l'amour, je ne suis rien de plus qu'une trompette claironnante ou une cymbale bruyante.

L'amour est patient, il est plein de bonté, l'amour. Il n'est pas envieux, il ne cherche pas à se faire valoir, il ne s'enfle pas d'orgueil. Il ne fait rien d'inconvenant. Il ne cherche pas son propre intérêt, il ne s'aigrit pas contre les autres, il ne trame pas le mal. L'injustice l'attriste, la vérité le réjouit. En toute occasion, il pardonne, il fait confiance, il espère, il persévère.

Mr Opinion, With formal training in history all one can really claim is that he or she has quasi-knowledge or pseudo-knowledge of history because universities brain wash you with Orwellian newspeak.

I respond by saying that if you have degrees in anthropology, sociology and history. I think that proves beyond reasonable doubt that everything you know is wrong.

I encourage everyone to read on these subjects but when university academics like you get a bit of knowledge they start to think that they know all the answers and know how to fix all of the world's problems. What a joke! We have the worst schools, colleges & universities in world history. Everything that has ever gone wrong in the land of OZ over the last 3 or 4 decades was done by a complete idiot with a piece of paper from a university.

Is Mise, Q, did i use any swear words on you? A, ANTI-socialists ALWAYS use worse manners on christian conservatives.

579, your first 2 comments were correct & the last one was wrong. Read the Quran in chronological order. The abrogated old testament is peaceful & the new testament is violent.

mhaze, your mostly correct but the burqa is mostly about traditional Arabian dress & stopping the local Skeik from seeing your daughter or wife, lest he decide to take her for the harem.

Dan S de Merengue, one day your treason will catch up with you.

Dear imacentristmoderate,

Your statements are so irrational and illogical that they make you appear as if you are some sort of ratbag. You really need to get a grip on reality.

Wal wi sabi bigmob odinri langgus langa dijan kantri, en dei holot garram mining. Bat wen enibodi tok langa mi garram im ron langgus, en ai nomo sabi det langgus, wal mi jidan streinja langa im, en im jidan streinja langa mi du.

If mi garram det pawa blanga toktok garram olkain difrinwan langgus brom dijan kantri en brom hebin, wal im gudwan ting tharran. Bat if ai nomo laigim pipul brabliwei, wal wen mi toktok, im jis laik mi meigimbat nois nomo garram eni mining.

Mr Opinion,

Lots of untested claims about expertise can be made on fora such as this. They have to be accepted or rejected without evidence either way. But I'd have to opine that anyone who thinks that the Bureau of Statistics have under-estimated the number of Chinese living in Aust by several hundred percent based solely on his observation of the numbers of Asians strolling around Chatswood is unlikely to have the level of qualifications you claim.

imacentristmoderate,

I've never seen evidence that the burqa is a traditional Arab dress or that it was adopted for the reasons you assert. I'd much appreciate it if you could provide some evidence for either point

Dear mhaze,

Good. The less you know the better. And I reckon you know a lot less than others.

Mr O,

Some adherents to string theory believe that there are an infinite number of universes. On some of those alternate universes, what you just wrote would make perfect sense. Unfortunately for you and your standing in this forum, this isn't one of those universes.

I hope that wasn't too subtle for you.

Mr Opinion, Andrew Bolt's blog & Alan Jones talk back show have been attacking our dead beat ANTI-education industry for months now. The 2 most popular journalists in the land of OZ. I move in a wide variety of social circles & i have not met a single person with anything good to say about our ANTI-education system. So if you think my opinion is wrong it is shared by 60% to 90% of the population & this is supposed to be a democracy.

mhaze, if i was a woman in the desert in Saudia Arabia during a sand storm i would want to be wearing a cotton burqa. if i was a man in an oil Sheikdom like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or Bahrain & my wife or daughters were attractive i would want them wearing a burqa BECAUSE i love them, for fear that the local Sheik might steal them for his harem. it is simple common sense realism. The facts of islam are horrific enough already, by making up extra stuff we make ourselves look paranoid.

Dan S de Merengue, you will change your tune after being charged with treason.

Imacentristmoderate,

The wearing of the burga I read, was ordered by Muhammed to protect women
From all the rapes that were occurring. It was the same old blame the victim
Instead of the perpetrator.

There is no reason for the burqa to be worn in Australia or Europe today.

And you are right it is about men keeping control of their women by hiding them from other men. The men however don't mind going out flirting with other women.

Women don't need marriage they always know who their children are.

Men need to keep women away from other men to know who their children are.

So the wearing of the burqa is a form of control over womens freedom to choose other partners.

Women really have no need of the burqa in any deep and meaningful way from
The female perspective.
They could have a pick of the best men to father each of their children to give them the best advantage of various strong genetic traits.

The same reason men seek multiple wives really.
Men want to have everything their own way.
Women are really better off and happier without marriage and the control of one man.
Something men just can't admit to themselves

Since when is speaking a language other than English treasonous?

Wal wen detlot pipul bin irrim im tok garram det langgus, deibin ol jidan brabli kwait.

CHERFUL, The wearing of the burga was ordered by Muhammed to protect muslim women. Using rape against non muslim women was part of their terror campaign, especially before or after beheading the husband. But be careful what you read, a lot of academics & media people lie to promote their agenda. Accurate information can be had simply by reading the Quran in chronological order. Reading Sirah (which is easy enough) & Hadith (which is encyclopaedic) or trusting the opinion of Christian cleric who has.

Of course except it is now part of their culture & multi-CULT-uralism was introduced by Trotskyists in 1972.

The men however don't mind going out flirting with other women. Also true when your not talking about enlightened, conservative, protesting Christian men.

Women don't need marriage they always know who their children are. Really, i recently met a rescued baby whose birth certificate had changed 3 times until the DNA came in with a winner. femi-NAZISM trains women to do dangerous things, then blame men for their self inflicted injuries.

Men need to keep women away from other men to know who their children are, true, if the women are not enlightened, conservative, protesting Christians.

So the wearing of the burqa is a form of control over women's freedom to choose other partners. NO, they suited the desert & protecting women from both rape & slavery in the harem.

Women really have no need of the burqa in any deep and meaningful way from, any perspective, true.

They could have a pick of the best men to father each of their children to give them the best advantage of various strong genetic traits, if they want to abuse their children, yes.

The same reason men usually prefer to pick one good women & be faithful to her really. Women want to have everything their own way. Children are really better off and happier with a good marriage and the control of BOTH biological parents. Something femi-NAZI women just can't admit to themselves.

Dan S de Merengue, aiding & abbeting islamic terrorism is.

Speaking in a language other than English is aiding and abetting Islamic terrorism? Please explain.

Speaking in a language other than English is something a healthy percentage of Australians do everyday.

I surprised by such alarmist xenophobia coming from you. If it was coming from Phil Dye, then it might be more understandable.
(Phil Dye - "If the dominant population of English speakers can't understand what is being said by a group who are not just over-represented in crime statistics but solely represented in terrorism news, then our first response is to mistrust it.")

Dan S de Merengue, YOU are an ANTI-socialist who has been supporting islamic migration & therefore ALSO supporting islamic terrorism. That is clearly "aiding & abetting" terrorism. One day in the not too distant future a conservative government will have enough backbone to charge & convict you.

Interesting that a pigs head was found at UWA prayer room last night This is likely to not only offend but provoke violence from the religion of peace. While I see this act as stupid it is not nearly as dumb as the Pollies who have encouraged Islamic immigration. For decades the regressives have been insulting Christ to the best of their perverted abilities and yet no outcry. Insulting Christ certainly help0s you get a job with the national broadcasters. NO doubt they will criticise the ones who planted the pig while continuing to mock the One they really have to face one day..

Dear mhaze,

I don't give two hoots about my standing on The Forum.

Supporting immigration is in my DNA. I am a migrant. I can't help it.

By the way, Australia is a nation of migrants, most of us having done so fairly recently. That pretty much defines us as a whole.

And if you call me an ANTI-socialist one more time, ill personally arrange it for a conservative government to come around and ban the use of capital letters in the writing of insults.

Dan

no one is denying that immigration has and is not good for Australia. Islamic immigration however provides a threat that none other has produced. You of all people must realise what Islamic ideology stands for and it certainly ain't freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom for women. One could argue that it is no less godless than secularism although Australian secularist restrict their murder to the unborn.

Dan. S de merengue

Good now we can't hear you,because we don't know what you are talking about
Now put a big bag over yourself maybe a burqa,
Then we won't be able to see you either.
It will be like you don't exist.

Maybe we should migrate to the country you came from
In our millions and speak in a foreign language nobody understands.

Your arrogance is certainly obvious

Dear runner (and others),

Aren't you afraid that the jihadists in the Australian Muslim community will seek you out and decapitate you for saying the things you have said against Islam. I'm afraid for myself, that's why you won't catch me saying anything nasty against Islam. I would be extra careful if I were you because Muslims see it as a sacred duty (jihad) to use violence against the unbelievers.

Also,
Later migrants never fought a war like the earlier European migrants
Did to defend this country from the Japanese.
I include members of the Aboriginies who fought the Japanese as well.
But they couldn't have held this country without the European Australians
And the Americans.

To the contrary, members of these latest migrant groups
Show us their complete lack of loyalty to this country and it's
People by racing overseas to fight against our military instead of with it.

Don't play the we are all migrants to Australia game.
The older migrants paid a lifetime of taxes to build this country, how much have you paid.?

So Mr Opinion,
Is that a veiled threat.

What if Christians on this site, threatened the Islamists
With death due to Blasphemy because, they don't worship Jesus.

The Christian religion today has come a long way since
The barbarity of its earlier blasphemy laws.

It's about time the Muslim religion did so too.

Mr Opinion

' Aren't you afraid that the jihadists in the Australian Muslim community will seek you out and decapitate you for saying the things you have said against Islam'

I am more afraid Mr Opinion for my children and grandchildren. I would like to think they will have the freedoms I have enjoyed in this blessed country. I have lived a very blessed life. Politicians who fail to act against Islam immigration are cowards. Finally the French are waking up to the simple fact that you will not stop Islamic terrorist by being in denial as to what the Koran teaches and how Mohammed lived.

I have to differ from the author’s “Perhaps what the Islamic faith needs is a reformation”. Its structure and history preclude this. What Australia needs in relation to the Islamic faith is a few thousand one-way tickets back to crapsville. First seat for their appointed leader who is too arrogant to address us in our national language.

When I see women getting about in body bags I feel immediate (unexpressed) hostility, no different from my hostility to a young man I once saw wearing a red t-shirt bearing a large white disc filled with a swastika. My objection to the body bags is they are an insult to all men with their assumption that if a man could see the wearer he’d try to jump her, and the implication insulting to all normally dressed women as suggesting that by letting men see them they are cat’s meat.

Australia will always be taking in at least some migrants. There will always be some bad apples in any bunch. Whether someone is rotten goes a lot deeper than what language they speak, or on what day they choose to worship.

Dear runner (and others),

I admire you for your courage but keep in mind that there are probably a lot of Muslim jihadists in Australia who browse sites like The Forum looking for unbelievers.

Dear runner,

PS The 'blessed country' and 'blessed life' you talk about does not exist any more. Australia's politicians and business leaders have been selling you and your descendants out to China since the day Bob Hawke came to power in the 1980s. And it's to their benefit that a strong Muslim presence is maintained in Australia in order to distract the general populace's attention away from the fact that they are being sold off to China. So say goodbye to the Anglo-Australian nation and start embracing the Sino-Australian nation. And by the way, how's your Mandarin coming along?

Mr Opinion, we don't give 2 hoots about your standing either.

Dan S de Merengue, the land of OZ by EVERY social measure has been getting more ANTI-social since 1972 thanks to ANTI-socialism & multi-CULT-uralism.

runner, actually i am denying that immigration has been good for Australia. EVERY racial, religious or ethnic group other than white Europeans is over represented in crime rates & jail stats. Even some European migrants have been a problem. Northern Italian migrants no problem. Southern Italian migrants especially from Sicily, Calabria & certain families however are heavily involved in the Mafia for 100 years.

Mr Opinion, NO we are not afraid, THEY are, as are the ANTI-socialists who support them.

Emperor Julian, actually Hitler was a nice guy in comparison to Mao & Muhammad.

Dan S de Merengue, Australia will NOT need any migrants if ALL white women had 3 to 6 babies. There will always be some bad apples in any bunch. Whether someone is rotten goes a lot deeper than what language they speak, it goes to what negative religion or culture they support.

Mr Opinion, i am aware of the daily attacks on my personal computers & on this site among others which are attacked by both islamic & ANTI-socialist hackers every day.

And you are right about us being sold to the Chinese by ANTI-socialists ever since 1972 but islamic terrorism is NOT a distraction. The ANTI-socialists hate white people so much, they don't care who the migrants are just as long as they are not white. They want China to take over the planet, that is their game plan. The sooner we start arresting the 100% evil watermelon & lie-bore scumbags the better.

Emperor,
Australia doesn't have a national language. We have a dominant language, English. But Australia has no official language, or language policy, as do some countries.

"And you are right about us being sold to the Chinese" ....and a few other comments along the same lines.

Now I know the last thing people like this want to see are some facts but just for the hell of it, here's what a little research at the Bureau of Stats and the FIRB shows:

1. 88% of all Australian farmland is fully Australian owned. A further 5% is jointed owned by some Aust and some overseas entity with the Australian party being the majority owner. A mere 7% is majority owned by overseas entities with less than 1% being fully overseas owned.

2. Of the countries that make up these overseas owners, the biggest by far is the US, followed by Canada and Singapore. China runs fourth and way behind these others eg US ownership is three times greater than Chinese ownership.

But as I said, mere data means nothing to those of a certain persuasion. Mr O for example thinks that he can debunk ABS figures based on his observations at the Chatswood shops - a technique he obviously learned while getting his three degrees LOL.

So back to your uninformed ranting boys.

Dear mhaze,

Can you please upload the stats you have cited above?

The data is all over the place but the best place to go is the ABS.

Go here:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/7127.0Main+Features1Jun%202013?OpenDocument

From there you can download spreadsheets (click the Download button) and get most of the data I mentioned.

Dan S de Merengue, last time i checked schools in the land of OZ teach English.

mhaze, but the ABS stats are rigged & faked. Furthermore heaps of Australian farming land is marginal, 3.5% to 5% of Australia is PRIME agricultural land & that is what ALL the foreigners want to buy. Talk to anyone concerned about Chinese foreign ownership & you will find they don't care who foreigners are, they favour 100% Australian ownership of strategic Australian assets.

Mr Opinion, mhaze is a communist & you should never believe anything a communist says.

" the ABS stats are rigged & faked.....mhaze is a communist & you should never believe anything a communist says."

Wow, where do these people come from?

I'm a great believer in the freedom of speech and that everyone has a right to his opinion and his say. But sometimes you just wish that some people would avoid embarrassing themselves by not spewing their utter ignorance all over the page.

the ABS stats are rigged & faked!! Wow, there's just no response to such idiocy. Just shake your head and marvel that such people manage to get out of bed in the morning.

mhaze, Q, do you really genuinely believe that the UN-employment stats are as low as the ABS say they are?

So what you're saying, imarightwingconspiracytheorist, is that the reasoning behind your rejection of the ABS's statistics is one big Argument from Incredulity fallacy.

AJ Philips, NO, the corrupt ABS has been fudging stats for years now. The UN-employment stats are simply the most obvious example. Have you heard of a little thing called the enlightenment? That happened because of the printing press & books.

Right now seniors are surfing the net, using social media to communicate across the land, meeting in groups locally like Men's Shed, Senior Citizens, etc AND at the same time you have the "grey nomads" meeting, talking to each other in camping grounds all over the land of OZ.

What exactly do you think happens when retired people from ALL over the land of OZ, from ALL industries & ALL walks of life get together around a camp fire, share some yarns? They find out that the bastards have been lying about EVERYTHING, 24/7/365 for at least half a century & their hatred of the ruling, left wing elites grows daily.

Remember the Monty Python "4 Yorkshireman" sketch? Right now as we type there are older Australians outdoing each other with stories about extreme incompetence & corruption among the Arts, Entertainment, Media, Education, Public Service, Politics. "They are as mad as hell & they are not going to take it anymore"

Most schools in Australia teach a language other than English. There are a few that teach primarily in a language other than English.

Wal wi sabi bigmob odinri langgus langa dijan kantri, en dei holot garram mining.

imarightwingconspiracytheorist,

What is your evidence that the ABS has been fudging figures? Oldies getting together and having a yarn about what they personally observe? That’s not a very reliable method of data gathering and analysis. What are their sample sizes? Do they have control groups to ensure the reliability of their data? How do they ensure their data is not contaminated in any way?

Capitalising the word ‘all’ three times doesn’t lend weight to their observations. They need reliable techniques for data gathering and analysis.

I never take statistics at face value. If you examine statistics critically and ask certain questions about the methodology used in collecting the data you might find that there is a lot of bias in the information being presented as concrete fact.

People like mhaze gobble statistics down without thinking about the data because they do not have any scientific training. And they love to cite only those statistics that support their beliefs and knowledge. They're the sort of people that don't want the think too hard about things and try to work things out for themselves.

Dan S de Merengue, & isn't that terrible, isn't that a perfect example of planned failure by Marxists at the height of the Cold War. Are you admitting to treason & sedition?

AJ Philips, why don't you prove your point? explain the ABS methodology used in compiling the UN-employment stats.

Mr Opinion, too true.

iamarightwingconspiracytheorist,

That's the Shifting of the Burden of Proof fallacy you've just committed there.

If you want to know more about the statistics provided by the ABS, they provide you with two ways to contact them:

"For further information about these and related statistics, email client.services@abs.gov.au or contact the National Information and Referral Service on 1300 135 070."

But it's easier to just believe what you want.

MR O wrote "I never take statistics at face value. If you examine statistics critically and ask certain questions about the methodology used in collecting the data you might find that there is a lot of bias in the information being presented as concrete fact."

Oh good, that's a much better attitude than silly old Ima whose modus operandi is to declare anything that he doesn't like to be 'fudged' by communists without the slightest semblance of an attempt to justify the assertion.

So, since you "examine statistics critically", I'm sure you have some really telling and insightful reasoning behind your rejection of the ABS statistics on Chinese population and Chinese investment. Now you assume I don't have statistical understanding because I don't "have any scientific training" but in fact I do have extensive training in the statistical method. Not as extensive as your three university degrees but extensive nonetheless. So I should be able to follow your obviously learned reasoning.

So please, please give us the benefit of your critical examination of the ABS statistics. Please explain to us why and how the ABS got it all wrong, their methodology and their (obviously wrong) statistical algorithms. Also, since you have determined that their figures are wrong, you must have access to more and better statistics on these issues.

So please please point me to the statistics that show the true picture of Chinese population trends in Australia and Chinese investment.

Please give us the benefit of your clear-minded and extensive analysis of the ABS data oh learned one.

Dear mhaze,

My answer to your requests is NO. Don't ask me to do what you yourself cannot do.

And I have four degrees, not three.

PS You sound like an engineer. If you are then that would definitely explain a lot of things.

Yep pretty much what I expected Mr O.

We can all see that you haven't got the faintest idea why the ABS data is wrong. Whatismore, you haven't got the faintest idea how to even begin to check or try to discredit that data. Obviously you haven't got access to any other competing data or even passingly believable data since if you did you'd surely refer to it.

So what have you got? Well you've got the fervent but totally ignorant belief that things are as you hope they are rather than the way they actually are. And to try to hide the fact that you are utterly ignorant on the facts and utterly determined to remain ignorant you seek to pretend that you are privy to analysis and data that no one else has found either here or in the wider community or academia.

So what we've got is an ignorant child trying to play with the adults and utterly failing.

Now Mr O I think I've had enough fun exposing your ignorance and embarrassing you from pillar to post. The fun has worn off. So henceforth I'll leave you and Ima-moron to make your ignorant and uninformed assertions without bothering to make fun of them. Enjoy the respite.

Dear mhaze,

So I guess I'm right in thinking that you are an engineer.

"So I guess I'm right in thinking that you are an engineer."

No.

Doh!

I don't admit to anything, other than saying that you are displaying the racist tendencies found amongst too many Australians.

Wi sabi bigmob odinri langgus langa dijan kantri, en dei holot garram mining.

Il existe, dans le monde, un grand nombre de langues différentes, dont aucune n'est dépourvue de sens.

I wonder how Dan S de Merengue defines (in plain English) the terms "race" and "racist" that he chucks around?

Emperor,
I've been accused of being unpatriotic just for asserting the fact that English is not the only language spoken in Australia. That's racist.

We are not legally obliged to speak English. Saying that to be a true patriot of this nation you need to be a (fair skinned) English speaking monolingual is racist.

Dear Dan S de Merengue, mhaze and Mr Opinion

If you three are to waste the web space of this site trading blows which have nothing to do with the content I suggest you spare us the boredom of your insecurities and either:
1. Get a room together and work it out nicely
2. Join Facebook where you can message one another constantly with love or not
3. Increase your medication.

As a new subscriber to the Forum I'd hope for a less personal and more considered analysis of whatever is being discussed. As a woman I'm pretty disgusted that I get email alerts every hour telling me that you three boys are simply scratching at one another again.
Grow up.
Robin

Dear RobJ,
Please, take a chill pill.

My comments regarding language relate directly with the (xenophobic) comments made within the content of the article itself.

Phil Dye - "If the dominant population of English speakers can't understand what is being said by a group who are not just over-represented in crime statistics but solely represented in terrorism news, then our first response is to mistrust it."

I am not surprised that Dan S de Merengue won't admit he (along with dhimmis who use the same stratagem) is using the term "racism" with which to label open opposition to the most bigoted religion on earth in order to silence this open opposition by calling it something (racism or xenophobia) which such opponents are not and don't want to be held to be. So he ducks spelling out in plain language how he defines "race" or "racism".

So cm'on, how do you define bigotry then?

Dear RobJ,

If we behaved the way you want us to do then The Forum would be dull and boring.

Emperor,
You asked me for my definition of 'racist'. I gave a definition above, in the context of what has been discussed so far, in plain English.
- it is racist to believe that the only loyal citizen or true patriot of this nation must be an English speaking monolingual.

Phil Dye didn't quite go this far, yet he did lean this way by encouraging mistrust towards someone based upon the language they were speaking. (His article in general didn't do a lot for me. I thought it was a bit shallow. But al least he's being open and honest, which is the first step in a reasoned discussion.)

You claim I'm trying to silence discussion. On the contrary. I'm not trying to silence anyone. Feel free to critique me, or anyone else, or their belief system.

What I would wish is to promote discussion and understanding. Yet it happens to be a simple fact that not everyone speaks the same language. We, as Australians, have different backgrounds and cultures. And promoting mistrust of others simply on the basis of their language is not helpful. Let's rather explore each other's differences. We might even learn something. We might even learn that others are not as different as we first thought. Or even if they are, we can grow in our cultural understanding.

Dan S de Merengue,

Why is your English not as good as your French and Kriol?

Dan S de Merengue wrote: "You asked me for my definition of 'racist'. I gave a definition above, in the context of what has been discussed so far, in plain English.
- it is racist to believe that the only loyal citizen or true patriot of this nation must be an English speaking monolingual."

I've searched and searched and can't find Dan S de Merengue's definition of race or racist. His supposed example of "racist" is one based on language, not race.

There are very few English-speaking monolinguals in Australia but the English language is the official language of, among other things, the conduct of law and the representative system of parliament that passes for "democracy".

It is arrogant (though not racist) to address a nation, in which one claims official status, in the language of a Middle Eastern desert tribe. It is not racist to call out this arrogance.

A race is a subset of humanity that is characterised by elements of genetic inheritance not shared by the rest of humanity. It is not a language and it is not a cult such as Islam.

Racism is treating people on the basis of their race (not their religion, not their language) and is especially egregious when it treats them as racially superior (or God-chosen) vs inferior. Racism is (rightly in my opinion) reviled as severe character defect. This is why confidence tricksters hijack the term to discourage on false grounds rejection of what the confidence tricksters wish to protect. An example is the use of the term anti-Semitism (a form of racism) by those wishing to protect Zionism (which really is racist). Another is the use of the term “racist” by ABC and SBS ideologues to label opponents of Islam.

It is also hijacked by those few who would wish to impose the curse of Babel on Australia

Julian,

"There are very few English-speaking monolinguals in Australia but the English language is the official language of, among other things, the conduct of law and the representative system of parliament that passes for "democracy"".Surely that was a typo?

The majority of Australians are monolingual English speakers.

Sorry, Is Mise, I didn't make myself clear. By "monolingual" English speakers I meant day to day language English and no knowledge of any other language. I an assuming that very many Australians have some learning of a second language at school. Yes, English is the language of the overwhelming number if Australians and English is our national language (unconvincingly disputed by Dan S de Merengue) in which law, administration and everyday speech are expressed.

//The majority of Australians are monolingual English speakers.//

But not the Queen's English.

Stone the flamin' crows, cobbers! Does it really matter whether we speak Strine, English, Scots Gaelic, Aramaic or whatever? A lot of brilliant scholars wrote in Latin and we only get to read translations (unless we know Latin); that doesn't make their work any less valuable. Dante's 'Divine Comedy' was not written in English but it still translates well; James Joyce's 'Ulysses' was written in English but it is still completely incomprehensible.

At the moment I am reading a translation of Dumas' classic, 'The Three Musketeers'. It's enjoyable, but I think I might enjoy it more if I was a native French-speaker and could read the original.

Some languages are easier for some people to learn. If I were to seriously apply myself to the study of German or French I could probably learn them relatively easily as if I was to try and learn an Asian language. A lot of Asian languages are tonal; the definition of a word depends on the pitch at which it is spoken. I'd find that hard to learn. But I have no problem looking at the words 'through' and 'trough' and knowing that the first rhymes with 'moo' and the second with 'off'. To us native English speakers that knowledge is second nature - for a Chinese person, it is as baffling and incomprehensible as their tonal languages are to us.

It's easier to learn new languages when you're young. A lot of older migrants have trouble learning the language of the country they move to.

Hab SoSlI' Quch.

Emperor,
Please state where it is written that English is the official language of Australia, if you are able.

My claim was that Australia has no official language, or official language policy, as do some other countries.

In the 'Recognition' movement, Aboriginal groups were looking to amend the constitution, to have it state English as the official, national language, with other aboriginal languages having recognised minority status. If so, this seems to suggest that English currently has no formally expressed status.

But you're welcome to demonstrate otherwise.

English is our national language in which law is written, administration is conducted and our people speak from coast to coast including in our national anthem. Whether this is stated in some official document I don't much care - if not then maybe it ought to be taken care if in the amendments to our constitution (a document written in English). It's definitely not a race.

All I claimed was that there is no formal, constitutional or legal requirement obliging anyone to speak in English in this nation. Despite a few attempts, no one seems to be able to contradict this claim.

For the definition of the word 'racist', we can easily conceive of the person who prejudges someone negatively based on their skin colour, before getting to know their inner qualities. That's racism. But I'd agree that 'race' is one those malleable words that's hard to define precisely.

People don't easily divided into neat groupings according to physiological characteristics. Japanese and Koreans share certain identifiable features not common to Australian aborigines. Yet Japanese and Koreans will easily note differences amongst themselves, as would those from different aboriginal tribes on opposite sides of the continent. Most genetic traits can be found in varying degrees amongst widely dispersed peoples. And genes are continually being reshuffled in inter-ethnic marriage. Strictly speaking, basing race on physical characteristics alone is a nonsense. There is only one race, the human race, and we're all part of it.

Yet ethnic groupings are often delineated by other factors, such as sharing a common history or culture, with language being one of those key sociological factors.

Mr Opinion,
Thanks, I'll take what you said regarding my capabilities in French and Kriol as a compliment.

Dear Dan S de Merengue

Or you could take it as an attempt at light humour.

Dan S de Merengue: "Yet ethnic groupings are often delineated by other factors, such as sharing a common history or culture, with language being one of those key sociological factors."

Yes this is often done. And when it is done it is an attempt to fool people into accepting that an ideology, or a cult (such as Islam) is a race or an ethnicity meaning a genetic inheritance, and that hence to attack it or deride it is racism. It's done routinely by the ideologues of the ABC and SBS - e.g. "anti-racist demonstrators" vs "anti-Islamic demonstrators" to fool people into recoiling from attacks on an ideology on the ground that such attacks are racism.

The fact that such blatantly dishonest deception is often resorted to does not in any way validate it or make it anything other than what it is - dishonesty.

PS: Probably the most frequent use of this dishonest linguistic trick, often seen on OLO, is to label attacks on Zionism (a racist ideology) as "anti-Semitism".

Emperor,
I agree with what you're saying. Islam is clearly a religion, not a race. And it's not so hard to make the distinction. Religion involves values and choice. But you can't choose your race. You can't choose your parents or your skin colour.

We should be able to critique religion when it falls foul of ethics, or for whatever reason. And this has been the problem in Victoria with some of its anti-discrimination legislation, which is so dull as to conflate race and religion. Those who wish to criticise Islam as an ideology have found themselves fronting up before the racial discrimination commissioner. I don't know if it's too far fetched to suggest that the Victorian government deliberately blurred the lines to try and pitch for the Muslim vote.

Language falls somewhere in between. One can sometimes choose a language to speak, but you don't get much choice about your mother tongue language.