Saeed Khan, while I'm comfortable with a diverse Australia, I think your article is just fuel for the fire.
It would be very easy to draw a white hating thread from this, the usual only white people are racist, all problems are caused by white people.

Embracing diversity does not mean embracing behaviors that are un-Australian, the hijab for many is a symbol of oppression of women.

Does the author believe that all cultural practices should be embraced in Australia in the name of multiculturalism?

Anyone who disagrees with this bloke is a 'racist' or 'xenophobic thug'. He really has nothing say that is of the the remotest interest. He lobbed here 20 years ago, and still hasn't sorted himself out.

The seeds of antagonism, as the author states, were sown 1300 years ago in the writings of Islam. Where Muslims go they take the hate, violence and discrimination their religion teaches with them. Does Mr Khan ever watch TV or read newspapers? Perhaps he has noticed in recent months (years) that certain people have a propensity to kill others, with guns, bombs and even vehicles. They do this in the name of a religion. Does Mr Khan ever ask why this happens? Of course not; it is all a big misunderstanding and if there is anything wrong, it is those vile infidels that don’t understand Islam's wonderfulness.

No, one does not have to look, dress or speak in a certain way to be a “true” Australian. The only requirements are accepting Australian values such as equality, free speech, separation of religion and state, and rule of Australian law. Muslims, by definition and actions, do not and cannot accept these. To them, murder, plunder, rape and slavery are not really wrong, it just depends on who is doing these (Mohammed did all these and no Muslim condemns him), Muslims believe they are the “best of peoples” and nonmuslims are “lower than animals” (Quran) so scratch equality. Blasphemy laws and sharia mean that freedom of speech and separation of religion from state are out, too. If theology is too difficult for Mr. Khan, then perhaps he should take a look at Islamic societies. Oh no, anything but having to think and consider simple facts!

Notice the previous articles written by this man, about “moderate Islam”. How has that turned out? Have things gotten better? Are Muslims better integrated or more respectful of others? Does Mr. Khan ever mention past events worldwide that may make Australians skeptical of his puerile claims.

So Mr Khan writes a silly article, puts a flag on his car and denounces “hateful” infidels (hateful because they criticize Islam and Muslims) – and thinks these make him a “real” Australian – even as he refuses to consider the animosity and violence he carries in his heart (with Islam).

Dear me, the author has been infected.

Research should focus on the question of cause and effect, or which comes first: is the lowered I.Q. a result of nationalism and flag-worship, or vice versa?

For all that, and all that, I think the author has put his finger on something: 'inclusive identity', a sense of (at least) similarity of people of many origins as Australians. This seems to be opposed to 'negative' or 'exclusive identity', which many Aboriginal people (perhaps not as many as one would expect) are now bingeing on.

In that second sense, 'identity' is defined as what one is NOT, and is built on an exclusivity which is dependent on myth-making: whites are all bastards, they have committed every crime known to humanity and still are secretly, and so have no redeeming features, therefore it's not possible to live with them [forget inter-marriage rates], while Aboriginal people were and are the most intelligent, advanced, etc. people on the planet - see, for example,

https://newmatilda.com/2017/01/22/busting-black-myths-the-truth-about-our-first-peoples/

Somebody defined negative identity as what unites people around a false belief. But if we thought about it, there is no future in this. The only future for all of us depends on an inclusive identity, a positive identity, which - warts and all - takes us for what we are and what we have done etc., and moves on.

And surely there is enough of 'Australianness', the easy combination of sharing and shi-acking, of taking people as they are, of acceptance. I was struck by something Don Aitken wrote, about an American town, their particular sense of community down their tree-lined streets - but also something else: after reading his article, I was driving through some tree-lined streets nearby and was struck by the suspicion that, while the trees down our streets were of all sorts, gums, grevilleas, bottle-brushes, mallee, all intermingled, my bet is that in America, those trees were all the same, cut to the same dimensions - giving a sort of false 'inclusive identity'.

Maybe I'm glorifying, but our sense of inclusive identity seems to be more tolerant of personal difference, choice, IF such choices don't really affect our sense of commonality. Am I wrong ? Am I getting all Pollyanna or turning into a chauvinist?

Joe

Hear,hear and well said Sir!
Alan B.

Thank You Mr Saeed Khan.

I love Australia Day.

The following link explains why:

http://www.mamamia.com.au/this-is-why-its-so-important-to-celebrate-australia-day/

Hey Saeed,

Proclaiming something doesn't necessarily make it true.
I could say that 'pigs fly backwards on their annual migration south' but saying it wouldn't make it true.
Do you think spending $150,000 on billboards buys you something?
Do you think that you can purchase our hearts and minds?
What if I asked Muslims to give up their beliefs for a price?
- That I'd pay 150 Muslim immigrants $1000 each to apostatise?
Would it be an insult of sorts?
Should your attempt to buy our hearts and minds by purchasing billboard advertising not be seen the same way?
What makes you realistically think you can buy the hearts and minds of certain patriot aussies any easier than we could pay you to apostitise your Muslim beliefs?
Do you think insulting us and calling us names is going to get you what you want?
That calling me a 'piece of crap' (in a fancy way like xenophobe) and 'demanding my respect' is going to 'EARN you my respect'?
You talk of 'national unity' but you are in the same argument insulting patriotic australians.
Do you think the idea of 'national unity' is alien to our nation?
Do you think you can get it by 'verbally abusing us into submission'?

We've had different levels of 'national unity' already throughout our history, and in case you weren't aware it's the increased level of immigrants which are fuels the disunity.
Not wanting to point fingers, but for the sake of arguments we'll say YOU.

One thing that brings us national unity is ANZAC Day, the sacrifice our relatives made for this nation.
What does ANZAC Day mean to you?
Is it just a paid day off and a celebration of a Muslim victory; since your religion comes first over country?
Do you know we are a secular nation?
That country comes before religion?

[tbc]

[Cont]
I think you are a moron and you haven't thought things through very well, no offense.
You think that by attacking other Aussies and calling them 'illegitimate' that it somehow makes your lot more 'legitimate'?

You're not going to earn the respect of Australians by calling us names, insulting our intelligence and demanding respect.
The aboriginals are still hoping for more respect and recognition after 200 years.
You've got a long and disappointing wait, I think.

Taking the attitude you do, I believe that all you'll achieve is to fuel the very same disunity that you claim to be against.

Your either like a Hillary supporter - with your head too far up your you-know-what to see the bigger picture;
Or someone who is willing to deliberately stoke disharmony to cause more disunity and civil unrest in OUR communities.
That's the way I see it you silly goose.

How are you really going to win my heart and mind, and 'WIN' 'National Unity' like a so-called prize that everyone gets to share?

Idiots...

' The question of national identity and Australian values has often been used by the politicians and far right, with varying level of xenophobia, to marginalise the non-white minorities.'

yeah unforutnate about a few red necks but not nearly detructive as the idiotic left like in Germany where young girls cheered the muslim refugees coming into the country only to be assaulted and raped come the new year. Interesting little has been made about the 'moderate' connection the Melbourne killer had with Islam. More than the media wants to let on I suspect.

"Fundamentally, as a nation of immigrants it does not make
sense to let outmoded ideas guide our choices because
none of us has a greater claim to the nation than our
Aboriginal people - and even they came to Australia once.
So we have to get along and work together.

Today the surviving population of culturally British people
is small and their descendants are being matched in number
by newcomers. Yes, there is tension, but in practical terms,
class rooms are multi-racial, work teams are multi-racial,
friendship groups, hobby meetups, sport teams are multi-racial.
Football supporters are more colourful than their teams and
lawyers, teachers, doctors, nurses, come in different colours.
Even police are not all white neither is our military or our
politicians. Young people fall in love across racial lines and
the picnic blankets make a giant checkerboard.

Every where you look Australia is multi-racial and in that
context, deep- isolated, outmoded ideas and thinking is a
recipe for extinction."

(Taken in part from an article on the web).

I just wish that the Government would remove the racist symbol of the ridiculous Saint Patrick's Cross from the Flag.

It was't there in 1788 when Philip caused the Union Flag to be raised at Sydney Cove so why keep it there now?

//Dear migrants, let’s reclaim the flag from racist thugs and xenophobes this Australia Day. Display it with pride. It’s your way of celebrating your new homeland in unity with all Australians regardless of their colour, class, creed or culture.//

Well spoken, Mr. Khan. I really object to the fckwits that try to use my flag which I saluted every week for the 15 years or so I was a Scout, as a symbol of white pride. I'm very white, and I'm not proud of any behaviour those racist dicks try to excuse by waving their flag about whilst they engage in vile abuse.

//I just wish that the Government would remove the racist symbol of the ridiculous Saint Patrick's Cross from the Flag.//

Do you feckin' have a problem with the Irish, mate? Come down to Lake Macquarie and say that to my face, if you've got the bollocks. As long as the British retain control of Northern Ireland, there is place for the cross of their patron saint on the Union Jack. Frankly, I think it's a bigger embarrassment that there is no representation of Wales: that is properly racist.

Foxy,

"The Anglo-Celtic element in the population is expected to drop to 62 percent by 2025."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Celtic_Australians#Number_of_Anglo-Celtic_Australians

Which would seem to indicate that it is still a majority.

You said, "Today the surviving population of culturally British people
is small and their descendants are being matched in number
by newcomers"

Currently it's around 66% so how is that small?

Back to your basic maths book, Foxy.

Dear Is Mise,

The figures given were not ones I made up but
were also taken from the web, like yours from
Wikipedia. It would be interesting to see
the reality though as to how accurate the given numbers
you cited really are. There are facts like inter-marriages that
come into play and we shall see what the future will
bring especially with numbers being matched by
newcomers to this country. I personally predict that
we shall in the future become even more of a
richer tapestry than we already are.

Foxy,

Intermarriages do not lessen the percentages one iota, they dilute but that's all.
How about a reference?

Toni,

There is no such thing as the Cross of St. Patrick; Patrick doesn't have a cross as he was not martyred but died of old age.

The cross attributed to him is the Saltire of the Geraldines, who were Normans not Irish even though the FitzGeralds became "more Irish than the Irish".

Dear Is Mise,

Many of the statistics that demographers have to
work with are merely estimates, which in many
cases are unreliable. The Bureau of the Census
has claimed that millions of people - vagrants,
illegal immigrants, illiterates, and many others are
omitted from their figures. Demography thus consists
of much more then simply extending lines on graphs.
The science must take full account of all factors, social,
culture, and environmental, that may affect population
trends.

Since such factors can't always be accurately forecast
demographic projections into the distant future are
therefore necessarily inexact. Nor is unpredictability
the only problem that demographers have to face. Many
of the statistics that they have to work with are
merely estimates, which in many cases are unreliable.

Anyway, enough said. If you want to believe that the
population of this country is made up of a larger
percentage of a particular group - I have no intention
of trying to change your mind. Nor am I interested in
doing so.

The future will take care of itself. What is important
to me is that people from all different backgrounds live
together in harmony and celebrate and enjoy our diversity
be it in food, in music, in religion, in language, and
in culture. I shall leave it at that.
Find someone else to argue with over numbers or percentages.

Onya Saeed!

C'mon Saeed, C'mon C'mon http://youtu.be/2uBjJAV3CMk

I've been thinking about this, and somethings not sitting right...

Now Saeed, you're calling these Australians racist and xenophobe.
You want the silent majority to stand with you on this issue.
You're claim that too many Aussie 'John Smiths' are 'racist'.
But what exactly does that mean?
First of all I need to respect the fact that some, maybe many of these 'racist' Aussie patriots you want me to cast out like vermin are the sons and daughters of ANZAC's, who fought for this country.
I'm not going to sell them out simply because you 'claim' they are racist.
I have absolutely no right to, their ancestors fought for this country, and they most certainly have the right to voice an opinion in regards to this nation.
Maybe they're racist, maybe they're not.
But their voices deserve to be heard.

If you're going to claim they are racist, then I want to know why they are.
Do they just dislike you for no reason; or do they have a genuine reason?
Maybe they have watched their suburbs been take over.
Maybe their children have had issues with immigrants kids.
Maybe they've been abused or victimised by immigrants.
There is a million reasons why they might have genuine prejudice.

I'm not going to sell out my own countrymen (or women) because you claim they're racist.
You need to earn our respect, freedom isn't free.
The forefathers of this nations people fought for it.

Some of my countrymen and women would sell me out in a heartbeat, but I wonder whether they're real Aussies or generic.
Because I'd never sell them out as citizens just because they held an opinion I opposed.

Your claim of racism could be one big whine that the red carpet wasn't rolled out enough or maybe that by just by whingeing you can more.

Also how can you have national unity, when your religions sees us as infidels and inferior?
How can you get upset by racism, when you're promoting a 'religion' that promotes its own kind of racism against Non-Muslims?

http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Citi/pathways-processes/Citi/Australian-citizenship-pledge

Armchair Critic
You are beyond redemption.

//There is no such thing as the Cross of St. Patrick; Patrick doesn't have a cross as he was not martyred but died of old age.//

St. David wasn't martyred either, and he has a cross: look up the flag of St. David - same design as the St. George flag, but in black and gold rather white and red. I'm not sure this 'only martyrs get crosses' thing is actually a thing.

Mind you, the addition of the black and gold would foul up the Union Flag. I prefer the revised version which represents Wales with their dragon rather than the cross of their patron saint.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Union_Flag_of_UK_with_Wales.png

Hey Saeed,
So now I'm beyond redemption am I?
Well I'd disagree, but even if I am my great grandfather was a commanding officer at Gallipoli, so I'm pretty sure his efforts entitled me to have an opinion, because if it doesn't then I don't know why he was there.

So how exactly am I 'beyond redemption'?
What exactly is your problem - please explain?
Is there an argument I made that you dispute, or is it whine, whine, fricken whine this person is patriotic about his country and he won't bend over and pull his cheeks apart as easily as some other foreign-born generic-australian sellouts?

If you want me to sell my fellow countrymen out then identify them, name them.
Lets go talk to them and find out why they're upset.
You want people to understand why YOU'RE upset don't you?
(Otherwise you wouldn't pedal these whingey articles)
Why shouldn't we try to understand why they are upset?
That would be fair wouldn't it?

Or maybe you don't want national unity at all?
Instead wanting to denigrate, vilify and inflame the divide as this is your vehicle to get what you want?

Don't you understand that I'm a citizen too?
You can't have 'national unity' unless I'm included, are you mentally challenged?
Do you think insulting me will earn my respect?
Does calling me 'a piece of crap' (in roundabout words) promote 'national unity'?
If you claim to want 'national unity' and I'm not included it's just a figure of your imagination do you understand that?

A boring puppet of the multicultural "industry", and NGO vacuume cleaner of precious tax payer funds, wasted on the unnecessary:

**Saeed Khan is a writer, diversity advocate, a former Deputy Chair of the Ethnic Communities Council of NSW and a former Treasures of the Federation of Ethnic Communities Council of Australia (FECCA). Twitter @saeedahmedkhan**

Some of our Muslim migrants came over from Afghanistan, with camels, to help lay out the overland telegraph. And apparently of the Sofie tradition, [the oldest and least revised Muslim tradition, who have peaceful cohabitation writ large in their philosophy, which includes meditation?]

And nowadays, they blend in seamlessly! As the Okers who share a beer or celebratory B-B-Q in the generations that followed. Some of who could be the bloke you have a convivial beer with after work or meet at the footy and just as passionate about the home team.

Their wives wear makeup and bikinis, nor are they offended by the odd complementary remark.

I'm not sure about their attitude to intermarriage. But I doubt many would lose much sleep, if a son or daughter met fell in love with and married a decent person of another faith? Or that any children of that issue could be exposed to both philosophies, and then choose what they felt comfortable with, even agnostic but humanistic values?

There are many roads to the top of the mountain! And enlightenment may start with a brick to the head?

And possibly the only way to shut Armchair's mouth, if only to give his brain a look in? United we stand, divided we fall!

We do not need to become our very own middle east! The goal of the eternally argumentative trolls posting here!?
Alan B.

Foxy,

". I shall leave it at that.
Find someone else to argue with over numbers or percentage"

You brought up the subject, so don't chicken out, back your statement with a reference.

Toni,

"The flag of Saint David was mostly unknown in Wales until 1994. There was a large one along the roof in St David's Cathedral with the cinquefoils thereon but hardly any others in use. The Welsh Tartan Company (WTC) were looking around for a 'brand' to complete the Brithwe Dewi Sant (St David's Tartan).
J Wake, then of the WTC, set out to see if the flag could be used commercially or indeed patriotically across Wales....."
from Wikipedia.

Hardly a traditional flag of the Welsh nation!!

The fact that the Red Dragon of Wales would not fit neatly onto the Union Flag is the same reason that the Shamrock of Ireland was not used (as it had been earlier) and the Geraldines' Saltire was chosen as it fitted, physically though not in accord with the rules/traditions of vexillology.

Dear Is Mise,

I don't have to back anything.
I've explained things to you regarding
demographics if you want to know more you can Google
the 2011 Census for yourself and see how many
ancestries Australians lay claim to.

To me numbers
are not important. The fact remains that today
Australians come from a wide variety of cultures
and as Mr Saeed Khan tells us - let us be united
not divisive which I consider a good call.

See you on another discussion. This one has run its
course.

Dearest Foxy,

On the contrary, it's barely begun. We do need to talk about what you might call 'positive multiculturalism' - promoting the values that Australians should be sharing, versus a rather brainless 'negative multiculturalism' in which every group fosters its own values and to hell with any sort of national solidarity, let alone unity.

As a positive multiculturalist, I'm happy to live, work and play with anyone whose specificities are no great burden to other Australians, i.e. language, food preferences, humour and aspirations. I'm wary of anybody who, whether for cultural reasons or otherwise, is antagonistic to, or promotes, unequal relations between men and women, especially if they use religion to justify their attitudes. I'm not keen on anybody who has racist attitudes towards, or demonises, anybody else.

But apart from that, I'm happy with an inclusive, positive, healthy and contributing multiculturalism. After all, something like that has made Australia what it is now, to a large extent. I really don't give a toss about comparative trivia such as flag design (despite being involved in making Aboriginal Flags back in the 1970s), even the present one, although one day, I'm sure, we'll get around to putting up something more relevant to Australia - the Union Jack is a bit irrelevant, and the Southern Cross - please forgive me, Australia - is, after all, visible to half the world, it's hardly the exclusive property of Australia or NZ.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

I've covered this topic so many times in the past.
I appreciate your post but I really feel that I
have nothing new to add. Therefore I shall leave
you with a link that you might find interesting.
It's from a speech to the Sydney Institute, 9 March
2016, given by Dr Tim Soutphommasane, Race
Discrimination Commissioner on "The Success of
Australia's Multiculturalism." : -

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/speeches/success-australia-s-multiculturalism

It's worth a read.

See you on another discussion.

Foxy,

You said, did you not, that "Today the surviving population of culturally British people is small and their descendants are being matched in number
by newcomers."

That statement is demonstrably false, just look at the number of people who have the name 'Smith', the commonest name in Australia.

You've been posting unreliable waffle.

Dear Foxy,

I was struck by this quote from Dr Soutphommasane's speech:

"Contrary to its critics, Australian multiculturalism has never sanctioned a form of cultural relativism. Any right to express one’s cultural identity and heritage has been accompanied by responsibilities. There must be a commitment to liberal democratic values – to parliamentary democracy, to the rule of law, to equality of the sexes, to freedom of speech....

"In other words, Australian multiculturalism has always been an exercise in nation-building. It has always aimed to strengthen Australian national identity, not to supersede it. It has always been robust and muscular; it has always been committed to liberal democracy. "

Spot-on :)

Love,

Joe

Dear Is Mise,

I'm a love-it-or-hate-it person.

I don't waffle!

Dear Joe,

I knew you'd like it.

"Quiet people have the loudest minds."
(Steven Hawking). ;-)

Hi Forum

I did reply to Yuyutu's comment ..... in trying to seek a "positive" in his comments.

Such post was "deleted" .....don't know why.

Please - don't tell me this forum is now becoming PC correct?

Foxy,

I too was struck by this quote from Dr Soutphommasane's speech:

"Contrary to its critics, Australian multiculturalism has never sanctioned a form of cultural relativisms.... There must be a commitment to liberal democratic values – to parliamentary democracy, to the rule of law, to equality of the sexes, to freedom of speech...."

Seems to exclude Muslims then, surprised that you posted it.

Well I genuinely think Sakeem Khan is a fraud, and a hypocrite.
He's either completely deluded, or a person deliberately wanting to disrupt our society and cause disunity and civil unrest.

I'd like to think I gave him a reasonable chance to show us that he true believes in what he preaches and despite his short response, however I did learn enough that I can safely conclude he completely failed the litmus test.

I think his article is designed to incite unrest rather than promote national unity, and I'd like to explain why I think he's full of it.

Now I did come out somewhat hard against Sakeem, in order to elicit a response:
I wanted to know if he was for real when he spoke about 'national unity' or whether he was full of it.

This argument could've gone two ways:
1. He could've acknowledged that some Australians have reasons for concern in regards to Muslims and immigrants; as evidenced by a poll during the last election that showed the majority of Australians were concerned about it (Can anyone find that poll again and link it please) and he could've made a show of allaying fears and a will to work together with patriotic Australians to try reconciling the differences and find a realistic way forward; but he didn't.
2. Instead he went the divisive path of labelling people (illigitimate), denigrating and marginalising them and their concerns.

THIS IS NOT THE WAY ONE WOULD ACT IF THE GENUINELY SOUGHT NATIONAL UNITY.

So I am asserting that by Sakeems own opinions/beliefs/actions - he's a fraud and a hypocite.
You can't have national unity if you are also attempting to label some people as illigitimate to stifle their particular concerns.
He's talking out of both sides of his mouth.
If you truly sought national unity you'd embrace those concerns in an attempt to overcome them.
Which is where the earlier comments 'completely deluded', and 'deliberately seeking disunity and civil unrest' are now relevant.

You cant fool all the people all the time Sakeem...

[Cont.]

[Cont.]

I want to note about liberal use of the word 'racist' and the harm that it can do.
I believe people like Sakeem use it to manipulate public opinion and to label and marginalise Australians who don't agree with his views.
Even if an Australians had reasonable and geniune concerns or prejudices people like Sakeen would attempt to stifle their views.
We should be mindful of the methods others use in attempt to divide us for their benefit.

Finally I want to talk about those 'so-called racists' themselves.
I want to put forward the idea that not all people are able to articulate their fears and concerns easily into words, or have a platform to voice these concerns.
Maybe they're facing differing levels of problems in different localities, so one size does not fit all.
These people who lack the skills to articulate their genuine fears and concerns into words or are more exposed to the issues in their neighbourhood might have a prevalence for expressing these genuine fears and concerns as 'racism'.
Also I want to put forward that its governments who ultimately fail to pay attention to their own citizens fears and concerns and have continued with bad policies and allowed situations to worsen.
Something to think about.

That's me, I'm officially done with this pile of trash thread.

Dear Is Mise,

Life is full of surprises, but as someone once said -
the biggest one of all is learning what it takes to
handle them.

Or put another way that someone else stated:
- you can either emphasize those aspects
of our traditions religious or secular that speak
of hatred, exclusion and suspicion or work with
those that stress the interdependence and equality of all
human beings.

The choice is yours.

“And before you embark on an argument or a debate, ask yourself honestly if you are ready to change your mind.”
― Karen Armstrong, Twelve Steps to a Compassionate Life

Have a great Australia Day folks, despite the usual tedious platitudes about multiculturalism and 'diversity is good'. The 'touch the forelock stuff' is also overdone.

Can we enjoy an Australia Day that is free of moral lessons and exhortations to do better?

Foxy,

".... this quote from Dr Soutphommasane's speech:

"Contrary to its critics, Australian multiculturalism has never sanctioned a form of cultural relativisms.... There must be a commitment to liberal democratic values – to parliamentary democracy, to the rule of law, to equality of the sexes, to freedom of speech...."

Does this mean that FGM, bigamy, forcing women to wear certain clothing and having child brides is not sanctioned by Australian multiculturalism?

Not surprised that you find him to be interesting.

Dear Is Mise,

You and I have covered this topic many times on
this forum.

You'll have to play this game by yourself.

I'm simply not interested.

Bye.

cont'd ...

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6867

Foxy bows out, outfoxed by a simple question.

Not at all.

You were left a link that more than answers the
question.

This issue has been dealt with.

Hi IsMise,

You were asking: "Does this mean that FGM, bigamy, forcing women to wear certain clothing and having child brides is not sanctioned by Australian multiculturalism?"

Of course not, since these breach the equal rights of Australians, Muslim girls and women. End of.

Clearly, at a deep level, there is a contradiction between aspects of multiculturalism and Australian conventions - and always, always, Australian values must prevail. All Australians are entitled, equally entitled, to the full protections and freedoms of Australian law.

I'm relieved that Dr Soutphommasane has put into words his opposition tov cultural relativism, which has plagued the social sciences for decades now - the notion that all cultures, i.e. all cultural practices, are equally valid. The burning of witches ? The killing of people for casting spells on someone ? Girls promised at birth in marriage ? The cutting of both girls and boys in initiation ceremonies or on some pretext ? The killing of women for supposedly looking at another bloke ? The lifelong subordination of women ?

It's interesting that so many vile cultural practices target either women or young people, or both. Clearly 'culture' is a tarted-up way of justifying power relations within groups, i.e. male domination, and I'm amazed that people who think they sympathise with Marxism would ever condone such practices, and the maintenance of such social relations. They certainly have no place in Australia, or anywhere in the modern world.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Joe,

We have a legal system that we are all expected
to abide by in this country. Of course we must have respect
for new cultures as well as old, but that does not mean that
we embrace of make legal or turn a blind eye to brutal
or demeaning or discriminatory customs brought from abroad.
Where they break our law, criminal charges should be laid.
FGM, child-brides, et cetera are illegal in this country.

Dear Foxy,

«We have a legal system that we are all expected to abide by in this country.»

Not again... you have mentioned this before, this well-known fact that there are some brutes around who expect us to abide by their legal system. People may have all sorts of expectations of us: your parents for example may want you to be a doctor or a lawyer, but that doesn't mean that you need to fulfil their expectations!

Foxy,

Do you include Aboriginal Australians or may some of them practice their discriminatory, anti women's rights traditional customs at will?

Dear Is Mise,

Everyone is subject to the laws of this country.
However according to the Supreme Court rulings
disadvantage and case by case circumstances are
supposed to be taken into account in a person's
sentencing. The following link explains:

http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/law/aboriginality-disadvantage-and-sentencing

cont'd ...

This link explains further:

http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/law/tribal-punishment-customary-law-payback

When I come to these threads the subject has usually changed, but to
return to the thread;

Saeed, now hear this, in English Islam is not a race it is a RELIGION !
Your article is peppered with racist references.
At Cronulla the riot was because moslem young men were bothering the girls.
Just like they are seeing in Germany, UK, France and Sweden these days.

You can call them being bigoted religionists but not necessarily racists.

Now a question for you to ask yourself;
All round the world WHY IS IT SO ?