The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > More outrages, more revulsion, more enmity > Comments

More outrages, more revulsion, more enmity : Comments

By David Palmer, published 15/7/2005

David Palmer argues Victoria's religious vilification legislation should be repealed or, at the least, amended.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 23
  9. 24
  10. 25
  11. All
I know Christians hate the Victorian Religious vilification Law and do not want to use it because of Matthew 5:11, but while it exists the offensive language of the Qur'an itself against Christians, infidels and Jews is extremely incitful of violence and should be taken to the tribunal to have it banned from endorced public readings. The Muslim community of Britain realise the Qur'ans incitement of violence and hatred is the reason for its exemption from the British vilification law.

In line with the Judge Higgins ruling it does not have to identify any particular person if we are offended by its incitement of hatred or violence against infidels, which is evident by the actions of some of its adherents - the case is evident. The Qur'an is not a suitable text for school children because it can easily be manipulated by extremists. Because many are offended by its language it must be assigned a restricted catagory. It is not a text to be endorced by an enlightened society, even as Christians do not endorce the violent actions and laws of Moses. We can read them to discover our roots, but they are not a Christian World view.
Posted by Philo, Friday, 15 July 2005 9:55:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Philo,

It could be felt some of you as regards the present global problems might be taking religous arguments too far. In fact, it could be argued that religion is being used only to further aggravate exceedingly grave political problems, which particularly in the Middle East still stem largely from both neo-colonialism and economic imperialism. As any dedicated political philosopher will agree, both Britain and America have much to be ashamed of concerning their injustices in the ME - Britain since WW1 and both Britain and the US since WW2. There have been suggestions in the "West Australian", the one prominent newspaper in our state, that of the leaders backing the war in Iraq, by their actions and their rhetoric none seem to have much of a sense of history. In a study of history in our universities, students also have to pass an elective in historical philosophy. Apparently lawyers and political wheeler-dealers do not have to study such critical courses.

By such letters to the media, maybe our public is becoming awake up, rather than being dumbed down with overdone patriotism, brought on by the fear of terrorism. The worry is that the recent tragic events in London might increase this panic, as well as increasing the hatred between the world's two most important religions.

George C - (Bushbred)
Posted by bushbred, Saturday, 16 July 2005 12:28:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This article has very little to say about the 130-plus pages of analysis and consideration of the evidence by Justice Higgins. Its basic message is that one judge may have gotten it wrong, therefore the entire Act should be repealed.

Many judges get things wrong in decisions under the Crimes Act. Should we therefore throw Criminal Statues out of the books? Or should we get rid of the Income Tax Assessment Act because a judge makes a wrong decision on what is an allowable deduction?

Those who have studied the Act and who have seen how anti-discrimination legislation operates in practice will know that this legislation really does not do much.

As for the infantile and simplistic references to what happens in muslim community organisations, this is simply a case of centralising the trivial and trivialising the central. What really matters is that 2 fringe pastors from a fringe christian cult made highly inflammatory remakrs. One wonders what would have happened had they made the same remarks about Australian Jews.
Posted by Irfan, Saturday, 16 July 2005 1:49:17 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Irfan
interesting that along with the ICV the AIJAC (Jewish lobby) was behind that legislation.

Peek at the vitriol in even the editorial section of "Islamic Sydney" from time to time you will find VERY hateful anti Jewish statements. But nothing was/is done about it...hmmmmmmm

Now.. you made reference to the 'cult' of the 2 Danny's as being 'fringe' etc, but this is a most misleading statement. While I personally take serious issue with some of the directions and claims made particulatly by Danny Naliah, they are by no means 'fringe'.

They represent a movement (of which I am not a part) which is gaining momentum by the day as evidenced by "HillSong" etc, to which prime ministers and Treasurers attend services... hardly 'fringe'. I have issues with Hillsong also, mainly the (previous) emphasis on 'prosperity gospel'.

The point you are missing in your assessment of the legislation, is that its USE was :

a) CONSPIRATORIAL with direct links to the ICV (May Hallou was employed by BOTH EOC "AND" ICV....
-spies were sent to the seminar.
-They had the outcome 'pre-decided' (they asked how Christians should treat muslims, they were told face to face "WITH LOVE" yet they went way saying "They are inciting hate"

b) SELECTIVE APPLICATION. I raised a complaint myself, which was a strong at least as the ICV complaint about a book peddled by the ABC, in which God was described as "The greatest pimp in the world" That book is "Da gospel according to Ali G" I was told by the EOC that my complaint 'had no substance'...

The point being made by the seminar on Islam was attempting to understand the 'mindset' of a fundamentalist Muslim.
Failure to distinguish between "The average Muslim" and the 'Fundamentalists' was a weakness in their presentation, agreed.

But not trying to surpess Christian free speech over. They pointed out far worse statements preached by Imams. touche :) (Judge ignored them)

Christ says "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"
(we're praying 4 u :)

Mohammed says "Fight the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 16 July 2005 7:19:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BD,

Your way of picking two words from a comment I made then put it into another context proves the size of hate ball inside you for muslims.
It also proves to me that you are unable to sell your religious beliefs on its own: you need to 'create' an enemy in your brian to survive. Sad.

No further comments on your prejudice and paranoia.

AK
Posted by Fellow_Human, Saturday, 16 July 2005 9:42:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Having attended the Catch The Fire Meeting which so caught the attention of those sent there for the purpose of mischief and also a number of the sessions of the case including the final handing down of the final submission from Judge Higgins, I could be forgiven for wondering whether the three 'events' were associated.

I believe I am very fair minded, despite my strong Christian beliefs or perhaps I should say, because of my strong Christian beleifs. I find it incredulous that such a damning, one sided conclusion should have taken so long to be handed down. David Palmer is quite right and I agree with him wholeheartedly.

The Steve Bracks government without question seems to have a hidden agenda to keep promoting this R & R Vil Bill against the wise judgement of other state who have rejected it completely.

Aussie
Posted by Aussie, Saturday, 16 July 2005 10:44:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 23
  9. 24
  10. 25
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy