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 > General Discussion > Should Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) be barred from Australia?

Should Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) be barred from Australia?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 18
  7. 19
  8. 20
  9. Page 21
  10. 22
  11. 23
  12. All
Dear SOG...it's easy when we try isn't it :) I'm talking about 'discussion'... I offered some information.. you came back..not a hint of condemnation. just *discussion*.. aaah.. I rather enjoy this.
What a refreshing change.

You also went from actually looking at the video.. and came back with a considered opinion. I support that opinion, I rather doubt that Aussies would embrace or accept such values regarding child marriage.

This doesn't mean certain groups won't attempt to alter things in that direction...which is of course my primary concern.

You seem to have the nouse to know how politics works...which is never about what majorities want or approve of.. but rather how small interest groups (such as the Greens) can take advantage of proportional representation, and target marginal seats to gain power in the Senate....from their.. while they only represent perhaps 9% of votes (2007).. they control the whole agenda giving their royal green 'yay' or 'nay' as they deem fit.

So...from this concern, (as you say "cause and effect" etc.. I deduce that 'awareness' is a good thing.

When Bob Brown campaigns for certain laws to be altered (e.g. Marraige Act) we know he speaks from a very personal standpoint.
When he supports "Freedom of Religion" for Muslims... he really means 'More power for Greens with their vote' Otherwise he would not support something which if given free reign would probably hurl him off a building for his sexual practices.

Did you have a look at that literary reference I gave ? What did you make of that ?

Here's one to mull on.

Greens policy
http://greens.org.au/policies/human-rights-democracy/global-governance

1. global governance is essential to meet the needs of global peace and security, justice, human rights, poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability.

In another policy..they say "We believe in self determination for all peoples"

Whereupon my 'small-a-rat-Ometer' went haywire.

cheers
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 5 June 2010 2:25:32 PM
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
PERICLES....you said/asked:

//Unfortunately, there has been little point in appealing to their common sense, their intellect, or their humanity.//

You have NEVER appealed to that list on matters re Islam.... you have demonstrated extreme phobia of all that "is" common and sensible.

//Their creed includes hatred of people who don't share their beliefs,//

Total rubbish of the most vile kind and.. unfounded, baseless and worse.. directly contradictory to John 3:16 "For God so LOVED the....WORLD"

//and they will not be shaken from it by any argument from rationality, reality or reason.//

You are joking...right ?

-Rationality "For the gazlionth time.. I have no interest in comparative religion"

-Reality: yes.. in the twilight zone.

-Reason: ? again.. you are living on some other planet. You could learn much from the balanced approach of SONofGLOIN... and actually "look" at reasons 'why' those you oppose hold the positions they do.

//Does anyone have any suggestions as to how we might approach this differently?//

Pericles.. it's simple.. try to understand peoples position rather than just condemning it out of bigotry and not taking the slightest bit of interest in seeing the reasons for..or discussing WHY they hold such positions.

//I've run out of ideas, frankly.//

I have a suggestion.

Look at what I provided.. be willing to discuss it.. and form your own conclusions..and then if they differ from mine.. just agree to differ.

Is it really that hard ? SOG did it in 2 posts.. but you can't do it in 1000 ? :)

I will confess one weakness. (though I have many)

In the past I have 'led' with bold conclusions and then sought to justify them. Now..I'd prefer to just 'nudge'... and see where it goes.
My son lectured me :)
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 5 June 2010 2:48:58 PM
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
ALGOREisRICH>> Did you have a look at that literary reference I gave ? What did you make of that ?<<

If you meant the surah passages, yes, there was nothing new. The dissertations regarding the social nuances to be followed in the Qurans is as relevant to a modern society as is the horse, it played a big part, but time moved on.

Here are two snippets regarding the status of women.
Genesis 3:16: To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you completely".
Muhammadan poet "mothers of mankind are only 'vessels' which receive the children without leaving any impress on them"

Our forefathers from all sides of the bridge had a pre determined "worth" ascribed to women. They were there for "us", and there was no "them" they were a chattel. Things have moved on, except for the majority of Islamic countries when it comes to social engineering. They follow the same rules as the first Mohammadans did, and they will not be dissuaded from their cultural practices no matter what society they transplant into, and that is the issue.

Re Bob Brown, what can you say about an Australian who wants the U.N. to govern the world. Politicians of all persuasions have signed away our rights, along with the countries sovereignty over it's people piece by piece from the 70's onward with every U.N. resolution we have signed. I have no issue with the greens natural heritage policy as long as the land to be impacted is not privately owned. If it is the owner should be compensated adequately if they are impacted. Regarding carbon trading, it is another way to extract money from the consumer, to the benefit of brokerage houses and a handful of people in the Environmental movement
Posted by sonofgloin, Saturday, 5 June 2010 4:50:05 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
Dear SOG .. interesting points you raised about ancient documents and:

//The dissertations regarding the social nuances to be followed in the Qurans is as relevant to a modern society as is the horse, it played a big part, but time moved on.// (?)

The commentary you read.. was written in our lifetime :) the opinion he expressed was intended in his community to apply 'now' and 4eva....

Was that apparent in your reading ?

Could you be more specific about what you referred to as 'social nuances' ? :)

The Genesis reference is well noted. "Rule over them"... compare the New Testament reference
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church,

Sounds similar right ? But the relationship is fleshed out further here

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.

GREENS and our FREEDOM.
I'm sure you would enjoy the newly created thread about Green Parties...a lot of what you said is relevant.

I draw your attention to a document from the UN from 1976 on private property...

http://www.un-documents.net/vp-d.htm

Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.

Recommendation D.1

(a) Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means of...achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits of development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.

(d) Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements...

COMMENT.
The people pushing this the hardest.. are also the richest.

Gore..Strong..Soros and their multitude of 'foundations'

Awareness is the first step toward freedom.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Sunday, 6 June 2010 8:34:26 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
CJ MORGAN wrote:

"Rest assured that if blasphemy laws are mooted by any religious organisation in Australia, I'll be vociferously opposing them."

I don't think you will. Because such laws would not be called blasphemy laws.

You frequently accuse posters of "Islamophobia" or of "demonising" and "vilifying" Muslims. So I think you'd be happy to go along with blasphemy laws labelled as "anti-hate speech" or "anti-vilification" laws.

There is a way of putting this to the test. What do you think about Victoria's "Racial and religious tolerance act" and the prosecution of Pastors Nalliah and Scott?
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Sunday, 6 June 2010 9:41:49 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
Steven, I'm on record at OLO as stating on numerous occasions that I don't support the Victorian legislation. I also think that the prosecution of the fundy Christian Islamophobes was a strategic blunder, in that it provided a rallying point for Islamophobic hatred and a couple of potential martyrs to their odious cause.

Who'd have heard of these clowns if it wasn't for the legislation and prosecution?

You're picking the wrong target here if you're arguing for freedom of speech - it's your fellow Islaomophobic travellers Boazy etc who have argued to "ban" various Muslims from the ABC, concert tours etc.

Do try and be consistent.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 6 June 2010 9:59:54 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. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 18
  7. 19
  8. 20
  9. Page 21
  10. 22
  11. 23
  12. All

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