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 > Principles for an Australian policy on religion and state > Comments

Principles for an Australian policy on religion and state : Comments

By James Page, published 17/11/2011

Australians ought to have the right to bring their religion with them into public debate.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
What get's up the nose of the god deniers is that people are willing to support their faith even after having paid tax on their wages. The new athiest god deniers expect the Government to pay for their faith. At least the Government gets a return from the churches rather than the bile that comes from the god deniers.
Posted by runner, Monday, 21 November 2011 10:50:12 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
runner, people pay tax on their wages but churches bleed the economy of a potential $30billion of untaxed income.

Churches need some 'pastoral care', that is, let them free in the same ATO pasture we all graze in, without any special deals.

I am reminded of the angst the trade unions went through as their privilege was closed down, the 'preference clause'.

Now they survive without it, and should they ever recruit anyone it could only be because that person/people have elected to join up.

So it should be with religions.

Join by all means, but pay your way and do not expect a special deal from the state.
Posted by The Blue Cross, Monday, 21 November 2011 12:26:10 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
Australia is, in many ways, the most fortunate of countries when it comes to religion in public life.
The general level of disinterest is in large part a great protection. No-one campaigns here based on their faith. No-one questions a candidate's faith. Matters of faith are intensely personal and here in Aus they are expected to stay that way - a wonderful system.
I would hate to see that change, where personal philosophy was suddenly dragged into the spotlight.
As for churches and their tax status, I believe firmly that churches should seperate their religious/charitable arms from their commercial arms (at least to the extent possible). The former should properly be tax exempt, the latter taxed the same as any other.
Posted by J S Mill, Tuesday, 22 November 2011 2:53:21 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
J S Mill you are right unlike the bigoted nonsence posted by The Blue Cross. My wife has worked for eight years for the Church and has paid tax on her wages without exemption. The employment is a not for profit service to the public and they pay GST and are accountable to the Government on service given and records kept.

The Church had to purchase the land and build the facilities.
Posted by Philo, Thursday, 24 November 2011 6:29:41 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
eh bluey
i watched half ya vidio

intresting it was the salvo's
[who asked my wife and daughter to take a paycut of 20 % just recently]

religeon has become a scam
it is time..that scam was revealed

i fel sorry for those people good and true
who try hard to follow the way of christ...but the thing is xtian arnt christian anymore..[charity is a thing govt pays for..or the tax payer]...but basicly govt bying favour..to get a xtian brand on things

so all the god god people
think govt acts for god..not corperate excess
and bailout of the rich banking ursurors

anyhow
satan has a firm hold over chistians..
via their tax free child perversion institutions..

by their deeds stand they revealed and reviled
i turned the other cheek..7 times 70..then i stopped turning away

and decided to attack the head of the best
but the beast has too many heads

then its prioritising which head
[jesus made that cleasr]..the money changers

who by stealing govt banking institutions
[mint fed note printing etc cyber credit..
plus who get funds at what intrest rate].../have no achieved criminal total control over govts[all govts]..by making them pay ursury on their own money

thats why i invented the wikiseed/wikigeld
but im talking to the guilty and shameless..who are deaf
cause they thing the nmessiah bringing armogeddon..to be 'christ'

when we know the true christ has gone to the fathers house
in heabven..to build us all a room in our fathers house

hell is here
satanic demonic autocratz teqnoc-rats..beurorockrats..
parties and corperate bankers..run the place

we have foregone spiritual riches..
for materialised debt

to forgive them seems too hard
im willing to risk eternal dammnation..to keep the barsteward honest[oops that one failed too]..ok i give up

your forgiven
go..AND SIN NO MORE

[disclaimer notice..;to now sin..means
you will get forgiven again and again,,but in the end
you get to go to..that special room[in our fathers house]..where liars go]

each sin has its own room
just as each blessing..[dont curse your future life
by cursing materialsts]..that they do...they do..not you
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 24 November 2011 7:24:07 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
The problem with wanting to do away with prayer is that to say we're not a Christian nation is akin to saying we're not an English speaking nation. To change the Constitution, preamble or prayer in Parliament isn't to leave some kind of phantasmal neutral space, as if forgoing English would usher in some transcendent mode of communication above language, rather you would have to promulgate Esperanto or Latin or Elvish or some other language considered superior.

So too with the attempt to excise Christianity from public life, the vacuum is filled by secular liberalism - a metaphysical position that requires argument to justify and is itself a tradition (a particularly unstable one as we are experiencing)and an incoherent one at that IMO.

Using multiculturalism won't work either if it is understood as being not multiethnism but grounded in cultural relativism, which says that Islamic culture or whatever is as equal as any other. Often multi-culti speak is used to undermine the West's traditions like our Christian one in order that a new one, secularism (liberalism) may dominate. What we find pretty quickly is that multi-culti speak is quickly abandoned once the job is done, for secularism really claims to be a supra tradition that rules from above relativising every other tradition but its own.

We need to think better about all, especially given that secularism (liberalism) really has no stable resources from which to secure things like freedom of speech, which is why it so quickly turns to human rights tribunals, media enquiries, and PC speech codes to support itself.

But I thank the author for his thoughts.
Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Sunday, 27 November 2011 10:30:49 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

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