The Forum > Article Comments > Supporting diversity without fear > Comments
Supporting diversity without fear : Comments
By Kay Stroud, published 3/6/2016Just as the broader community is beginning to question stereotypes and think differently about ethnicity, culture, faith, race, nationality, skin colour, age, sexuality and gender, spiritual carers are also challenged by new paradigms.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
-
- All
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 3 June 2016 8:56:31 AM
| |
Can't we just care for each other without believing in such a concept as a divine source?
Posted by david f, Friday, 3 June 2016 3:48:34 PM
| |
"...the broader community is beginning to question stereotypes and think differently about ethnicity, culture, faith, race, nationality, skin colour, age, sexuality and gender, spiritual carers are also challenged by new paradigms. Armed with the common religious acknowledgement of a higher power as man's common source these carers have something in their toolbox that can help them prayerfully reconsider sincerely held beliefs that might have prevented them from embracing diversity."
Any individual making such authoritative comments on the "broader community" is seriously deluded. The broader community - totally beyond the ken of a Christian Scientist - is hardening its attitude to diversity of population, sexual deviation, incompatible (with Western values) races, religions. The results of diversity can be seen in the lowering of behavioural standards in Australia, the weakening of our politicians (evidenced in their fear of thugs and people wishing our society harm, and their suppression of the free speech of people demanding our governments act as they are supposed to in upholding Australia society and values. But, both major parties are importing too many people, and people of the wrong kind. Diverse people were not meant to live together. Putting together people of different races and cultures is a modern piece of social engineering that has clearly failed. Posted by ttbn, Friday, 3 June 2016 4:34:02 PM
| |
Dear David,
<<Can't we just care for each other without believing in such a concept as a divine source?>> Certainly! It is not possible to care for someone who is truly other than yourself. What allows and prompts us to care for each other is that in truth we are not separate entities, that we do share our common divine essence, that deep within, behind the appearances, we are in fact not many, but One. But whether or not we conceptualise the above and believe in it, is not that important. Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 3 June 2016 4:53:43 PM
| |
Why not David? After all, doing the right thing by other folk because it's the right thing to do, is brotherly love in action. In other words, one doesn't need to believe in a controlling creator to do its work, which is just love?
And no I'm not talking about the misrepresented love portrayed by the usual bible banger who wants to own your mind and your free will? Just that represented by the good samaritan, or everyday small acts of kindness that's universal and not owned by this or that religion! At the end of the day, no smiling fanatic or goody two shoes able to quote chapter and verse, from what could be a work of man made fiction? Can decide what the other believes! However, nobody can live or exist in a vacuum and if we must believe in something? What about the mighty irrefutable truth? At the end of the day the only person able to stand in judgement and decide whether you lived your life as well as you were able, and treated all others as you would be treated if you had to walk a mile or two in their shoes, is the person staring back at you in the mirror. And the only one who knows your secret truth and anything you would not have others know of or about you and therefore can't be fooled. Christian charity is simply not something that's exclusive or necessarily the proclaimed property of the so called Christian brotherhood or God botherer, but every person who lives and draws breath or risks it all in the service of others! Alan B. Posted by Alan B., Friday, 3 June 2016 5:00:56 PM
| |
Why does the word diversity only ever seem to get used in white communities? Funny how we never hear the word diversity used in non white or Muslim communities.
It seems that the word diversity is taking on the meaning of 'less whites' and 'less christians.' Posted by Referundemdrivensocienty, Saturday, 4 June 2016 12:40:52 PM
| |
Dear Referundemdrivensocienty,
You wrote: "Funny how we never hear the word diversity used in non white or Muslim communities." Where do you get your information on what words are used in non white or Muslim communities? Are you non-white or Muslim? Posted by david f, Saturday, 4 June 2016 12:55:28 PM
| |
Yea lets all just luv each. Tell that to the deviants who are trying to sexualise and groom kids. Tell that to the terrorist using kids as shields as they bomb Israel, tell that to the radical Hindus who murder Christians in Northern India, tell that to the millions of unborn whose mothers have had their hearts calloused. This article is really for those who live in fairyland and totally misrepresent Scripture.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 4 June 2016 5:17:49 PM
| |
//Why does the word diversity only ever seem to get used in white communities?//
Presumably because you live in a white community. //Funny how we never hear the word diversity used in non white or Muslim communities.// See previous point. //This article is really for those who live in fairyland and totally misrepresent Scripture.// So can you point me to the bit in the Bible where it says to be judgemental and contemptuous of your neighbour? Just book, chapter and verse will do thanks - no need to add your own commentary. I prefer the word of the Bible to the word of runner. Posted by Toni Lavis, Saturday, 4 June 2016 5:56:42 PM
| |
For someone who has held such contempt for Scripture Toni its very odd that you want me to quote it.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 4 June 2016 6:23:23 PM
| |
at the biology level there is no brotherhood of man
I know exactly who my biological brother is and where he lives. I also know that men born in countries far away or even in cities far away are not my brother. If any one of them suddenly turned up on my doorstepand said, "hi sis i'm your brother,". id laugh , loudly and say, "no your're not." This idea of the brotherhood of man, only exists at the intellectual, emotive wishful thinking level. Its a lovely idea, but wars are fought for terrortorial,biological survival reasons. in other words,like every other species on earth we fight to protect those biologically closest to us. Like, in a time of war, my real brother, would fight on my side of the line not men (since we are talking about brothers,not sisters) of a non closely related and connected bloodline This is the reality of war. Not hippy religious ideas about the brotherhood of man that exists in the mind only. . Posted by CHERFUL, Saturday, 4 June 2016 9:38:47 PM
| |
Yes there is a brotherhood of man that exists outside any biological connection! Those who've served or shared common danger or need the wisdom or skills of another to survive are able to form the camaraderie of a band of brothers (the generic term.)
Moreover, one gets stuck with their biological siblings, good, bad or ugly, but one gets to choose one's friends or what you'll tolerate as acceptable behavior? Which from where I sit, is doing the right thing because it's the right thing to do. Even where that requires one to grit the teeth, take a couple of deep breaths and then explain as if one were addressing a very young child? My father a man of very humble beginings, used to say if you can't do a man a good turn at least don't do him a bad one. And that also applies to most medical disciplines, which have a maxim, at least do no harm. Children are born both color blind and accepting others who are different; and aren't necessarily welded to control through violence or fear or repression. Generally speaking all those traits which include intolerance, hate and domestic abuse, are the product of (tribal or familial) inculcation and or conditioned acceptance? No one with a functional and rational mind is trying to turn this thread into a vehicle to enable yet another gay bashing tirade. As far as I'm aware runner, brotherly love just doesn't apply to sexual relations! Perhaps you have a different experience? Alan B. Posted by Alan B., Sunday, 5 June 2016 11:31:02 AM
| |
' No one with a functional and rational mind is trying to turn this thread into a vehicle to enable yet another gay bashing tirade
no more likely Alan B another Christian bashing tirade. The so called progressives will turn it into a promotion for perversion and a tirade against anyone with medical science on their side. Posted by runner, Sunday, 5 June 2016 3:09:07 PM
| |
“Where do you get your information on what words are used in non white or Muslim communities?”, asks david f.
The information that white women who did not cover up like muslims were like “cats meat” came from media in our own community who reported what an muslim imam said after the rape of white women by muslims in our own community. Where is this white community in which we are supposed to live, david f?The community in which I reside has a proliferation of non-whites and muslims.Where do you live? Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 5 June 2016 8:06:30 PM
| |
Dear Leo Lane,
I live a little bit north of Brisbane in a suburb called Cashmere. However, to know how non-whites and Muslims talk it is not enough to live near them it is either necessary to be part of their community or have entre to their community. Media emphasise what they want to emphasise which is not necessarily how the average person in the community talks. The imam who made that remark you cited is a foreign import. He did not grow up in Australia and probably does not know Australian ways. Presumably some of the younger Muslims are not like that. It does not help for young Muslims to have separate schools financed by the government. The ideal would be for Australians of different backgrounds to be together in public schools. Posted by david f, Sunday, 5 June 2016 8:58:36 PM
| |
david f says:“ to know how non-whites and Muslims talk it is not enough to live near them it is either necessary to be part of their community or have entre to their community. “.
It is certain that they would conceal a lot of any negative attitude they had, from you, and media reports are the closest you will get, without undercover reports. Muslims form enclaves, and their religion is hostile to any who have a different religion, or are not part of islam. We do not have, and have never had, a “white” community. The white Australia policy was far from achieving this objective when it was dismantled. Observation of the non-whites and muslims informs us of their attitudes. There is a high proportion of muslims serving prison time.In NSW the muslim population is 3%, with prison population comprising 9% muslim. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/community-under-siege/muslim-jailhouse-converts-on-the-rise/news-story/641a2d8372fb45383fd7de4a8a97d879 We do not need or want this diversity. Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 5 June 2016 10:10:22 PM
| |
Dear Leo Lane,
You wrote: "We do not need or want this diversity." Who is included in your 'we'? You do not speak for me. Posted by david f, Sunday, 5 June 2016 10:32:32 PM
| |
Neither for me.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 6 June 2016 2:16:18 AM
| |
What a ridiculous notion, David f, that I would purport to speak on behalf of people like you. I am speaking against the pernicious attacks on the integrity of our community by promoters, like yourself, of group think slogans like “diversity”, and, no doubt, “multiculturalism”. Your kind were so successful in England, that suicide bombers in London were born, raised, and educated in England. All it took was a visit to a madrass in Pakistan, to kick start their DNA.
You might start a movement like the one in England, to have prisons built with the cells facing mecca, for the comfort of the growing muslim prison population. What is the basis of your determination to disintegrate our community, davidf? Posted by Leo Lane, Monday, 6 June 2016 11:11:34 AM
| |
//Who is included in your 'we'? You do not speak for me.//
She is practising nosism (from the Latin 'nos' for 'we'), the practice of using the pronoun "we" to refer to oneself when expressing a personal opinion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism Posted by Toni Lavis, Monday, 6 June 2016 11:45:23 AM
| |
Dear Leo Lane,
I remind you that the first settlers of Australia were Protestant, Catholic and Jewish English and Irish. They were mostly criminals. The Aborigines might have objected to this bit of cultural diversity, this unwanted multicultural addition to their society. However, the descendants of these crims built a great nation. The Australian community disintegrated long ago starting with the first fleet. The societal change was much greater than anything since. I see no reason that descendants of other new Australians cannot add their bit. It seems a bit much that a citizen of a nation built on a convict heritage gets high and mighty about immigrants from a different background. Posted by david f, Monday, 6 June 2016 1:41:59 PM
| |
Alan B
you are talking on an individual level, sure you can feel great affection for people of different diversity and background and the point I am actually trying to make is that wars are not about intolerance I dont think we have any particular dislike of people from different races and backgrounds, until they move into our territory in huge numbers. Displays of so called racial hostility is actually terrortorial hostility. We go to war over control of land and resources. Because our survival as an ethnic group depends on being allowed access to abundant food,water,shelter and what the land can provide for our survival Many. a bloodline in history has been pushed to extinction by being driven off their land. The Aboriginals is one example, the American Indians another Itis basic biology that every species seeks to defend the survival of their genetically closest offspring For humans this is their children,their cousins,uncles and Aunts, and on the wider scale their tribe through centuries of intermarriage. This is the law of nature and nature is more powerful and in control than mankind thinks. Homosexuals, may actually not be as unintended by nature as people think, in time of war when the males of a tribe may be dimished in number the masculine side of the gender bender, may provide some masculine abilities to help the community. and on the otherside of the coin the feminine nuturing side of a gender bender may be able to mother orphaned children. There are just too many lesbians and homosexuals for it to be a mistake or thats how I think when I ponder it sometimes also there are many so called normal people with obvious degrees of male and female traits in them. The sexpot alpha female, and the androgenous looking female. Also you get quite overly masculine, macho men and effeminate looking male professor types. Posted by CHERFUL, Tuesday, 7 June 2016 9:43:55 PM
| |
david f:
The penal colony of New South Wales came about in an era when rehabilitation of prisoners was an emerging movement, in England. Prisoners were offered incentives, so that, for instance, good behaviour during his term could see a prisoner with a land grant, and a financial start to a new life. .The Colony offered opportunities for advancement to people with the right attitude, the people who laid the foundations of the colony. The prisoners generally were of English, Scottish and Irish heritage, who had taken the opportunity to absolve their criminal background, and with no heritage of a disgusting religion like islam. David f says:” I see no reason that descendants of other new Australians cannot add their bit. It seems a bit much that a citizen of a nation built on a convict heritage gets high and mighty about immigrants from a different background.” As I have mentioned more than once, david, their background is a religion aggressive to all other beliefs, with a directive to enforce submission to their unacceptable beliefs. You have shown us the addled thinking whereby you became a subversive, working against the integrity, and well being, of our community, while receiving its benefits. The current actions of these people you support show that they will not establish a record of good behaviour, as the convicts of British heritage did. Their disregard of the gun laws, and their regular shootings and stabbings and drug offences which make them such a high proportion of our prison population,show them to be migrants of a very different background to those who laid the foundations of our community, disingenuously referred to by you as “convict”. They were people who by their industry, conduct, and application, had surpassed their convict status Your assertions are ridiculous, david. You are a dangerous man. We would be better off without your addled thinking. Posted by Leo Lane, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 12:15:52 AM
| |
Leo Lane wrote: “As I have mentioned more than once, david, their background is a religion aggressive to all other beliefs, with a directive to enforce submission to their unacceptable beliefs.”
Unacceptable beliefs? Let’s look at the Bible. A woman gets pregnant without a male sperm involved. God destroys almost all life on earth in a flood, asks a man to murder his son as a test. As he is omniscient he should know what the man will do. God subjects his own son to torment and a harrowing death. The Bible contains unacceptable beliefs. Christianity has a history of enforcing its unacceptable beliefs. After Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire they persecuted and killed pagans and heretics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_persecution_of_paganism_under_Theodosius_I: “... Theodosius I reiterated Constantine's ban on pagan sacrifice, prohibited haruspicy on pain of death, pioneered the criminalization of magistrates who did not enforce anti-pagan laws, broke up some pagan associations and destroyed pagan temples.” Fletcher’s “The Conversion of Europe from Paganism to Christianity: 371-1386” tells how Europe was Christianised. With the exception of Ireland the conversion was achieved by violence. eg. Charlemagne gave the pagan Gauls the choice of Christianity or beheading. Crusaders not only slaughtered Muslims but also non-Catholic Christians, heretics and Jews. Crusaders sacked Orthodox Christian Constantinople and massacred the Christian inhabitants, massacred the Albigensians who they regarded as heretics, massacred Jews in the Rhineland. “Participation in such a war was seen as a form of penance which could counterbalance sin.” The Wars of the Reformation saw Christians slaughtering Christians. Martin Luther hoped Jews would accept his new faith. When they didn’t he preached against them and advocated their destruction. His diatribes were reprinted in the Nazi newspapers. The War against science shown by the murders of Hypatia, Michael Servetus and Giordano Bruno. The Inquisition. Imperialist European powers massacred and enslaved the indigenous people of the Americas, Africa and Asia to spread the benefits of Christianity. The Holocaust was the outcome of centuries of Christian hate. The secular state can tame evil Islam as it has tamed evil Christianity. Posted by david f, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 10:17:23 AM
| |
david f
Your understanding of the Christian gospel is atrocious. Really I suspect it is more deceitful as you are obviously much more intelligent than you display in your deceitful anti Christ rants. No wonder you get Islam so wrong when you are so deceitful whem it comes to Christ's teachings. Posted by runner, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 10:37:16 AM
| |
Dear runner,
I appreciate some of Christ’s teaching very much and understand the Gospels. I pointed out the horrible record of Christianity, and Jesus’ words apply. Matthew 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. There is also a tendency to tell how horrible Islam is and ignore the horrible Christian record. Jesus’ teachings apply to that also: Matthew 7:3 “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” Christianity might be a considerably better religion if Christians would follow the teachings of Jesus instead of ignoring them. In my previous post I said nothing about the teachings of Jesus. I mentioned the nonsense that is in the Bible and the horrible record of Christianity. Posted by david f, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 11:13:25 AM
| |
Davidf says:” I mentioned the nonsense that is in the Bible and the horrible record of Christianity.”.
Correct, david, you did not address the topic of the thread, because you have no answer to truthful and sensible observation. Instead, you launch into an attack on Christianity, not on its current actions, but on a distant, disputable record, of no relevance to the topic under discussion, which is your determination to diversify our community by introduction of elements hostile to it. Just further exposition of your addle- brained, pernicious state of mind. You have nothing relevant or constructive to say, so you evade the topic.. What about the direction of islam to kill non-believers if they do not submit to islam? This is current, and being acted upon now, by islamist terrorists, not some questionable unbalanced observation of the past, or a scurrilous opinion of yours about some effect of Christianity. Your response is that you have no rational basis for a response. Posted by Leo Lane, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 1:51:08 PM
| |
Leo Lane wrote: "Just further exposition of your addle- brained, pernicious state of mind."
Since you seem unable to post without including insulting language I have no further dialog with you. Posted by david f, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 2:22:33 PM
| |
Yes, David, I should add that evasion is your choice when faced with the fact that your position is completely without merit. You will never face facts, and will use any tactic to evade them. Bye.
Posted by Leo Lane, Wednesday, 8 June 2016 3:16:21 PM
|
And wouldn't that be as close to paradise on earth as was possible to get? And something we should strive for given the fact that the expanding universe is accelerating toward its day of eventual destruction? Which seems to also hold true for planet earth, but far sooner?
That said we don't need to blind to the fact that evil is alive and well and stalks this and every other land looking for fools to inculcate with the poison of selfish individualism, hate and eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth revenge, and carried out indiscriminately on any available and convenient proxy?
And if that then leads to them inheriting a ruined hellhole planet, they'd be welcome to it!
On another note, I see no problem with keeping what you've actually earned, just no case in taking it from others by "legal" means?
There's a very old roman expression, which as memory serves translates from the latin as, trust but watch.
Alan B.