To Plantagenet.

Have I said I am holier then you? Better then you? Or anything else that should cause your reaction to my being Christian? Let me correct this for you. I recognize that I need God, trust in Him, am thankful for what He's done for me in my life and for what He and His son did 2000 years ago.

But what of a non-Christian? From my understanding God loves you as much as He loves me. In fact it's said that there is more celebration in heaven for one sinner turning to God, then 100 saints who've stayed true to Him. Regardless how many bridges you burn between you and Christians, or how many bad relations you would have with a Christian community, God will always welcome you to come to church or to seek Him out in other ways. Though several nonbelievers here have tried my patience, I know God love them still. It's a sobering thought.

I will not apologize for being a Christian. And if you or anyone else is insulted by my faith when I've said nor done anything that causes you harm, then your reaction is on you, not on me.

(Continued)

(Continued)

As for the student who was accepted for coming out, that's encouraging. I know homosexuals live their lives with their sexual attraction in the background of debate throughout their society and their lives. Many of them have said if they had a choice to choose, then they wouldn't choose to be homosexual. So with that in mind it's good for them to know that they are encouraged and accepted, because that ongoing controversy could trap them into thinking they are outcasts and unwelcome.

However, that is on an individual level, and it doesn't approach the point of "now what" where homosexuals acknowledge their attraction but don't act on it when it comes to sex (if they are trying to uphold religious beliefs), or how to stay safe, healthy, and well rounded if they decide to be active in their homosexuality. The "now what" element is an often ignored aspect of homosexual acceptance. That might be a contributing factor for why homosexual lobbies, agendas, and cultural overtones have a smack of being over sexualized, or narcissistic. It's a problem that can be seen on a societal level when homosexuality and politics overlap.

To Yuyutsu.

You would restrict the government's ability to govern and to police it's nation? Your right what counts as a criminal, or a terrorist is up to that nation and it's government. Some factors that go into this are the ruling body, and whether or not the people and their culture have a say or only if the ruling regime has a say. In most democracies I am not worried about the government being able to identify who are truly dangerous and act on that, as opposed to those who are innocent and not harmed anyone. Australia's only restriction on this are politicalized agendas that try to ignore harms or crimes being done, so that their agenda gets more support. This is what is happening with growing crimes among Islamic migrants. Instead of trying to fix the issues, they try to ignore it, stuff it under the rug, and demand everyone else to do the same or be called Islamiphobes. If politicians listened to the police officers on the ground then they might know what is really going on, to make the government act justly towards the actual dangers and criminal issues. For countries that are ruled more out of government or religious dictatorship, the issues are more on the leaders being moral and not an extension of injustice. It's a much bigger blind spot then politicians mucking it up.

(Continued)

(Continued)

Regarding schools teaching practical tools for the students they teach, I stand by my previous statements that this is the responsibility of the schools. They should hold up this responsibility with the roles that are required from being a teacher. If a parent or an organization wants to teach their kids better (including religious organizations) then they can go into the process of starting their own school or setting up a homeschool environment. As long as the kids and staff are safe and are not turned into dangerous criminals, nor that the students are being neglected from being taught a minimum of subjects, then the government does not need to get involved. The school is doing it's job. The same principle can be applied to religious organizations like churches, Jewish temples or anything else that teaches and preaches but is not a private school. As long as they are not causing harm or creating criminals the organization should be free to operate as they do.

Hi Yuyutsu,
I'm not all that interested in your religious views. But I am left scratching my head when you say we are not human.

I see myself as human. Being human is often the starting point for how I think about most other things, and forms the basis of a lot of law making in this society (the laws making abortion legal notwithstanding.)

Alan B spoke entire nonsense above when he said that if we don't like these new PC lefty laws, then we're free to go elsewhere. But where would we go? If we're Australian, if we are born here, where are we supposed to go?

Now this nonsense. "We're not human". Well, I'm not planning on leaving Australia, as Alan B would suggest I do. And I'm not planning on leaving the human race. For better or for worse, I am human.

Alan B,
You've spoken of a "natural aberration of nature." Could you try an explain this concept. I don't think you've thought it through.

A natural aberration of nature is a contradiction in terms. If such an idea was even possible, the we must be able to conceive of an unnatural aberration of nature. But I'd think I'd just be tying myself up in semantic knots.

I don't think you've thought it through. I don't think the Greens think much through at all before they start drafting their legislation.