And so say all of us.

David

As far as I know all Australians are free to follow
any religion they choose, so long as its practices
do not break any Australian law. Australians are
also free not to follow a religion. We have
secular government and no official or state religion.
And as I understand it religious laws have no
legal status in Australia.

Having said that however, I've been told that -
some laws may be flexible depending on the cases
involved. For example regarding the process of
divorce and related matters. Common law -
regarding the Indigenous community. Not sure about
bigamy - or the practice of female genital mutilation,
and so on. I've been told - there's the law, then there's
how people practice things.

I used to be quite certain in these areas - however
I am not a lawyer and it has been pointed out to me
that certain exceptions have been made in the past
regarding our laws.

I remember the radical Muslim cleric Ben Brika being
asked in an interview on the "7.30 Report" -
"Don't you think Australian Muslims - Muslims living
in Australia - also have a responsibility to adhere to
Australian law?"

To which he answered:

"This is a big problem. There are two laws - there is an
Australian law and there is an Islamic law."

I used to think - No, this is not a big problem. There is
one law we are all expected to abide by. It is the law
enacted by the Parliament under the Australian Constitution.

As I understood - Religion instructs its adherents on faith,
morals, and conscience. But there is not supposed to be
a separate stream
of law derived from religious sources that competes with
or supplants Australian law in governing our civil society.
The source of our law is the democratically elected
legislature.

However -

I've been told that exceptions have been made in certain
cases. So I'm not sure how it all works.

It will be interesting to see what reaction this article will get from OLO's overepresentative band of anti-Muslim haters.

The Muslims task of living a holy life among the ungodly, is considerable more difficult than their counterparts, Christians.

This article is simply another attack on Muslims and their religious beliefs, to be filed under Muslim-baiting; sub-titled, the right to offend...free speech!

"This article is simply another attack on Muslims and their religious beliefs, to be filed under Muslim-baiting; sub-titled, the right to offend...free speech"

Oh, yes! Rubbish the religion of West, Christianity, all you like, but don't dare criticise Islam. Getting ready for dhimmitude, are you Danny? If you are not already one of them yourself.

Is unionism a religion?

Its high priestess Sally McManus has decreed that it's OK to break laws that disagree with Unionism.

Foxy,

Islamic law can be followed if both parties contract and agree to do so. However, even in this case it has to be within the bounds of Australian law.

For example, any marital agreement that contracts to give custody of the children to the father as per Islamic law is null and void in an Australian court where the best interests of the child override any contract.

Similarly, any will that delivers 90% of the assets to a male child and 10% to a female child as per Islamic law will fall apart if the female child challenges it.

To respond to Foxy, there is a widespread habit of using wrong terminology and the word "law" is one such example.
A law is a form of binding regulation, demanding adherance.
Religious belief and practice, on the other hand, is covered by belief and guidance in moral principles and any enforcement is determined by persuasion, not by compulsion.

Islamic law can be followed if both parties contract and agree to do so.
Shadow Minister,
Islam is a religion & we already have a Law !
Want islamic Law ? Go to an islamic country !

Which of the two following statements would likely be acceptable to be
printed in a book under hate speech laws.

Kill moslems wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill
them. Such is the reward of moslems. (2:191)

Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then
kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (2:191)

The Islamic religion is unique in that it is one of the world's major religions, and it is a religion who's own holy texts instruct it's followers to be entirely intolerant of non believers, and to kill, maim, torture, behead, crucify, humiliate, and enslave non Muslims. Furthermore, it is a religion which instructs that women are inferior to men, and are in fact, the property of men. In addition, those Muslims who wish to leave Islam should be murdered, and also that Islamic law is above secular law.

How could Australian politicians and bureaucrats have been stupid enough to allow such a dangerous religion to enter Australia? Well, it comes down to leftist humanitarian ideology, which considers all religions, races, and cultures to be equal. Under such stupidity, nobody even bothered to look at the teachings of the Koran and the Hadiths figure out if Islam was compatible with western values. Those who did do their homework and point it out were simply shouted down as "racists."

When the racists were yet again proven to be right, and the predicted social and economic problems with Islam eventuated, the Foxy clones had a couple of problems. Their first problem was, that it proved that their humanitarian ideology they so fervently believe in was just plain stupid. The second problem was a lot worse. That is, that they regard themselves as a Brahmin class of intellects, morally and intellectually superior to the lower classes they despise, and the bourgeoisie (who are usually their parents) they despise even more.

To admit that they got is so horribly wrong, and that they have burdened their own country with a serious and endemic problem of terrorism and social instability, is something they don't want to contemplate. So, like any idiot who puts their self esteem above anything else, they just go into denial and become apologists for a religion which fundamentally opposes every liberal ideal they have always advocated.

Cuckoo. Cuckoo

I'm afraid I don't understand all these attacks
on the religion of Islam in this discussion.
History shows that in Australia Islam has been
part of this culture since the early settlement.
Arrivals from many countries brought Islam here.
The early cameleers who helped our explorers
were Muslims.

Looking through religious history - Christians
also have a rather questionable history of
violence. Read about the Crusaders, Teutonic
Knights, their exploits, the religious wars in
England, the Inquisition, just to mention a few.

This discussion is about the laws which govern our
civil society - and the fact that we are all
required to abide by them. It should not be about attacks
on the Islamic religion. Fundamentalists exist
in all religions and of course criminals and thugs
and terrorists, and extremists,
should not be tolerated and should
face the full brunt of the law. But as the recent
massacres in Christchurch have shown - extremists
come in all shapes and sizes - and what we say and do
does have consequences.

Spreading hatred is not the answer.

Now back to the discussion.

Der vFoxy,

I don't think that the notion that Muslims, like everybody else, should act within the law, is somehow anti-Islam. In Australia, as Australians, we all should act within the law. We can have our own private preferences as well, as long as we keep them to ourselves - and at within the law.

On a lighter note, Assange has been expelled from the Ecuadorian Embassy and shoved in the slammer. Gosh what a shame.

Joe

'Spreading hatred is not the answer. '

either is sticking your head in the sand and ignoring history and truth.

Dear Joe,

I said that anyone who breaks
our laws by violence should bear the full
brunt. What I was objecting to was the
demonising of a religion - that few people
actually know much about - except what they
read in the media or from the actions of
extremists.

runner,

What do you really know about the religion
of Islam?

If you don't understand why intelligent people attack Islam, Foxy. I will be happy to explain it to you.

The "contribution" "Islamic cameleers" brought to Australia was inconsequential, and resulted in the famous Broken Hill Picnic Train massacre which was a portent of how stupid it is to import Muslims into a western society.

Christians do indeed have a "questionable " history of violence. But the salient point is that Christianity was created from the teachings of a Jewish pacifist and it's earliest manifestation was as a purely pacifist religion. That was why the warlike Romans hated Christianity and they amused themselves by feeding Christians to the lions. The subsequent conversion of christianity into a warlike religion simply goes to show what happens when freedom of speech is suppressed, and a brahmin caste gets total control.

Islam is completely different. It was started by a warlord to inspire his soldiers to commit suicidala acts of bravery, and to spread his religion by force. It is the most male dominate religion on Earth, to the extent that females are considered the property of males. I thought a liberal like you would be condemning Islam to hell and back? But no, your brain goes something like this.

"All humans, races, cultures, and religions are equal." "Therefore, Islam is equal to Christianity or Buddhism." "Therefore, if the western world has a problem with Islam, then there can be only one explanation." It is all the fault of those damned western males, somehow."

A Christian fundamentalist looks like an Amish, or a Quaker, or runner. A Muslim fundamentalist looks like ISIS, Boko Haram, or Jemaah Islamiah. Big difference.

And you still seem to be pushing the line that freedom of speech must be curtailed because it has "consequences." No wonder you support Muslims, Foxy. You think just like them.

LEGO,

Your hatred is wasted on me.

I've stopped reading your posts ages again.

You need to pick on a more kindred spirit who
cares what you think.

Hi Foxy

'What do you really know about the religion
of Islam?'

mainly what those who were once muslims have said about their former faith. Many of them would lose their life for doing so if they went back to countries that practice Sharia. On the other hand former Christians have nothing to fear until they face God or repent.

Foxy wrote.

"As far as I know all Australians are free to follow
any religion they choose, so long as its practices
do not break any Australian law. Australians are
also free not to follow a religion. We have
secular government and no official or state religion.
And as I understand it religious laws have no
legal status in Australia."

Completely wrong, Foxy.

Australia's new religion is "multiculturalism" and it does not tolerate criticism of it's holy scriptures. It is so averse to criticism, that it has actually almost succeeded in preventing Freedom of Speech in Australia, which is an absolute right and the very basis of democracy. And you support that? You are not a liberal progressive, Foxy, you are a ideological totalitarian.

Islam is a religion that does not tolerate criticism. It's adherents will kill you if you criticise it. But Foxy supports Islam. Islam considers females to be the property of males, and that women who do not follow the strict conditions of female modesty deserve to be raped, but Foxy calls herself a "feminist" but will never criticise Islam. Islam believes that those Muslims who reject Islam and convert to another faith should be murdered, but Foxy sees nothing wrong with Islam. Islam encourages child marriages, but Foxy sees nothing wrong with Islam. Islam demands that religious law supersedes secular law, but Foxy sees nothing wrong with Islam.

And lastly, Islam demands the execution of homosexuals, but Foxy can't see the elephant in the room.

Isn't faith wonderful? All you need is faith and you can live in a fantasyland where black is white, and where your cherished ideology has the answer to everything. And when your fantasy world goes into turmoil you just refuse to look at the facts and just keep chanting the mantra.

"Islam is just another religion, and all religions are the same."

And.

"Don't criticise multiculturalism or we will burn you at the stake."

.

Dear Laurence (the author),

.

The reformation provoked by Martin Luther 500 years ago redeemed the tyrannical rule, excesses and abuses of the Christian Church and its ecclesiastics and rendered them more palatable and humane.

Muslims, in their vast majority are just as calm, peaceful and respectable as Christians.

According to Sami Zubaida, Emeritus Professor of Politics and Sociology at Birkbeck, University of London and a Fellow of Birkbeck College and also Research Associate of the London Middle East Institute, Islam has also undergone a certain number of reforms, including liberal and rationalist reforms.

It seems, however, that these reforms have little cultural appeal to Muslims. According to Sami Zubaida “those inclined to liberal ideas are more likely to be secular or nominal Muslims”.

He asks : “What is ‘reform’ in these contexts? It is the assertion of literalist orthodoxy against what was seen as heresy and innovation: that is, fundamentalism, parallel to the Protestant fundamentalists, but in vastly different contexts. And it was not one decisive ‘reformation’, but repeated cycles. Salafist and Jihadist trends in modern Islam, including Saudi Wahhabism and its spread, are part of that trend: hardly the ‘moderate’ and liberal reformation that is being sought” :

http://www.opendemocracy.net/en/north-africa-west-asia/islamic-reformation/

.

Dear Banjo Patterson.

Christianity and Islam are two fundamentally different religions. Christianity was based upon the teachings of a Jewish pacifist and it is entirely pacifist in it's original form. Christianity changed from a pacifist religion to an extremely violent one because the Church hierarchy gained absolute control through such devices as preventing freedom of speech, which is a vice that you, yourself, support in this country.

Islam is a warriors religion started by a warlord to make his warriors suicidally brave and to justify imperial expansion. Your premise that Muslims are in the main peaceful and nice people is irrelevant. Germans, Japanese, Russians, and Chinese are really nice people too. But if they live in totalitarian communities and their leaders order them to kill you and your family, they will do just that.

Christianity reformed because of freedom of speech (which you oppose) through Gutenberg's printing press, and the subsequent publishing of the Bible in national languages (instead of Latin) which the Roman Catholic church vehemently opposed. Islam stayed a violent religion because Mohammad himself decreed that Islam was perfect as it was and could never be changed. That message was written in the Koran for all Muslims to see.

That is the problem for Islam. It can't reform itself. As a social and economic system it is a complete failure. The more Muslim any nation is, the more dysfunctional it is. Unable to grasp why Islam is so backward, Muslim leaders today have convinced their masses that it is because ISLAM IS NOT ISLAMIC ENOUGH. Which is why ISIS, Jemaah Islamiah, and Boko Haram are now in existence.

Another reason why Islam can not reform itself is because we have a class of people in the western world who think that all it takes to be considered "intelligent" is to always sneer at your own culture and defend every minority culture, no matter how despicable that minority culture really is. Since you believe in opposing free speech because you consider it "hate speech", then whatever you think you are, a liberal social progressive you are not.

Looking at the 3 major religious traditions that
believe in one God (Christianity, Islam, and
Judaism) all 3 make references in their religious
texts to both violence and peace.

So the fact that a religious text contains violent
verses does not make it a violent religion. But it's
also a fact that a religious text containing peaceful
verses does not make that religion peaceful either.

Violence is not new to the history of religions, nor
is it a phenomenon solely attached to the history of
Islam.

Christians and Buddhists also have a track record of
fanaticism, such as the bombing of abortion clinics,
and the hardliner Buddhists in Myanmar. Religious
content may be a catalyst for violent action, but it
should be remembered that it's reading relies heavily
on human interpretation. To put it mildly - "The world
is bleeding to death through misunderstanding."

Of course - it can never be right to kill in the name of
God - but it should be dawning on all peoples that it is
time to let go of pretensions that anyone knows the
will of God.

Rather than listening to the claims and counter claims
about what "authentic" Islam really stands for, we might
be better to pay more attention to how advocates of their
faith choose to live their lives.

That way it might be easier to avoid making assumptions
about what the religion might mean, and instead focus more
on how the faithful live.

The enemy of peace is not religion, but those who pursue
acts of terror and violence against the innocent in the
"name" of religion.

Another false equivalence, Foxy.

That is like saying that Frank Partridge VC and Ivan Milat are equally violent men and both must be equally despised, because both of them killed people.

The teachings and "Hadiths" of Jesus Christ were

Love your neighbour
Love thine enemies
If a man strikes you, turn the other cheek
Blessed are the peacemakers
The parable of The Good Samaritan (just because somebody is of another religion, that does not automatically make them bad people.)

The teachings and Hadiths of Mohammad

Fight the unbelievers who are near to you... terrorise them.
We will win through terror.
Slay the idolaters wherever you find them.
Crucify them, mutilate them, cast their heads under their feet.
Take not Christians and Jews as friends.
Be prepared to fight people that Allah knows and you knowest not.

They don't equate, Foxy. Trying to equate Islam with generally peaceful religions like Christianity and Buddhism is a loser for you. The more you try to equate them, the sillier you look. Switzerland has violent crime and Mexico has violent crime. The Swiss homicide rate is 1.5 per 100,000, the Mexican homicide rate 30 per 100,000. But claiming that Switzerland and Mexico are therefore equally violent would be laughable. But you are trying the same leap of logic with religions.

As for "looking at how the faithful live." The Sydney Muslim suburb of Auburn is the domestic violence capitol of Sydney. Hardly surprising, given that Islam wholeheartedly approves of wife bashing. In 2000 AD, the NSW Bureau of crime Statistics reported that 55% of the handgun shootings in the entire state of NSW occurred within the boundaries of two notorious Muslim ghettoes. Auburn and Westmead hospitals now have specialised surgical teams to treat Muslim girls suffering from complications caused by genital mutilation. All Muslim suburbs have high rates of serious criminal behaviour and welfare dependency.

All Religion may approve of violence in certain situations, but that does not mean that in terms of violence, they equate, Foxy.

Islam has a history of violence.
Muslims can be violent. Denying this is just as
false as sayin g that Islam is peaceful and that
all Muslims are peaceful. The dichotomy is simply
false.

The Qur'an contains injunctions that call both for
peace and for violence. The problem is not that they
are there: the difficulty is that non-violent and
militant Muslims appear equally justified.

For some the peace of God is through his sword -
for others it is found in his unbounded mercy.
Part of the problem is that there are concerns about
religious content that are not dealt with openly.

And there are just too many hard conclusions made
about religious texts, often by those who know less than
they claim.

I hope my detractors have read these comments.
I have been fuming at the, now most obvious, of moronic statements by someone who is so fragile and easily offended, that I once again am vindicated by my statements about stupid people, and how it is nigh-on impossible to convince them they are wrong.
I can't wear fools easily, and believe me, I am a very patient man, I have to be to be on OLO.
I moved away from religion many years ago, when it became obvious to me that it was simply a medium of controlling weak minded people and a great revenue source.
These so called 'religions', are in fact cults.
Unless I get physical and actual contact from something spiritual, (and I don't mean liquor) I am going to keep believing in the one person I know very well and know that he has a real grasp on reality, he is a pragmatist, looks at things objectively, not subjectively, and sometimes even relies on a gut feeling because he has considered all the known information.
That person is; MYSELF!
Now about all this malaise and discussion about what is patently obvious to any intelligent thinking man, and that is; ISLAM is a bad thing!
End of.
It is a violent and sick cult which is clearly unlike ANY other group or cult, to-date.
I would have allowed the Muslims who 'genuinely' renounce their faith in Islam, entry into Australia.
Otherwise I see the blanket approval of 'any' Muslims into 'any' non-Muslim country in a similar vain to allowing a known 'hit-man' or someone carrying weapons into the country.
We have restrictions on people we consider a threat to others, so why are these people who have made it clear, that they are groomed to kill us, at a moments notice, been welcomed with open arms?
On the topic of law over religion, I am recovering from a laughing bout at the comments that religion can in some cases over-ride the country's laws.

ALTRAV,

"I would have allowed the Muslims who 'genuinely' renounce their faith in Islam, entry into Australia."

But how do you tell the genuine from the ones who are lying?
It is permissible for Muslims to lie in order to further the cause of Islam.

Criminals come in all religions, etnicities, races,
genders, et cetera. We were after all -
founded as a penal colony.
We've had our fair share of crims over the decades.
Crims of all persuasions, from bushrangers, corrupt
government officials and police, to
Asian triads, to mafia crime syndicates, to the
good old underbelly of crime families, but hey - it's
Good Friday - so lets go out and attack the Muslims.
It's the Christian thing to do.
After all they're all - bad, sad, mean, and extreme.
And who knows better than the Christians about sin,
hell and damnation - right?

As for not allowing Muslim criminals and extremists
into Australia? That's not going to work - especially
if you've got enough influence and money honey.
Just as Philip Ruddock - or better still - where
do donations to political parties come from?
Any Saudis on that list?

Foxy,

"Criminals come in all religions, etnicities [ethnicities], races,
genders, et cetera. We were after all -
founded as a penal colony."

But, as far as I know, none of the First Fleeters were carrying a Holy Book that exhorted them to kill.

Bye the way, Foxy, Grammarly is a free download.

cont'd ...

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released
the data that 40,577 people were in prisons in
Australia during the first quarter of 2017.
This is up from 25,968 - ten years ago.

I looked up notorious gangsters in Australia and
names like - Squizzy Taylor, Tilly Devine,
Kate Leigh, George Wallace, Abe Saffron, Stewart John
Regan, Chopper Read, Christopher Flannery, George
Freeman, Alphonse Gangitano, The Moran Family, Carl
Williams, Mike Gatto, The Pettingill Family, Tony
Mokbel came up. Not an Abdul or a Mohammad amongst
them. Funny that. Perhaps Muslims are not such
a big threat after all?

Is MIse,

What you don't know is the problem!

But in this country - you're not alone with
having that problem.

In our history books you get - "The First Fleet arrived.
It brought 1000 English convicts."

It didn't. It brought 1000 convicts but probably they came
from a dozen different countries. English jails were no
respecters of nationality. The first Italian arrived on
January 26, 1788 - Giuseppe Tuso. There were people
from South Africa, there were people from Ceylon, from
India, from Spain, from Portugal, from Hungary.

And what they carried in their hearts - we can only
speculate.

The only way (as I've argued many times) that our freedom
and tolerance can be protected is within a legal framework
that is accepted by all.

cont'd ...

At the time of the 2011 Census, 476,000 Australians
(representing 2.2% of the population) reported Islam
as their religion. And I imagine that not all of
them are extremists, fanatics, or fundamentalists.

Not a big threat it would appear.

I love it when people quote stats.
As I have said before, we don't know who are the baddies, and until they do something bad, they are just people like the rest of us.
But surely, I ask the question, how is it we have accepted a race who have been 'groomed' to kill non-Muslims, all their life?
I obviously hope that they have renounced their adherence to the teachings of the Koran, and truly wish to integrate into the Aussie life.
Sadly, the evidence to date is not good.
There is too much being exposed and being enacted by people and govts which are disturbing and show a clear trend to non assimilation.
I don't recall ANY other race, Vietnamese, Chinese, and so on, who forced themselves upon us to remove our signs of our christian faith so as to accommodate them.
No, if we are to accept them they must first accept us and respect our views, values and religion, otherwise we are not being true to ourselves and our children and their future.
I am angered, not so much because some cretin demands we remove statues of our faith, this I expect from a lesser person.
No what I am really pissed off about is that some moronic, simple minded, gutless toe-rag, actually facilitated them and complied.
I would thrash the living daylights out of him, or her.
How dare this kind of thing be allowed here, and in this day and age.
What is this 800 AD?
This only adds to my disgust about this country and it'a morons within.
Where was the rally?
Where was the opposition?
'Nah, she'll be right, turn up the footy and get me another tinny'.

Foxy,

The first Negroes also came on the First Fleet and one of them was drowned saving the life of a fellow convict.
Our first real hero was a Negro.

There is no mention of Muslims on the Fleet, there were no doubt diseases but none of the mind to compare with Islam.

Is Mise,

Muslims in Australia have a long and varied history
that is thought to predate European settlement.
You can learn more by Googling "History of Islam
in Australia."

As for "diseases of the mind?"

Violence is not new to the history of religions,
nor is it a phenomenon solely attached to the
history of Islam.

Christianity and other religions also have a track
record of fanaticism. You have only to look at the
current occurrences of the Christchurch massacre,
the bombing of abortion clinics, the hardliner
Buddhists in Myanmar and so on.

Religious content may be a catalyst for violent action,
but it should be remembered that its reading relies
heavily on human interpretation. To put it mildly,
"the world is bleeding to death through misunderstanding."

Of course it can never be right to kill in the name of
God - but it should be dawning on all peoples that it is
time to let go of pretensions that anyone knows the
will of God.

Rather than listening to the claims and counter claims
about what "authentic" Islam really stands for, we might be
better to pay more attention to how the vast majority of
advocates of their faith choose to live their
lives.

The enemy of peace is not religion, but those who pursue
acts of terror and violence against the innocent in the
"name" of religion.

It is now a matter of record.
Germany, amongst other European countries have announced that their migration and humanitarian policy have failed.
The elephant in the room has finally been allowed to speak, and it has denounced the intake of Muslims.
The evidence is overwhelming and growing day by day, and the fact that it has become untenable.
The alleged risk to the non-Muslim public has now become a reality and can no longer be ignored.
We see Muslims berating a judge, whilst in court responding to some charge, blatantly tells the judge that they do not have to abide by our laws because they only follow the laws of Allah. (or was it Muhammad)
Then we see another mob spitting and throwing rocks at reporters trying to ask about a property which is being turned into a religious entity, against shire and zoning regulations.
And the abuse goes on.
If my detractors on OLO truly believe that my attitude is worse than these people, then we all have a problem.
At least I can see the difference between right and wrong.
The do-gooders and the bad Muslims don't want to see the right from wrong.
One lot are too naive to save themselves, and the other are too brainwashed to be of any use to themselves, or anyone else for that matter.
No I am now just waiting for the penny to drop so as the govt admits they too cocked it up and shuts the door on these people, before we too suffer some major life threatening catastrophe.

Hi Altrav

recently an experiment was done at a couple of US unis. Someone stood on campus with a US flag and then later with an Isis flag. Of course the brainwashed leftist students abused the guy when holding up the American flag far more than when the same guy held up the Isis flag. It is certainly the idiotic leftist Marxist who are far more to blame for the destruction of the West. Muslims have done what they have always done and the leftist fools are the useful idiots even know homosexuals and the like are the first to be beheaded under sharia law.

Foxy,

"Violence is not new to the history of religions,
nor is it a phenomenon solely attached to the
history of Islam+

You can special plead all that you like, but Christ did not exhort His followers to kill, Muhammad did exhort his.

'Christians' who kill in the name of Christ dishonour Him.

Muslims who kill in the name of Muhammad honour him.

That's the big difference.

Is Mise

these things have been pointed out to Foxy many many times. She sticks her head in the sand and just finds a few more websites when truth does not fit her narrative. Its not just the young that are incapable of thinking past their false narratives.

So as not to upset the children, I won't mention names, but it continually amazes me how there are those who refuse to see beyond what they perceive as the truth.
It is precisely this kind of mindset that causes problems, for everyone.
Now I would not mind if the children were the only ones affected, it would be justified and pure Karma, but unfortunately the rest of us become unwilling recipients of the negative outcomes as a result of their lack of maturity and capacity to look beyond their narrow and uncompromising views and attitudes.

Is Mise,

Looking at the 3 major religious traditions that believe in one
God (Christianity, Islam and Judaism) all 3 make references in
their religious texts to both violence and peace. So the fact
that a religious text contains violent verses does not make it
a violent religion. But it is also a fact that a religious text
containing peaceful verses does not make that religion peaceful
either.

As stated earlier violence is not new to the history of
religions, nor is it a phenomenon solely attached to the history
of Islam. I've already pointed out that Christians and
other religions also have a track record of fanaticism.
Religious content may be a catalyst for violent action, but it should be remembered that its reading relies heavily on
human interpretation

It's like talking to a recording.
You can speak all you like but the machine is only programed to say what it has been taught to say, again and again and again and again and.....................................................................
To put words in the last posting, in the form of corrections, which has been mentioned by others repeatedly, but unfortunately that which is programed to speak, only speaks, it does not listen let alone have the ability to reason, so, 'once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more'.
It is utter rubbish that every religion preaches violence.
We will not defer to this when the Koran actively speaks of and quite clearly, about attacking and killing those who do not believe in, or follow Islam and it's teachings.
Now please try and sell the idea that this is not teaching and preaching to kill people, and openly.
You know what, I think I may be maligning kindergarten children by associating this lot with them, how thick do you have to be to even think about, trying to refute the egregious messages being taught by a disgusting 'CULT'!

runner,

It's Easter Sunday tomorrow.

Perhaps just on this special occasion
you - as a self-proclaimed
Christian - could try to practice what Christ taught.
That would be such a nice change.

'It's Easter Sunday tomorrow.

Perhaps just on this special occasion
you - as a self-proclaimed
Christian - could try to practice what Christ taught.
That would be such a nice change.'

you mean agree with lies Foxy? No thanks.

runner,

And I thought that just once you would not
be practicing judgement and condemnation.

Instead of finger-pointing at others and what
their beliefs may or may not be - how about we
concern ourselves with what our beliefs are -
and practice them. Oh that's right you said -
"No thanks!"

It seems that it's so much easier to blame others
isn't it. But that's all right. Everyone is doing
it. Conservatives think that Liberals are the problem.
Liberals think that conservatives are the problem.
Christians think that Muslims are the problem, Muslims
think that Christians are the problem. Others think
that homosexuals are the problem, still others think
that parents are the problem, that young people are
the problem, that old people are the problem, that
disabled people are the problem, and so it goes.

It would be a much better world if we instead of
criticising others looked at ourselves for a change
and the way we live our lives and tried to improve on
that. If we practiced our religions instead of
criticising those of others.

Happy Easter runner!

Runner, good to see Foxy is finally starting to realise the truth and relate to the 'real' world.
Her latest posting is finally describing that she has, at last, come to see what and where the problems are.
All that she mentions is true and correct.
Unfortunately in typical childlike fashion, WE are somehow at fault for pointing out these wrongs, and WE should change OUR ways, not the very people she has described.
I can't believe you are being criticized for pointing out the wrong do-ers, yet she glosses over the guilty parties in haste to accuse you of wrong doing.
How sad, she accuses you of being 'judgemental and condemnation', and 'finger pointing', yet in her haste, she completely missed the fact that she just included herself, and her followers, of the same acts, rendering them all hypocrites and bringing into question and exposing their lack of maturity and flawed ideologies.

'It would be a much better world if we instead of
criticising others looked at ourselves for a change'

ok Foxy good to hear you are no longer going to judge Trump, Dutton, Abbott. Instead you are going to self reflect. Well done.

For all the talk of ancient history, the vast majority of terrorist acts even against Muslims have been committed by Muslims and the attack in Christchurch wasn't even the worst attack that month with two massacres of Christians far outdoing it.

The CC massacre made headlines because it was so rare and unexpected. The Muslim led massacres hardly got a response because they have become repetitive and humdrum.