Pericles, you say you are 'excited' to meet me. I can take that two ways. If it's a sarcasm, well, I'll just move on. If you actually mean it, I'm happy to expand.

I do, by the way have an answer to your 'what now'? question and it does not involve some kind of 'expirement that may go wrong' as you seem to presume would be the case.

I'm writing this in a helluva hurry as have much work, little time. However, over the next few days, hope to get back here and respond/ answer---depending on whether Pericles was sarcastic or for real---let me know. This stuff is seriously important to our future social well-being and one must therefore not jump to conclusions.

Also have a response for Boaz' "confounded by reality" and some other comments. There's a 'simple' and enlightening explanation, Boaz. When time permits.........

And Grace, your assumption that Pericles has signed off may be, I hope, a little too presumptive. I suspect that, although he did put an intellectual foot into a bit of philosophical poo, he has much to contribute that may be valuable.

Final quick thought---much of these last posts are rather off topic. Maybe we should start a new thread somewhere else? This stuff could help a lot of people learn whole new perspectives---and God (sorry atheists!) knows, we sorely need some
new' thinking outside the ideological box that most Aussies have become trapped inside--what a horrible sentence, if I had more time I'd fix it, but you hopefully get my drift...

Perhaps I could write a piece for publication on OLO - but someone would have to persuade the editor--who, like Grace, has rejected me...(darn that's two women in a week!)--to go along. I'll also re-approach her (the EDITOR!). If anyone else puts in a word as well, it'll maybe help.

Over and out for the next day or three...

OZ.... I didnt say 'confounded'...I said 'confronted'....

*BOAZ hands OZ a higher power set of glasses*

By the way people.. my comments in the last post about white yellow black etc.. were intended to stimuate discussion :) Like the unions, some times we have to begin negotiations with a request for 150% pay rise.

GRACE

Given that u appear to be on the leftish side of the political spectrum. You might be interested to see the work of Tony Campolo.
He is quite interesting, and controversial.
Check this site out, have a listen to one of his messages as well as look at the ministries section.
http://www.tonycampolo.org/

As for his messages, "The Church: God's Instrument for Changing the World" contains some insights.

If ur bored, try "Its Friday, but Sundays comin"

Boaz,
Just getting back to something here. Do you think religions such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism, (see they can reside side by side), have become too pedantic and now rely too much on language and religious text. Language is limited and not a very adequate way of fully experiencing God, and language can also lead to theocracy, demonising others etc.

I guess I’m looking for middle ground between the religions for dialog. Can’t have a war. Too many people will get killed (even me).

Boaz, we're teetering on the brink here, but I'll accept your Quirk's exception for the time being.

However, I'm not sure that shifting the discussion from "is demonizing Islam a productive strategy" to "should we aspire to a monocultural Australia" is particularly appropriate. So if you'll allow, I'll back off this one until someone posts a more relevant article that we can debate.

Hi Tim...

in general terms u can speak of them side by side. But to take the issue really seriously, one has to look more closely at each one.'
Its neccessary to analyse the 'political, social, legal implications'
of each one. Its not a matter of pedantism, its an unavoidable task.
I'm not interested in any war, or victimization or demonization.
But I am interested in a true understanding of particular groups in society.
Your view is very tolerant and commendable. It's also rather broad and seems to be a projection of the liberal democracic view of 'others'.
I suppose I'm a tad biased :) having experienced life under a moderate Islamic government, which translated a few times into personal oppression against me including the threat of imprisonment without trial for who knows how long. I don't hold that against them specifically, I hold it against 'human nature' .. its how we tick.
I guess for those brought up in Australia, you can only speak about the 'here and now' and our generally peaceful tolerant society. and we shudder at the thought of some of the social disruption going on in other places.
But if u can identify specific verifiable attacks on our way of life, attempts to change laws, in ways which effect you, your freedom to be 'you' etc.. would you not be a little concerned about 'Thin edge of the wedge' ?
That is the point, where I will say "This is simply the outworking of such and such a doctrine that these people hold" and you might say "Well.. a bit of give and take never hurt anyone, and hey.. lets accomodate as far as possible".
Have a read of some of OZAWARE's stuff on his web site. He gets written off as 'ultra rightwing' as suggested by Pericles, but it should always boil down to 'is this verifiable as an issue of fact'
Example: Some anti semitic web sites will claim that Jewish sanhedrin decisions delared that u can 'steal and defraud' from gentiles and a host of other things. I tried to check their sources, and found them dodgy and unfindable. I could find the volume they mentioned but not the actual reference. I then found a Christian site (John Mark Ministries) which looked in scholarly detail at these claims and found pretty much all to be 'non existent', wrongly quoted or the such like.


Other sites say a lot about Jews controlling media,(USA context) and u can actually filter out the 'factual' from the fanatical in what they say. The same is true about Hindu sites which are vitriolic about Islam. Usually u just have to prune out all the adjectives :) to be left with facts. But when in doubt, further reading might be needed.

If this doesn't answer ur question, try again :) always welcome.