meredith, I do not understand what you have written; we are in total agreement. Michelle has nothing to explain; the wowsers should use their time more productively. As I said previously, she can belong to one religion one day and another the next, it is not our business.

People with any decency will leave her alone.

Dear Ant,
you are beginning to gain an inkling of "Islam" .. by observing in a very 'western/Judao christian manner..that issues of faith are primarily an individual matter whereas under Islamic rule they are a judicial/police matter.

Hence we have a very 'noticably traditionally dressed' Muslim author here suggesting that Michelle should.... shape up to specific dress codes.

In many Islamic countries, people are fined if they don't attend mosque, eat during ramadan or consume alchohol or tobacco. In Saudi Arabia there is no such thing as 'singles' shopping opportunities. A man has to go shopping with his sister, or his family. They only recently opened 'family' malls where both sexes can be present, and then, only with relatives of the opposite sex.

I don't know about others, but the thought of the 'religious police' breathing down my neck every time I cough or blow my nose or go shoppping, is not something I relish, but it is "Islam" as practiced by many Islamic countries.

Paul, when writing to the Galatian Christians (who were being pressured by the legalistic Jews to be 'circumcized') had this to say:

<<1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.>>

This is balanced by his further saying:

<<13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature[a];

rather,

serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."[b] 15If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.>>

The latter part of V 15, seems to describe very accurately the goings on among the Islamic community today.
The Jews have over 600 'sub rules' to interpet the 10 commandments.
I prefer Pauls approach in v 14 above.

ant

What I am meaning is islamic/sharia law is not Australian law, islamic propaganda acts as if islamic law is law in OZ, or has some meaning here to the Australian population.

I thought some of the posts in this string supporting Michelle’s right to freedom were spoken as if the Australian public feels the islamic insistence that we recognize forced dress codes for muslim females actually had some weight to it.

It has about as much weight legally and socially as a xtian attempting to force us all to go to church every Sunday, and wear jesus t shirts as national dress cuz we have xtians in the population.

Not even hardcore xtians fundies, even if they may wish to live like this themselves, in comparison to the islamists they have enough social skills to not do this to the general public. They reasonably rely instead on people’s free will to embrace or discount. Though some will debate this, i.e. abortion laws coming into debate. Even so it is still debated within our Western sensibility.

So ant along with the slice of public opinion in this thread, I’m in total agreement with you,
"People with any decency will leave her alone."
That is exactly the problem, some aren’t.

Michelle DOES NOT have to explain anything. There are no “should be free to’s” as she IS FREE under Ozzy law.

To question the right of a woman to dress (religious or non religious) as she wants, is hardcore fundie islamist, no matter how Salam Zreika cloaks it.

Never forget for a second we are actually free here!

Nah, she wasnt serious. She does what anyone caught red handed and hauled before the courts contemplating a serious penalty would do. She says what ever she needs to say to mitigate potential punishment. Any lawyer worth their salt would be down right negligent if they didnt advise a client to go that approach. Criminals have a way of denying and explaining things away. She and her lawyer ran a good campaign and now she's free. She did a few months in gaol now she's out. Good for her.

I'm going to stir the pot a bit. Reading some recent posts opened up a new line of thought on this issue for me.

The message is being sent loud and clear that Michelle Leslie can wear whatever she wants and muslim leaders should not have any say in the matter. Fair enough and pretty much my prefered opinion.

On the other hand many of us want muslim leaders to be speaking out on other issues, encouraging muslims to do what the law does not require - to tell muslims to integrate into the australian community as far as their religion allows. Our law does not force muslims to have non muslim friends. It does not force them to try and seperate cultural artifacts from things that are generally part of their religion and yet I'm cheered whenever I see that on the public agenda in the muslim world. And for the hardliners out there I do see it being discussed.

Can muslim leaders only make public comment on an issue if their views suit the prevailing ethos of the Australian community? What happens to our freedom when that becomes the rule?

No easy answers here but worth thinking about if we are going to spend time on this topic.

R0bert

Robert here is an editorial on Muslims in England and France.
Will they assimilate? It appears not.

WILL LONDON BURN TOO? By Patrick Sookhdeo
"Trevor Phillips, chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, has warned recently of 'sleepwalking our way to segregation'. Although he was not speaking principally about Muslims, they have become perhaps the most dominant group in British society. Divided along ethnic and sectarian lines, Muslims are nevertheless united by their creed, their law and the powerful concept of the umma, the totality of Muslims worldwide.

The process of migrating and establishing a Muslim community in a non-Muslim context has an important place in Islamic theology. The word hijra is used to describe such a migration, in particular the migration of Mohammed and his followers in AD 622 from Mecca, where they were persecuted, to Medina where they established the first Islamic state. Eight years earlier another hijra occurred when Muslim refugees found freedom of worship in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia.

Muslims see the establishment of a Muslim community in the UK as a contemporary hijra. But an important question concerns which 7th-century hijra they compare it to: the hijra to Abyssinia in which the Muslims became contented and loyal subjects of a Christian king, or the hijra to Medina where they seized political and military power. ...."

Posted on Free Republic at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1519425/posts

John Stone: Some will not integrate

The Australian. November 18, 2005
John Stone is a former treasury secretary and National Party senator.
"...The usual apologists have been lecturing us on the reasons for these French events. However, there is one obvious reason they seem reluctant to mention. That is the cultural incompatibility involved between the French people and the huge numbers of Muslim immigrants who, with their large families, are rapidly turning France into an Islamic country. ..."
At http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17280160%255E7583,00.html