Sebastian makes the same mistake as the average Australian; using a broad-brush approach to social frictions by using tolerance or as he puts it ‘acceptance’ of each other and dropping our prejudices to accommodate the ‘other’ as the bandaid remedy.

This would probably work with most races and colours given time (e.g. the Asians) – BUT with the muslims it is a different game altogether.

They (mulims) are called to put religion before the host state or country. The repercussions are terribly worrying to the alert observer.

The religion of islam does not need - let alone respect - our democracy or our laws. They come to a country with their own set of laws that supersede the law of the host land.

Just listen to any moderate imam at the normal every-Friday address and you will understand what business they are in. Their elitist stance is made obvious by their arrogant behaviour towards the koffar (non-muslims).

Non-muslim Australians still don’t get it. Asking for a wolf to live and respect the sheep by preaching tolerance and acceptance simply WONT WORK

The problem is quite simple really. The top half of our society (academics, politicians, business leaders) want higher levels of immigration and a more multicultural, diverse society. The bottom half, the people who don't wield much power or influence think otherwise. People who think the ideas espoused by Sebastian and Co is a load of B.S is not represented at all in any of our parliaments. If fact, anything contrary to the opinions of Sebastian and Co is 'hate speech', 'intolerance' and 'vilification'.

How about a few Jean Marie Le Pen's in our parliament. Now that would make politics more interesting.

Sebastian you've taken the narrowest possible view of the meaning of tolerance and are instigating controversy because of the breadth of meanings of the word accept.

Here's a few definitions

1. From dictionary.com

'tol·er·ance ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tlr-ns)
n.The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others...
The capacity to endure hardship or pain.

2 My mum's old and tattered Concise Oxford Dictionary Seventh edition 1982

'Tolerance n. willingness to tolerate, forebearance(esp.Med) capacity to tolerate,...'

Tolerate v.t. endure, permit (practice, action, person's doing); allow (Person, religious sect, opinion)n.to exist without interference or molestation; endure with forebearance, sustain, endure (suffering etc.) esp. Med.; sustain use of (drugs, radiation etc.) without harm, so ~'ATION n, (esp.) allowing of diferences in religious opinion without discrimination...'

3.From dictionary.com

ac·cep·tance ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k-sptns)
n.The act or process of accepting.
The state of being accepted or acceptable.
Favorable reception; approval.
Belief in something; agreement.
Abbr. acpt. ...'

4.And from a really tatty page of that much loved old dictionary.

Acceptance n. 1 consent to receive(gift,thing delivered, payment, pleasure,duty); favourable reception (of person or thing by or with person); affirmative answer to invitation.2. approval, belief, toleration...

The verb accept also has in it's list of meanings a couple of phrases every multiculturalist should abhor.

....submit to. (Old Oxford Dictionary)

...To endure resignedly or patiently: accept one's fate (Dictionary.com)

Tolerance is more than sufficient...unless you intend to change the meanings of words and not just all my values, customs and beliefs.

I'm not going to submit myself to someone elses values, beliefs, and customs. I am entitled to hold my own. However if people with differing values, customs and beliefs wish to join my community I will recognise and respect their values, customs and beliefs. I'll allow them to exist without interference or molestation. I'd expect the same in return. I'd expect them to apply the words (their meaning is clearcut)of our Official Multicultural Policy too.

That policy is something we all ACCEPT.

davo, would you agree with le pen's policy of mass-expulsion of foreigners? in what way is this consistent with our 'judeo-christian' values?

IRF.. worked for Joshua. But, not theologically applicable today.

ACCEPTANCE vs TOLERANCE.

It all depends on our meaning of ‘acceptance’ - in the cultural or the legal sense.

If Legal, migrants already have to uphold our laws.

The area of more concern is the CULTURAL.

Lets say it means “We accept your right to practice your culture, within Australian law”

But what if that cultural expression is in CONFLICT with prevailing Australian culture but not law ?

This will lead to automatic marginalization because of the incompatibility of the new and the old culture. It will emphasize “difference” and give no motivation to adjust or assimilate to the predominant culture.

EXAMPLE

Murut Tribe of Borneo.

There ‘culture’ was that a young man could have multiple girlfriends in various villages. If he travelled a distance, he was free to SLEEP with the girlfriend in that village, but NOT to have sexual relations. To do so meant severe and immediate social ostracization.

Dayak/Iban of Borneo.

Their ‘culture’ included a custom ‘Mengayap’ where the young females and males (unmarried) from puberty onwards slept in the outside ‘sikang’ or verandah away from the adults. It was quite normal for Iban boys to have sexual relations with a number of girls during this time. Visitors were also allowed to engage in this practice.

Now..ask yourself, if an Iban/Dayak boy of 15 goes to stay in a Murut Village..... and is by Murut culture allowed to sleep with a young girl, what is the likely outcome ? yes.. you got it in one.

Cultures are NOT compatible and should NOT be seen as something to be simply ‘accepted’ by an existing culture nor ‘tolerated’. In the example above it is abundantly clear that the Dayak boy MUST conform to Murut culture or all hell will break loose ! (and a bundle of arms and legs might result.)

CULTURE INCLUDES RELIGION
and to the extent that a new migrants religion is in conflict with the Australian Culture, it should not be practiced supported or encouraged. (Islamic call to prayer from a mosque, Female genital mutilation etc )

I tend to agree that we need to aim for acceptance rather than tolerance as when tolerating there is no obligation to be kind, respectful or nice.

Even being kind can have a totally different meaning depending on who you are. Some might think that they were being kind when they kicked their victim in the stomach instead of the head!

Acceptance demands more respect.