Isn't time we acknowledge the issue about religions is really about power plays with the dominant one, theocracy, Islam playing its card?

Religion is a *personal* practice or at least should be so, but the theocratic Muslims wish to institutionalise their religion. All the consequent power struggles we see around the world, is by Muslims seeking to impose their power, legitimised by their Koran.

Pull a chador (figuratively speaking of course) off most young women in Tehran for example, and see what they wear underneath (jeans and other non-islam clothing with a hint for any disbeliever in their footwear.) Who can stand for election there, only via a Guardian Council (read Big Brother).

Our society works on the division of religion from government. To talk about multiculturalism, is talking about division of power with the theocratic underpinned islamics.

I came to this country to be an Australian and spoke English within a year at home and forgot about my native country. I became Australian.

Multiculturalism endorses a fragmented society with all the consequent powerplays we see in countries like France, England etc. I've become Australian and have absolutely no time for the powerplays of Muslims. You're welcome here but dont impose yourself on me, or attempt to restrict my freedoms. Just look at Denmark's problem right now about a cartoon in a newspaper.

Multiculturalism is an experiment that is going terribly sour, potentially violent when there's talk about "majorities" as by Syed. The only majority here are the 20 million Australians.

I say "go home" if you cant accept that there are no majorities.

I don’t want to be a part of forum discussion on my article rather I leave on readers to judge with honest and proficient manner. You are most welcome to criticise on my write-up as it provides me the reflection and thoughts of different sections of the society. I hope it would initiate healthy and constructive discussion. However, I notice that some of you just criticise without going through the article deeply and try to understand my point of view. If you want to be an honest contestant then please don’t preset your mind just by looking writer’s background rather than focus of writer’s sayings - Thanks

Syed Atiq ul Hassan

Syed, I thought it was a very well reasoned article with no bias or hidden agenda, and I'm sorry that seem people on this comments list failed to read it properly, or should I say, they read into it stuff that suited their own personal agenda. I too may be concerned about the rise of Islam in Australia, but I know an intelligent, well written article when I see one.

Thank you Syed, We really appreciate you stating your positon. Again I agree with what you say. Just about every country that is seemingly secular has a religious controlled society, in that they include religion within their procedures. So a majority will always dominate culturally, religiously and socially, with a religious slant.

Thats what a majority of Australians want to change, we have the intelligence to not end up as other societies in the past have, because of ideological religious controls. So removing any form of religious control and public expression, would solve the problems. If religions really want to live in peace, then they would be happy to achieve that be taking the path of removing themselves from the public arena and keeping their worship and practices private.

We could still within our courts, have people swear on their religious books, or make affirmations. Isn't peace and harmony more important than pestering people about your religious rights and causing trouble.

We have no other choice, the monotheistic religions are going to fight for control of the world no matter what any of them say. We just want to stop it happening in this country and survive. Any religious approach will defeat that purpose. If people can't see that, we are in for a hell of a ride over the next few years.

Syed

I am a great believer in a secular state. I also believe people have the right to practice the religion of choice. I also believe people have the right to reject religion or believe in the Ancients Gods or even practise Satanism.
I ask why must people have a religious belief in Christianity, Islam or Hindu? Your article infers such. It doesn't talk of other possiblities.

There was recently a Government in this country that had at it's core a group of avowed atheists. They would not dare impose their particular traditions upon the majority even though the majority probably had more in common with them than practising christians.

The significance of religious public holidays in Australia is merely the result of our European historical preferences. Similarily other Public holidays. Labor Day, Queensland Day, Queens Birthday, Anzac Day and Australia Day. As can been seen these other holidays draw their legitimacy from concepts or events of special significance to Australians. Yep they were all determined by the preferences of the majority even though with some many disagree with the idealogical basis of them.

I'm an employer and I've already stated my preference. But most people would merely grin at my cheek. They'd certainly not hold a symposium involving children to discuss my preference. Such a waste of time really. I'm in a minority and I accept the reality of the rule of the majority. I don't grizzle about it. I just pay the penalty rates and get on with my belief in ... well that's my business.

Syed, thankyou for your input, however there are parts that I do have concerns about. You quoted the history of secularism and religion and Australia has both although, I do concede, that the lines may be blurred at times.

The separation of church and state does not deny the fact that a Christian society invaded or settled this country, depending on your viewpoint, in 1788 thus inculcating a Christian system of convention and commemoration.

Pragmatism would suggest that if Australia was to satisfy the holy days of every religion that is inherent in multiculturalism we would rarely work yet belief is an integral part of life.

That, in itself, is problematic enough but what is the solution to a religion that does not recognise that separation? Remco stated that multiculturalism had gone sour and, apart from emotional rhetoric, it is difficult to discount his assertion.

You portended an argument about the veracity of secularism however the article mounted an argument about the corruption of Islam by the west and Christianity.

To preface that argument you put forward questions from children. It is natural for children to come up with questions based on what they see or hear. What of the global conflicts of the world today? Would all the answers to their questions be based on the deleterious influence of the west on Islam?

Syed, I honestly thankyou for your input to this discussion but in this secular society we have the privilege to disagree with impunity.

It would be a boring world, indeed, if we were all the same.

All the best.