runner
Please don't banter about the word pagan or paganism. It is a derogatory pronouncement, like the word mushrik, of any other religion not being Abrahamic. Paganism is not a religion or a faith in itself nor does it represent a religion or a faith. There are many other religions in this world besides Judaism/Christianity/Islam and none are more or less.
Unless your advocating that the Abrahamic religions battle it out for rightious supremacy and the winner promises to forgo the politics and social manipulations the big three are currently involved in. In centuries past religion and politics worked as governing partners (somewhat) while(or where)the population was all of one. Today, not at all(most all), because we are not all of one nor do we intend to be. We're multicultural/multiethnic/multireligious/multipolitical and we will only come together if we can find social agreement. We are returning to tribalism. Not clans related by blood but, shared ideas. We are becoming a tribal world of ism's. We are now led by the all knowing truth of political correctness and the cultural and ethnic vote. There is no unified us.

Boaz_David, I regard myself as a secular moralist. My values come from lifelong thinking and experience. That does not put me above a religious devotee but nor does it mean my values leed to some sort of downward slippery slope.

Your aspersion on Bob Brown's values are your own invention. I am aware that Brown is very concerned about the effect of violent and other gratuitous entertainment on young people.

He has never advocated free heroin - but has advocated measures to help those addicted get off their addiction, including such things as free needle exchanges.

Debate those specific policy points rationally if you like, but please don't invent things to serve your own religious/political agendas.

As a secular I accept that religion can give people a tidy moral basis for living, but history shows that a religious-based morality leads to various forms of discrimination, intolerance and bigotry, and as a result, much warfare and bloodshed.

This is not to deny a value in religious thought, whether one gains their morality and ethical basis for living from religious or secular thought, we do ourselves a disservice if we put ourselves on a pedestal and shoot others down unthinkingly.

Runner: interesting you regard secularism as paganism dressed up. Many secularists feel the same way about monotheism - one god or many - it's still a believe beyond what is rational.

And I've got to agree with gecko's comments re bob brown.
You can disagree with him, but it's another thing to hold up an individual and chalk a whole ideology up to that person.

(Note, I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with all of brown's politics either)

I could just as easily do the same for plenty of christians...

"Secularism ? that gives us Bob Brown and the slippery moral slope he would take us down. (xxx rated porn, free heroin, but lots and LOTS of trees)"

Porn
Free drugs
..and trees?

Awsome.

Trust you Spendo... :) you forgot to say (like in the Horror Movies) "I'm Baaa--aaack"....

Yes, I think I went a bit too far with the 'free' heroin... its more like my gracious corrector said.. injecting rooms.. but I'll need to update the policy on that.

But I'm right about the Trees :) Crumbs..I think a branch just fell on me !

Gadget... your quite right, the issue is close to my heart, but on 'mono-culture' I should point out that by this I don't mean an 'anglo saxon' 50s British culture, though by virtue of numbers this will probably head in that direction to a 'degree' no matter what.

I'm quite 'for' an osmosis style cultural absorption of the best things in the more recent migrant communities. All I'm really saying, is lets not further strengthen difference which alienates the majority and then places barriers to intermarraige.
Intermarraige is probably the fastest way to become that "Australian" of tomorrow.

Gecko... I take your point about secular moralist. But while I realize you can feel comfortable and even secure in this, I still feel that such a foundation is quite prone to all manner of philosophical influence over time. Sure.. you reflect... and live, and experience. But isn't it reasonable to assume that all of those things will in time modify your views about certain issues ?
Can I suggest you look at some anthropological articles on tribal cultures or traditional societies and even about Australia.. as I think this would provide benefit to one's outlook.

I prefer more of a rock solid foundation as I am always ranting about.
The reference point never changes, but the understanding and application may find stronger or weaker expression depending on external events.

Ahhh but Mr Boaz...

Your christian rock has changed greatly over time - indeed, few would believe the OT should be followed to the letter.
Few still cling to the no intercourse before marriage (I know there are plenty that do, but compare it to the number of christians who don't).
You can point out that many who don't adhere to the more traditional aspects of christianity aren't actually following it in the original 'spirit' as it were, but isn't this another example of change, of interpretation?

In any case, let's say you're right. I believe you yourself have pointed out that the problem with some followers of Islam is that they adhere too strictly to the Qu'ran. (If I'm wrong here, of course, feel free to correct me).
Aren't the more progressive muslim's, i.e. the ones who have a more liberal interpretation of the Qu'ran, the ones we're more keen to invite into our society?

How can it be good for christians to remain rigid, while bad for others?

I know you could point out the virtuosity of the bible here, but if you could explain it from a more relativistic standpoint I think you'll be more convincing for secular posters.

And lastly... perhaps it's a good thing that views can adapt over time.

Maybe the world is so screwed up because people are all convinced their way is right, and perhaps that's because they're not willing to let their beliefs evolve.