Coach,

I’m Dutch Australian and proud of it.

It is not loaded with intent to create new values.

I have family and friends who are Australian Buddhists, Australian agnostics, Australian Catholics, Australian Muslims, Australian Lutherans, Chinese Australians, Malaysian Australians, Australian women, Australian men, even Australian feminists.

We all respect Australian laws.

I have an Australian passport, speak the lingo, vote and love a good debate on OLO. I swore my allegiance to this nation and her laws: I am Australian.

I’m doubtful that the government knows what ‘Australian values’ are. There are many multi generational Australians who do not know what Australian values are either.

As to ‘arrogantly ignoring how people feel or think’; isn’t that what you are doing?

You demand: ‘name one country where Islam is peaceful’. As Frank said: Australia

For those still interested in the biological and/or ethical questions raised by Cardinal Pell’s public statements:

http://www.biotechnews.com.au/index.php/id;401382468;fp;4194304;fpid;1

or

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/07/science/07cell.html?ex=1182052800&en=e58547ac3be0bc33&ei=5070.

I empathize with Fellow Human. I myself am a male medium height Australian Jewish agnostic of Eastern European ancestry. The majority of Australians are Christian and the largest number are of English background. But this group often arrogantly asserts itself as the true Australian never mind the indigenous people.

We need a change in attitudes to accept that no group has a superior right to be here, or a superior right to its own background, except perhaps for the Aborigines and the Torres Straight Islanders. That to me is what multiculturalism is about.

Incidentally both my grandmothers were born in England and came here with their parents. Yet there are some who consider me slightly less of an Australian. This view is applied even to my brother-in-law who is descended from a (Jewish) convict.

Please back off and accept diversity in our land.

Thanks for the links George. I will have a read.

I think the problem for some is the intervention of the Church rather than the opnions of a man. Moreover, I think there has been a counter-revolution by religionism since the nineteenth century, wherein the Church is tring to keep knowledge from the masses and interpret morals on their behalf.

Given there philosophies, I am surprised Kuhn and Popper didn't stand in clear opposition to the Church consistent with the logic of heir posits. Even H.G. Wells when he told history-as-history was apologetic. Some might site Dawkins as a successful secularist, but really wish he would use specialist topic editors when outside his field. He bright but his not a Gell-Mann.

Besides, as I note elswhere, Jesus states that the Eucharist is is in memory of Him, not adherence to a Church creed. In fact, to honour the human, I see no reason why an anthiest could not eat bread in memory of that one first century Messiah.

First century Messiahishs were a defense against the Romans. Isalm was an Arab unifying agent against Christianity and Persia

Oliver, what do you mean by intervention? Am I intervening in this forum if I write a post saying what I find right and what wrong? Yes, I would be intervening if I had the power to force my opinion on others or to prevent them from presenting their own opinion.

Australia, as a democratic country, has to put up with all sorts of lobbies: nuclear and anti-nuclear, environmentalist, pro-tobacco, pro-choice and pro-life, anti-war and pro-American etc. And that is good so. Why should the Catholic Church be deprived of having their own lobby? Cardinal Pell has no power to force others to accept his moral criteria or prevent others from lobbying for their understanding of what is feasible and ethical.

I do not know why Pell had to say what he said - it was just a repetition of a rather well known position of the Catholic Church on an issue that is changing from day to day due to scientific progress - but even less do I understand why his speaking up should be called an “outburst”. Is it really true that Catholic MP-s in Australia have no free and informed conscience (Aquinas) of their own, that they can only either (sheepishly) accept or (loudly) reject ecclesiastical guidelines without taking into account other factors influencing the complicated situation and their position in it? And if they are like that, how come they were elected?

Coach,

You said you find my statement "I am an Australian muslim and proud to be so” to be provocative! thats interesting.

Australian is the land we all call home and live together and here is a short storÿ:

my next door neighbours are Irish, Greeks, 2 chinese families, a polish family and a russian couple. we are all australians, we look after each other, we work hard, we get together on wekends, our children play together. The ony 'new value'is I serve non alcolohic beer when we watch the football on weekends. They are OK with this new value and the 'other new value'of my wife serving lamb instead of ham.

I know you are an Arab Christian, you should have left your political baggage at the customs instead of bringing it in with you.
Its your choice but don't feed your hate to your kids, its un-australian.