Today's world is proof of two theories.
1. Populate or perish...Western style that is what we are doing.

2. Overpopulate but spread your excess to Western countries where the living is easy and when your numbers build up, the country is ready for take over... Muslim style that is what the muslims are doing.

Today's history lesson.

Trad. Who will support the wives and children when you can no longer work or die? Do they go onto the streets to beg and be treated like animals like they do in the Middle East??
Do you not accept that the world needs less people rather than more? And why should Western countries with lower populations be expected to be the dumping grounds for the overflow from countries and cultures that do not encourage or support population/birth control. Is this not a macro form of abuse where over breeding is left to others to take care of?

By the way, don't hold England up as a bright light. England is stuffed thanks to the Islamic influx into that country.

Lets face it. Keysar supports polygamy simply because he believes in a false prophet that taught the wrong things.

Muhammad needed women. They were his extensions and influences.

Muhammad married the wealthy Khadija, and tricked her to believe her husband met an angel from God.

Entrapped by her false belief, Khadija became the first false "witness" of Islam...

Then Muhammad and Khadija went to Khadija's cousin Waraqa. Together they influenced him about Muhammad's angel encounters.

There was no such thing as a "Muslim" earlier... then suddenly there were 3 - Muhammad, Khadija & Waraqa.

The population of the false religion Islam exploded astronomically... supported by forced conversion, many polygamous wives, many children...

Muhammad needed many wives. Is it any wonder he supported polygamy?

Muhammad deceived people around him from DAY ONE. Keysar the poor fool is a modern day victim of Muhammad's deception.

But now Keysar is replicating Muhammad's lies... and the lies just go on and on...

Is anybody really surprised by demands by Muslims to allow polygamy?

After all, if Australia is truly a multicultural society, as our elites keep telling us it us, then surely every group should be allowed to follow and practice their own separate cultures and traditions, shouldn't they?

In truth, what we are seeing is the inevitable outcome of multiculturalism. By redefining Australia as nothing more than a mere collection of disparate communities, multiculturalism has undermined the role of Australia's founding European Christian population and delegitimised the right to primacy of its Western cultural norms, thereby creating a false historical equality between the host and newly-arrived populations.

As a result, the culture of Australia's historic majority population is entitled to no more consideration than those of newly-arrived minorities. To multiculturalists, the host should not expect immigrant minorities to adapt to the host's culture and traditions. In fact, the host should have to cater to all the demands of the newcomers.

Having surrendered the right to primacy of its own culture, it follows that the host population is obliged to yield, step by step, to the demands of the other cultures that now exist on Australian soil. After all, who has the right to decide that something is not culturally acceptable in 'multicultural' Australia?

Interesting words of protest, Efranke

>>Having surrendered the right to primacy of its own culture, it follows that the host population is obliged to yield, step by step, to the demands of the other cultures that now exist on Australian soil<<

But face it, what we are seeing today is absolutely no different to what has happened in every generation since 1788.

No "culture" has, during this time, been in any way static. It is surely therefore not reasonable or realistic to assume that everything suddenly comes to a shuddering halt in 2008.

How would you have phrased your concern in 1800, if you were aboriginal?

How would you have phrased your concern in 1860, if you were a freed convict, observing the influx of Irish and Chinese into the goldfields?

As in the past, there is no reason to suddenly change our mind as a country, and in doing so become insular, inward-looking and fearful.

Typical Keysar Trad: say it's only a very small problem, not at all a muslim problem, but it's a really big problem for non-muslims, it's a problem that effects the underpriviledged (like muslims, but I didn't say that), and even you secularists need to embrace Islam otherwise there'll be trouble. All with Keysar saying he'd rather not do it, and poor me for having to do it.
Just like the Koran: imbecilic nonsense laced with threats.
That no society is without problems is a banal statement. That a secular society may not have removed from itself all of the trappings of its religious past is also no surprise.
Most secular western societies have dealt with the notion of illegitimate children by abolishing the notion of legitimacy, and the term wedlock is part of this archaic past.
Children may well benefit from parenting from a mother and father more than from one or the other: or, for that matter, from a father or mother shared. A large number of families in Australia are 'blended' nowadays: children from more than one relationship. But not trying to hang on to the old relationships - leaving them in the past. Is such a relationship in the present? That's Keysar's legitimate question.
The hidden agend is that Islam should be allowed to be fully practiced anywhere there are Muslims. One law for Muslims, another for all the others. But Islam is a stupid, chaotic, puritanical form of fascism, which is clear if you actually read the Koran. Fortunately, most Muslims don't seem to read it, or can't bring themselves to do what it tells them to.