The Forum > Article Comments > Tony, Joe and Kev: God protect us from the true believers > Comments
Tony, Joe and Kev: God protect us from the true believers : Comments
By Jennifer Wilson, published 20/11/2009The terms 'politician' and Christian' are well on their way to becoming an oxymoron, if they aren’t there already.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
-
- All
Posted by Peter the Believer, Sunday, 22 November 2009 7:03:47 AM
| |
On yers Jennifer....poor old 'secular Joe', hasn't got a pair of synaptic gaps to spark between.... and clearly his speech , apart from being 'tosh', was an attempt to stop people questioning him any further on his 'faith'.
As Harris et al., say, once you declare you have 'faith', that is supposed to prevent any further nasty questions on your behaviour... 'It's his 'faith', you see'.... "but he has his 'faith', so that explains all". Do read this open letter to Secular Joe at the Australian Secular Lobby web site: http://www.australiansecularlobby.com/PDFs/2009-11-11_ASL_Joe_Hockey.pdf If Jennifer was to turn her attentions to the 'charlatans', as the High Court warned us all against when it comes to allowing 'religious freedom', within the new 'Rudd Chaplaincy Paradigm', that would make for interesting reading. I see Jennifer is skilled in 'child abuse' matters. Nothing could be so close to 'child abuse' as that which Rudd promotes for public schools through his continued impostion of school chaplains within them.... while happily sending his own oik to a private school to escape the rabble of the "working class" in Canberra. Why do people not question what goes on in public schools? It's simple really, like Joe Hockey, and all those other luminaries Jennifer mentions, the school chaplains are known to have 'faith', and are therefore beyond questioning...ever. But what if Rudd stopped and did question what he was doing? Would that be a denial of his 'faith', or would he be upholding it? What would Jesus have done? Lied and fibbed, and acted like a charlatan, or questioned and demanded answers? Maybe Peter The Believer knows the answer to that one? Posted by The Blue Cross, Monday, 23 November 2009 10:27:15 AM
| |
The true believers in what.
Religion would have to be the worlds worst fraud, and they have been allowed to get away with it. There is no heaven and there is no hell, it's all a con. It's forced upon kids as soon as they are born, they don't get any say in what religion they want to be, or even at all. Science keeps proving there was no single creator, and yet religion survives. The world would be a much calmer place without religion. It will probably cause the demise of the world. In the name of god ovcause. Posted by Desmond, Monday, 23 November 2009 2:15:12 PM
| |
Almost fell off my chair.
On TV. Tony Abbot said "scientologists are a load of nutters". Posted by undidly, Monday, 23 November 2009 3:43:58 PM
| |
The scientologists are shrewd business people; they've followed the scent of Vatican gold and all the wealth of all the other hateful religions that parasitise the public purse and pilfer from the nutters they patronise. I would rather have the scietologists than the ratbag religios; the former are only on the nose because they beautifully parody conventional religions. Give me a scientologist Chaplain in my kids' primary school any day over the benighted brethren of fundamentalist churches. You've got to wonder, when a mob like the scientologists, whose underlying tenets are mostly reasonable, at least by comparison (if cynical in their intent), are decried nutters. Simultaneously the God bothers propound all sorts of utter garbage about virgin births, walking on water, resurrections, six day creations, and all the other crap. The vast majority don't bat an eyelid at all this---but the scientologists are nutters!
Uh huh... At least Scientologists charge an up front fee for their services; the other religions filch the money from their followers via manipulation and scare tactics, working symbiotically with governments. Hockey is of course merely grooming himself and courting the popular vote---he's on a winning ticket I'd say! Posted by Squeers, Monday, 23 November 2009 4:21:40 PM
| |
Squeers, dangerous territory when you start heaping mild praise onto religious outriders.
Would you equally praise the Exclusive Brethren, John Howard's chums, who are also 'good at business', and welcome them as a school chaplain? Or that cult that Chris Masters looked at in Brisbane? There has to be a clear line demarked here auld chum... religion... and no religion... there are no 'partial pregnancies' on offer. A touch of the Bush absolutes are required here. Posted by The Blue Cross, Monday, 23 November 2009 4:44:35 PM
|
Just because Malcolm, Penny and Ian ( McFarlane) hammer out a deal, to give authority to Kevin to sign this treaty, Kevin still will not have authority to sign, because Parliament in Australia with our written Constitution is not Supreme, Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second is and Her Supreme Court the High Court, must enroll such a treaty before it can become law. The Governor -General cannot assent to such a Bill, unless she is satisfied that it has been supported by a referendum, and must use her reserve powers, under S 58 Constitution to reserve the Bill for Her Majesty’s Pleasure.
Australia is a signatory to Interpol. Its Australian Federal Police is a party to its protocols, and the Criminal Code Act 1995 has adequate protections for the Constitution, and the Crown on their badge, is evidence of their power, which is equal to and co-existent with the powers of the Governor General that are granted by S 61 Constitution. One of Interpol’s duties is to stop corruption, and now that The Honourable Brendan O’Connor has promised not to interfere politically with the Australian Federal Police, it can insist on proper procedures before any Bill is passed into law.
The Australian Federal Police can insist that overheated and emotionally misguided politicians, accept that the rule of law is paramount in Australia, and that the proper protocols to protect make and enforce the laws of the Commonwealth are followed. We must trust them.