OK, to show how silly any ridiculous "LITERAL" interpretation can be, and how misleading it can be if it is falsely applied to ALL modern religious worshipers, here's an example of an extremely violent quote (there's hundreds and hundreds of them) from ancient "Christian" biblical text:

"And the Lord's anger burned against them, because they turned to other gods. The Lord said to Moses, "take all the leaders and kill them in broad daylight before the Lord, so that the Lord's fierce anger may turn away from the people of Israel".

So there ya go folks...... let's interpret this Christian quote "LITERALLY", just like the Christian, and other, bigots like to interpret violent Muslim ancient text "LITERALLY" (while using that "interpretation" as a device against all Muslims): The "Christian" god is angry, he is fierce, he personally ordered Moses to commit violent acts of murder and he wanted those murders to be committed in broad daylight in front of him......that's the literal interpretation. It teaches Christians to follow the Lord's word by becoming violent murderers of people who don't worship the "Christian" god!

Of course, for a modern day, educated person to actually "believe" this rubbish would be ridiculous.....he/she would definitely be a fundamentalist. Now "THIS IS EXACTLY" how "some" bigoted Christians/and others love to represent the violent quotes in ancient Muslim text (while totally ignoring the violent quotes in ancient Christian text). By presenting absolute LITERAL versions of ancient quotes, they are trying to give the "IMPRESSION" that ALL Muslims are violent, murderers, terrorists and need to be FEARED. We "ALL" know that some fundamentalist and political activists claim to act under the mantle of Islam.......this makes it VERY easy for the bigots among us to attack Islam and ALL Muslims, and perpetuate their fear and loathing of ordinary, everyday people who are not just like "them".

philips: << Of course, for a modern day, educated person to actually "believe" this rubbish would be ridiculous.....he/she would definitely be a fundamentalist. Now "THIS IS EXACTLY" how "some" bigoted Christians/and others love to represent the violent quotes in ancient Muslim text (while totally ignoring the violent quotes in ancient Christian text). By presenting absolute LITERAL versions of ancient quotes, they are trying to give the "IMPRESSION" that ALL Muslims are violent, murderers, terrorists and need to be FEARED. We "ALL" know that some fundamentalist and political activists claim to act under the mantle of Islam.......this makes it VERY easy for the bigots among us to attack Islam and ALL Muslims, and perpetuate their fear and loathing of ordinary, everyday people who are not just like "them". >>

Spot on, philips - you've described Boazy and his hypocritical, hate-mongering cohorts to perfection.

Phillips,
The only thing you got right, and relevant to this thread, is that the development will be decided on 'planning matters'. If people think that objecting to a development will prevent it, they are mistaken. Peoples wishes are not a consideration for development approval and the L&E court or the Minister do not consider that.

I am not religious at all, so I don't bother to read the stuff about any religion and in this case the issue is not about religion.

People like yourself, steel and Morgan are manipulated by media propaganda which sensationalizes issues such as this.

The people of Camden are not bigoted or racist. Their first concern is economic as they can foresee their property values falling if Muslims move into the area. History has shown this to be the case in the S/W suburbs of Sydney. An influx of muslims has not been positive for any suburb in relation to property values.

The second concern Camden people hold is if many Muslims move to the area it will mean a loss of social amenity for the existing non muslim residents. History also shows this to be the case in suburbs with high muslim populations. For years, the social problems associated with Muslims have been aired on OLO, so it is not necessary to show them again.

As Kactus said in the other Camden thread, these are legitimate concerns. Dispite all the media hype, the above are the real reasons for concern about the development.

As for the future, well if the developers continue to pursue the matter, it is a safe bet the present residents of Camden will suffer.

Philips - sorry to rain on your parade
and
CJ - you should know better by now

Boaz will wriggle out of Philips' above quote by saying, "that's the Old Testament, I'm a Christian and follow the New Testament." However, JC did admonish his followers to obey the OT:

"5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

And if Boaz claims that this is a wrong "interpretation" try this from the NT, where Jesus warns of the fate awaiting people if they refuse to listen to his disciples, charming:

"10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

Cheers m'dears

:-D

Fractelle
You are a Cristian theologian!
Do not worry in PARAGUAY? the new left president was, some years before, a catholic bishop.

Banjo
About the question "What does the future hold for Camden"
The Camden is not the first and will not be the last one with this kind of problems.
Read what happened in USA, EUROPE OR UK.
They are full of mosques and of cause from their high minarets every one can listen "the call to prayer".
The freedom for religious is a fundamental human right,and it is protected from the international law, which is stronger from the state or federal law and any try to blog the spread of mosques in Australia will fail. The locals could create temporary some problems to Muslim religious BUT ONLY TEMPORARY.
MUSLIM'S RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED BY LAW AND SOONER OR LATER THEY WILL FIND THEIR RIGHTS IN THE COURTS.
SOONER OR LATER THE CAMDEN WILL BE FULL OF MUSLIM MOSQUES, IF THEY WANT IT!
You know, it is not bad if we use our brain before we open our mouth!

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Dear Banjo,

Most people fear change to a certain extent. Particularly change that they consider alien to their way of life.

Having a religious school of over 1200 students in a small rural community is bound to have an affect. Especially when the religion is not that shared by the community.

The City Council voted on the issue - but as you pointed out - the decision will ultimately not be theirs in the long run. It will be a
decision made by the State - according to existing legislature.

What I don't understand is - what's the attraction of Camden? Why isn't the school being built in a community that has a larger Muslim population? Why bother going all the way out to a small rural community - like Camden? Is it because the cost of land is so much cheaper at Camden?

I think Antonios is right here - the Camden community will not win this one.