Dear Celivia

actually we do have anti homosexual vilification laws. I'ts part of the racial discimination act I think.. but it's also in the equal opportunity act.

Now..here is an insight you might reflect on:

"It’s hard to understand why people are intolerant of another’s sexuality- what does it matter to THEM"

If you have a look at the flack I'm getting in the 'Some dog owners' thread.. it should be abundantly clear that it matters a heck of a LOT to 'other's how an aggressive dog is treated. It seems some of these individuals feel they know more about the circumstances than the person experiencing it.. me. And.. so..they are just trying to find angles about why I..the one mauled.. was wrong to kick a dog which was mauling me (for the umpteenth time)

On sexuality.. here's the thing. It doesn't 'matter' terribly much how people think about sexual things UNTIL... they wish to bring that onto property owned by us.. and dedicated to the purpose of promoting the Gospel of Christ and the values of the Bible. THEN...it matters to 'us'.

It also matters to 'us' when this movement seeks to alter our educational and media content in such a way as to.

1/ Promote behavior which is condemned in the Bible.
2/ Socially marginalize Christians because of that belief.
3/ Criminalize Christians for that belief.

So it matters one heck of a LOT... to us. It especially matters when people seek to use our property for the promotion of that agenda.

TAX PAYER FUNDED CHURCHES.. can any one enlighten me about how Churches are funded by the tax payer? Give actual evidence.
In our case, we pay for them ourselves- 100%

Umm.. World Youth Day? not a church but in any case I disagree with state funding for such a thing.

I would not even want help from outside.

Polycarp on demanding preferential treatment because of his faith:

"On sexuality.. here's the thing. It doesn't 'matter' terribly much how people think about sexual things UNTIL... they wish to bring that onto property owned by us.. and dedicated to the purpose of promoting the Gospel of Christ and the values of the Bible. THEN...it matters to 'us'."

Blatant discrimination like this 'matters' to the bulk of humanity, you hypocrite.

1. The Phillip Island Adventure Resort is not a private club or private property of any type. It is a business open to ALL.

2. Who is this ‘us’ you refer to? It is not the average Christian. It is the marginal, fundamentalist, intolerant bigot such as yourself.

3. Try substituting the word ‘Muslim’ for the word ‘homosexual’.

The “Christian Youth Camps said it "desires all guests to experience Christian life and values, and it was the aims of the Way Out group in promoting a lifestyle to young people contrary to those values that was in question".

Based on that excuse it should exclude any people whose beliefs differ .

And MY taxes pay for this blatant discrimination. I object to that – as is my right in a democracy. Australia is still a democracy, Polly, and until it is a Christian theocracy I, and all other Australians, have a right to question the practices of an exclusionary group like the Christian Brethren church.

Finally, people can CHOOSE to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Buddhist. We do not choose our sexual orientation that is something decided by nature – or if you prefer, by GOD.

Dear Fractelle,

You've summed it up beautifully.

As Robert Nguyen Cramer tells us:

"Studies from the APA (American Psychological Association)
in July 2004 stated clearly that homosexuality is neither
a mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the
way a minority of our population expresses human love
and sexuality. Study after study documents the mental
health of gay men and lesbians; these show that their
judgement, stability, and social and vocational
adaptiveness all show that gay men and lesbians function
every bit as well as heterosexuals. Nor is homosexuality
a matter of individual choice. Research suggests that
the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the
life cycle, possibly even before birth.

It is found in about ten percent of the population, a
figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures,
irrespective of the different moral values and
standards of a particular culture. Contrary to what some
imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population
does not appear to change with new moral codes or
social mores."

As I've stated previously, the religious zealots like
Polycarp do not have a fact to stand on.

They can't grasp that:

"Outside show is a poor substitute for inner worth!"

Fractelle: "And MY taxes pay for this blatant discrimination. I object to that – as is my right in a democracy."

Absobloodylutely.

The fact is that, while there are non-prejudiced religious people like Foxy, there is still a clear biblical defence to the Christian bigotry against gay people. The Qu'ran and the Torah aren't too fussed on bottom-love either. (Does anyone else notice how *Islamic* Polycarp seems? Such a warrior! I swear he was born into the wrong religion.) While there is preferential treatment for religions in this country (tax exemptions, religious vilification laws, invitations to talk on Lateline etc), there is preferential treatment for bigotry — the same bigotry that is explicitly proscribed in Australian law.

If religions have charities, fine. They incorporate the charity and apply for a tax exemptions. One of my charities has a religious basis (World Vision) but I'm happy to part with the dosh because I approve of what they do.

One thing I've been reminded off since visiting this forum is how *not good* some Christians are, despite having so much instruction on how to be good. So why are we propping them up?

Next time you drive past St Pats in Melbourne of St Marys in Sydney, or Polycarp's church or the Church of Scientology or your local Mosque, just remember: the people who own those piles don't pay tax. In fact, your taxes allow them to own lovely inner-city property and scare children and gay people with their medieval balderdash about sin and hell.

It's sheer lunacy. Time to start lobbying, I reckon.

Excellent posts, Fractelle, Veronika and Foxy.

Heeeheee Veronika, ‘homosexuality’ sure is one hot topic that would help converge different religions.

Fractelle said,
” We do not choose our sexual orientation…”
Spot on, sexual orientation is innate unlike dogma, which is learned.
If something is learned it usually can be unlearned.
It’s possible to treat phobias because they’re not innate.
There’s still hope for bigots.
Psychiatrists can even cure arachnophobia- it’s easier and more effective than training all Australian spiders to behave like happy honey bees, or eradicating all spiders from the country.

Until a new Pied Piper is born -one who can lure homos away from our communities- we have to face the reality that homosexuals are part of a normal, healthy society and therefore they should be able to enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as anyone else.

Fractelle,
I even think it shouldn’t matter whether homosexuality is innate or a choice because people should be free to choose their sexuality and express it.

Polycarp,
As Fractelle said, that camp is not a private club and receives tax exemptions so it should be open to the general public.
If it doesn’t fit in with your bible then either rip out a few pages or ignore what it says about homosexuality just like you ignore the bits where Jesus says to kill disobedient children and beat servants.

Yes you’re correct that there are anti-discrimination laws that make it unlawful to discriminate against homosexuals, but they’re not sufficient because in federal law they don’t cover all areas.
Also, as you know, exceptions to anti-discrimination laws make life hell for homos since these make it possible for some employers, private education, religious bodies to discriminate against homosexuals and same-sex couples.
That means that Australian laws support homophobia.
There would be outrage if the same limitations applied to a certain race or ethnicity- that would be like going back to the times when black and white people couldn’t marry. The zeitgeist moved on and will move on again in time despite religious ‘values’.

Polly

Up to your usual standard of research I see:

<<actually we do have anti homosexual vilification laws. I'ts part of the racial discimination act I think..>>

Duh! Two minutes googling would show even you that that's a nonsense.

<<TAX PAYER FUNDED CHURCHES.. can any one enlighten me about how Churches are funded by the tax payer? Give actual evidence.>>

This might take five minutes research. Start with the Church of Scientology's desperate (and successful) High Court appeal to be listed as a church because it would win significant tax exemption on its properties.

Then go to recent media discussion about the fears among churches that the current tax review will blow the whistle on their privileges.

The Australian July 28, 2008

"Charities and other non-government organisations could lose billions of dollars' worth of tax perks as the Rudd Government's taxation review prepares to examine whether the concessions offered to the $80 billion non-profit sector are justified...
Most of the country's religious groups, which make up about $25billion of the sector, run commercial enterprises. Among them is the Seventh Day Adventists' cereal giant Sanitarium, which generates more than $300 million a year.

"Many of the operations have little to do with charitable work but are exempt from various taxes including corporate tax and capital gains tax. The Catholic Church has long opposed reforms such as the creation of a national charities commission to regulate the sector, or charging tax on commercial enterprises.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24086963-2702,00.html

Remember too taxpayer's money goes straight to churches for all manner of 'services' . Thankfully, Hillsong (much loved by Costello and Howard) $414 000 grant for crime prevention was withdrawn after allegations that the organisation had deceived and manipulated an Aboriginal community to get the money.
http://www.democrats.org.au/speeches/?speech_id=1861&display=1

Matheson recently pointed out that the Tax Assessment Act, “gives total exemption to fringe benefits given to religious practitioners”. “...As there is no cap to this, some churches use remuneration packages that consist of nil salary and 100 per cent fringe benefits”, which in effect can create “an unwarranted entitlement to social security benefits”.
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7592&page=0