The Forum > General Discussion > Should freedom of religion be part of an Australian human rights act?
Should freedom of religion be part of an Australian human rights act?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
-
- All
Posted by one under god, Monday, 19 October 2009 10:41:51 PM
| |
King Huzza, <"...an obvious example- the right of doctors to deny patients a treatment or reference because the patient is asking for something 'unholy' in their eyes (like an abortion). This is completely unacceptable."
While I believe in a woman's right to choose whether to carry a baby or not, I also respect the right of a Doctor not to agree to perform an abortion if she/he does not want to. As long as the Doctor refers the woman on to another Doctor who does perform abortions, or to some pregnancy counselling centres/ family planning clinics who may help the woman. I agree that we do not need a specific right to practice our own religion, but that we all have the same rights and expectations of behaviour for all people with any religion or with no beliefs at all. Being given the 'right' to practice some bizarre religion which allows, for example, cannibalism, would not be acceptable in Australia What would the definition of religion be? Posted by suzeonline, Monday, 19 October 2009 11:04:11 PM
| |
<< Fractelle also makes a good point that it would be nice if any such legislation included the right to freedom from religion. >>
Thanks CJ. While writing my comment I had in mind that failure of the Atheist Foundations attempt to promote rational thinking and the simple idea that is OK not to believe in any religion. http://www.atheistcampaign.org/371/ "ATHEIST FOUNDATION OF AUSTRALIA INC MEDIA RELEASE BUS SLOGAN REJECTED! ‘APN Outdoor’, the company responsible for Public Metropolitan Transport Advertising, says no to atheism." Yet, religion still gets the green light for any propaganda they wish to advertise, such as the recent Jesus Campaign. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,26126675-7582,00.html "THEY argue about pretty much everything else but every Christian church in Australia accepts that Jesus is central to their faith. Without him, they've got nothing. With this in mind, 15 of the umpteen Christian denominations, including even some brave Catholics, will this week join forces (and funds) to create a $1.5 million advertising campaign that focuses on Jesus, and not the individual churches. The campaign is being billed as the largest and most expensive marketing exercise for Jesus in Australia and it features a television commercial, to be launched tomorrow. Besides the "big ones" (Anglicans and the Catholics), the Baptists, the Uniting Church and the Salvation Army are on board. The campaign will be called "Jesus -- all about life". $1.5 million to preach to the converted. How many condoms would that buy? Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 20 October 2009 8:54:50 AM
| |
from...THE MATRIX..AND..THE U.S.CONSTITUTION
During my..twelve years..service..as a Judge,..I always..insisted on the truth..and placed justice..above..law and order! research/paper..;..people..tend to lose interest..when articles of this nature..become..too technical.. http://whatreallyhappened.com/ http://www.stevequayle.com/News.alert/0 ... tution.pdf. teqnicly i should be in synche with you lot <<<The seizure of/the Americas..by..the Kings/explorers..was not as it has been..depicted..in our/history books,..presented to us..by our government,..in our government controlled..public/private/schools. Native_Americans ..the Indians)..were murdered,..their villages burned,.many were/enslaved,..infected by diseases..brought from England ..and their lands/..taken by force..and the/threat of force,..by these...'early explorers! The Indians..were labeled savages...by these/immigrant/explorers..from England,..but..the true savages..were our English/ancestors! One thing../the Founding Fathers..did not know,..was that all of the Kings lands..and all future/acquisitions...$!"..such as the AMERICAS,..had been given and pledged by King John to Pope/Innocent III...*^%$*>>...and the Holy Roman Church,..by the Treaty of 1213. After that fact/was proven..to the Founding Fathers..;..King George and/representatives..from the Vatican..;..decided to use/the Constitutional draft..created by the Founding Fathers,..to further their plan to control the/Colonists! Control attained..by bringing the Colonists to their knees..in debt! Did you know..that 98% of the Law Schools..in America/England..do not include/..Constitutional Law..as a part of their law curriculum? ....Constitutional Law does not apply to..or affect the enforcement of statutes,..codes oradministrative regulations,..which have replaced constitutional law,..the common law,..public/law and penal law....and which have been..designed to..control....you;.. ..English soldiers..refused to take up arms against the Colonists because..they were/English citizens/..and relatives. Mr...Mayer/Amschel.Bauer,..founder of the Rothschild../Banking Empire;..by this time,....owned the King! Mr. Bauer..had extended unlimited credit..to the King/..and contracts with him,..which permitted..the Rothschild Tax Collectors to represent..and/collect the_Kings_Tax...from...the_Kings_/subjects.servants/pewons/ignorant faithless[or lunatics and savages..as a later/king..wrote/in capt philips..sealed orders. When his show../surge..of force..in the Colony’s../failed;..Mr.Bauer suggested..that King George/..finance the Colonists..in their War efforts../against him,..and bring the Colonists..to their knees in debt!... using german solgers commanded by brit officers..paid at 50 p per day...mr b..charged the king 100 each per day.. .clever stuff/..from the future pope..of the_church_of_england/religious/franchise.../the board of the crown corperation franchise.../owning....controling....from one square mile in london/city...and not of..the queeen but...it dont change a thing...re god neither god..nor satan ...made them..do it... Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 20 October 2009 9:38:01 AM
| |
Suzie- I believe it becomes a slippery slope when doctors- who are providing vital services, are free to pick and choose what they want to do and retain their position- especially with so few doctors in the country (especially as they're being paid a substantial fee by patients or by the taxpayer). To set a standard for a vital service to deny help to the public is not a good idea.
It would be a lot like a soldier who doesn't want to commit an act of violence- but refuses to resign his position to someone else. I think to be fair, doctors should sign a contract saying that they are not willing to perform ALL of their job- and instead agree to be liable to be replaced by a doctor that takes his/her responsibilities to assist people a little more seriously. Providing a referal is good so long as the doctor is NOT paid for essentially wasting the patient's time, and resides in a large city full of other doctors who are theoretically willing to do the full job- but smaller towns it may have an exceptionally negative impact. Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 20 October 2009 12:40:17 PM
| |
when a bill of right violates anyone with a conscience that is not seared then it is not worth the paper it is written on. It seems to me that the bill of rights frees many agnostics, atheist and others from a moral conscience. They have created their own little pathetic rule book devoid of to much value (except the handpicked areas they took from the bible) God has allowed mankind to create these silly little rules dressed up in compassion but fortunately their is enough fortitude among believers to reject this second rate attempt by humanist to redefine good and evil. Will believers bow to such second rate garbage. They will only have themselves to blame if they do. Thankfully I have grown up in a country of free speech. It is to late to stop me and hopefully many others now.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 20 October 2009 4:09:32 PM
|
thats why its taught to children
that much quoted court case /religion v[not evolution...but the right to present the god theory WITH the THEORY of evolution
it didnt judge creation fraud..it decided that religion couldnt be taught in science class///thats when the athiest hads their big win...a theory is taught as fact...kids get one fersion..i know cause i was raised in science...till i realised it totally fraud
there is no ambiogensis...first life...and there is not one scrap of proof of one genus evolving into other genus...not one...kids get taught you will know it all.....later...but by then there are so many other specialitoies..no one sees the whole picture
we got expert's in say micro/bacteria/virus...here at this forum..forrest is a eucalypotus expert...but see its so specialised...withing the genus....any evolution they see is within the same taxonomy...not one of you have reported an evolution...OUT OF GENUS...many species..but all within genus
at least tell the kids all the options..i was lied to but i know it...you lot been lied to but cant concieve why...your so specialised..your seeing only what...you do ...but your missing so much because your not seeing gods hand
i can breed two resesives to gether..and get the egsact imatch i seek...beyond mendelic rtatio's...when the odds are 16/2...and i get it in one...i know i got a little help