Dear Al,

Not everything is about you, as another poster
pointed out.

In any case -

Kindly re-read the following website:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2893

Take a look at your own post in the comments section.
You seem to have one set of rules ( excuses/explanations)
for one set of people, and different rules for others...

If you'd take your blinkers off perhaps you'd see
the full picture, but I won't hold my breath.

Westralis,
You said on Sunday, 13 June 2010 4:54:52 AM "For Jews and Muslims to teach that Jesus is a God is a blasphemy most heinous punishable by death".

So you believe the death penalty is applicable for such blasphemy. Who is currently applying this penalty? Not too many Jews are applying this penalty. I have several Orthodox Jewish relatives inclding a Rabbi we communicate admirably.

Do you believe this statement??

We still do not have an answer from Westralis - What is he/she hiding? It is this type of attitude that cannot participate in a democratic secular / Christian society. It reeks of primitive violent religion to "kill the infidels".

The Federal Police need to visit this person as he/ she cannot be permitted to espouse such incitement to violence in the name of his god in a multicultural society. This attitude is primitive sharia law. Christian teachings can be criticized but certainly not apply death penalty to its adherents. Revealed in such is the true face of Islamic belief.

Dear Philo,

Stop this nonsense.

Is the American, Randall Terry, the true face
of Christianity?

Google him, and see what he has to say.

Pelican,
Your given example reminds me of the elderly widow that lived in SW Sydney and she was similarly harassed by the Lebs. The police could do nothing, but the object was to make her move so they could buy the place cheap.

I call this serious harassment, although there were race differences, the motives were not racial, even though racial slurs were often used.

I am not sure where the line is between critisism and vilifacation.

I tend to think one is based on fact. e.g. Saying I do not accept the eating of dog meat. As distinct from accusing a person of being dirty or unclean because they eat dog meat.

Can you come up with any other, ot better examples?

Maybe if ones agrees it is criticism, but if one does not it is vilifacation?

Foxy,
It is better you read the New Testament to understand Christ's position, and how he treated opponents. He never encouraged or stated religious laws to kill blasphemers. People use the name of "Christ" every day in cursings and Christians view it as blasphemy, but they have never advocated the person be put to death.

They rather pray for repentance of the offender that they might respect the revelation of God in Jesus. Thousands have done just that.

Such advocating of the death penalty is the ugly face of Islam under Sharia. Try claiming Jesus is the Son of God in a country under Sharia.

Dear Philo,

I'm not going to enter into a debate of
the ugly side of any religion, be it
Christianity or Islam. Fundamentalists
exist in all religions. This thread
is about the positive contributions of
Australian Muslims, who by the way have
been part of the fabric of this country
for centuries. Pointing out the negatives
in their religion does not achieve
anything constructive. Most people who
come to this country do so with the hope
of building a better life here, and
contributing to our society.

However as Dr Eva Sallis writes:

"Prejudice creates what it fears by
cutailing young people's prospects.
Yound Arab Australians are increasingly
ghettoized in Sydney's poor suburbs,
where they struggle for education and jobs.
Their families are often prejudiced against
non-Arab Australians, the racism of the
minority and that of the broader society
reinforce each other."

Sallis tells us that, "I have Muslim friends
who used to feel that they were Australians,
but now cannot identify themselves in the
negative space created for them in our
community. I have non-Muslim friends who
are furious at being mistaken for Muslims
because of their Middle Eastern background.
They are doing all they can to differentiate
themselves from people they too are starting
to openly dismiss."

Therefore it appears that a volatile part of
our community is deeply alienated, unable to
belong. As Sallis points out, "another volatile
part has retreated to an irretrievable past
and a mythical notion of racial purity..."

I agree with Dr Sallis that "if contemporary
Australians are to live at ease with ourselves,
we need more education, less fear mongering
and not least, greater honesty about the
culture of racism that is so damaging to us
all."

And please Philo, no more bible preaching -
or anti Islam quotes. Each of us has our
own faith and beliefs - you have no way of
knowing what exactly strangers believe in,
or don't.