Jolanda, you present the rhetorical question:

>>I always think that the standard should be set by the other. Would a strict Muslim Country allow Christians to come to their country and live as Christians, dress as Christians, think as Christians and behave as Christians with all their Western freedoms and ways. The answer would be NO.<<

It would appear that you place absolutely no value on living in a free country. A country that - compared to some - is also generous, compassionate and caring. From the above statement it would appear that you think the approach of these comparatively oppressive regimes is the right one.

Do you really, deep down believe that? Would you not prefer to live in a country that treats its people humanely?

Every time I hear the argument "they are different to us. Keep them out at all costs or we are rooned" I ponder how uncharitable we have become.

It is classic dog-in-the-manger. Other countries' citizens would give their lives to enable their children to grow up in the freedom that we take for granted. But we treat it so lightly that we are prepared to sacrifice it simply because we despise and fear "otherness".

People as lucky as we are should surely demonstrate our belief in freedom by showing a little more Christian charity. Particularly to those who have chosen to come here because they value that freedom that you would so happily throw away.

How do I place no value in living in a free country?

How do I happily throw away freedom?

Is it because I believe that Muslims and Catholics struggle to get on, as do most other cultures, and that it would be best if the different cultures stayed in their own countries unless they were prepared to accept and respect the culture and values of those that they wish to join.

How did you possibly work out that I think that the approach of these comparatively oppressive regimes is the right one?

What I do think is that these oppressive regimes are given no reason to change as others respect them so much that they even go so far as to change their ways so as to accommodate them. It gives them power. They do this knowing they are oppressive regimes and I cant help but wonder whether it is because of fear as they know that these people will, unlike Australians, support each other.

For Western countries to allow Muslims to dictate the way things should be to me is not only stupid it is wrong and these countries are failing in their duty of care to its citizens.

If Muslims want to live in freedom in another Country and they know that the Country that they are going to live in is a Western one then they should be prepared to accept the Western ways and not try to change them so as to suit them. I am sure that good Muslims that are respectful of the beliefs and rights of others would agree.

If they dont like being offended well nor does anybody else.

Dear Goku
thanx for highlighting an aspect of this question for further discussion.

Non Christians.... are basically compatable to a secular society, which is what we have. Our Christian responsibility is to evangelise all. So, simply "not" being Christian is not a threat in itself. The more important thing is 'in the absence of Christianity, what is at the centre of the persons outlook'? if it includes a religious faith which would seek to build a religious 'State' of a contrary faith, then I politely suggest this is dangerous. To be impolite, I suggest it is suicidal.

The goal of my thread is not to suggest non Christians should leave or be dealt with in any way other than they are now, we don't have and must never have a Christian Theocracy at the State level.

Marxists.. I would interrogate them, determine how seriously they believe in the violent overthrow of the Borgoise state and if they convince me that is their goal, I would lock them up and throw away the key. Nauru sounds good.

Christian Assylum Seekers.

I would be most happy to extend a warm welcome to any number of them, SUBJECT to our environmental infrastructure and sustainability criteria.
At the same time, I would pay attention to their ethnicity and ensure that a mix of ethnicities were accepted such that no ONE ethnicity obtained an over-representation, which could produce some undesirable results.
Acceptance would also depend on them agreeing to some strict re-settlement rules which prevent racial ghettos.

CHRISTIAN ETHICS.
46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

AUSTRALIA IS NOT A THEOCRACY.
The injunction above, is to Christians, on how to treat non Christians. It is not a treatise on the mechanics of State.
Loving, caring, showing compassion for people is a Christian duty.
It is part of our calling. It is not the calling of a Government, if you believe it is, then you are advocating Christian Theocracy.

It is a responsibility of the State (of any flavor) to ensure social harmony and peace. This suggests an awareness of both history and common sense.

The STATE maintains peace and order. THAT is the framework desired by God. Within that framework, Christian ethics can work freely.

THIS THREAD.. is not an expression of "Christian Theocracy", but of sound governance for any time and any place.

Too late! No so-called asylum seekers should have been allowed into Australia in the first place. Most of the migrants brought into the country since the 1950's should not have been brought here.

However, there is no point in continuing to argue the toss about such matters as the damage has been done, and Australia is heading for Third World status as a result.

Trying to raise other countries to our standards has become a joke, as Australia gets closer to THEIR standards ever day. Few people give a toss about their own country these days simply because they have not been listened to or consulted on anything by either the Coalition or Labor.

It's every man for himself now. Get used to it!

Pericles (Ah someone closer to my era!)

You say:
“We are should …(show) a little more Christian charity. Particularly to those who have chosen to come here BECAUSE THEY VALUE THAT FREEDOM.”

But “THERE’S THE RUB”

As we, & much of western Europe is finding out “refugees” from many Muslim countries are not so much seeking “freedom”( i.e. liberal democratic value systems) as a better economic situation (i.e. a higher position on the pecking order).

We saw that a number of the London Bombers were living off social welfare/community charity while conspiring to destroy the hand that fed them.While other refugees -not involved with the bombing - gave them sanctuary after the event -when they were on the run.

And we saw similar things in Australia with a well know Muslim leader gaining residency ( after much pleading by his community) then seemingly planning & inciting others in terror attacks against Australia

And while you’ll no doubt argue that these examples are the antics of a minority.I’d suggest that even if you cared to visit the “moderates” you’d find their views/values about womens rights, religious tolerance & terrorism are far from liberal-democratic- freedom-loving.