Bilingual Muslims children have a right, as much as any other faith group, to be taught their culture, languages and faith alongside a mainstream curriculum. More faith schools will be opened under sweeping reforms of the education system in England. There is a dire need for the growth of state funded Muslim schools to meet the growing needs and demands of the Muslim parents and children. Now the time has come that parents and community should take over the running of their local schools. Parent-run schools will give the diversity, the choice and the competition that the wealthy have in the private sector. Parents can perform a better job than the Local Authority because parents have a genuine vested interest. The Local Authority simply cannot be trusted.

There are hundreds of state primary and secondary schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In my opinion all such schools may be opted out to become Muslim Academies. This mean the Muslim children will get a decent education. Muslim schools turned out balanced citizens, more tolerant of others and less likely to succumb to criminality or extremism. Muslim schools give young people confidence in who they are and an understanding of Islam’s teaching of tolerance and respect which prepares them for a positive and fulfilling role in society. Muslim schools are attractive to Muslim parents because they have better discipline and teaching Islamic values. Children like discipline, structure and boundaries. Bilingual Muslim children need Bilingual Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods, who understand their needs and demands.
IA
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

The mind boggles.

The thick edge of the wedge gets closer.

F-off is the fist thought that comes to my mind.

You come to Australia for a change of life, not to change our way of life.

Like it, or leave! It truly is that simple.

rehctub, I get the impression that the poster is UK based. Same deal though, the extremism that marks some muslims in western countries seems to be partly a product of some the very things the poster is pushing for.

They should be in with the rest of the community, mixing and making sure their kids have some understanding of the community in the countries where they choose to live.

If the culture and values of those western countries are so bad they don't want the kids exposed to it then move to some country where muslim values and a culture they like predominate.

R0bert

One act that could help the country would be to eliminate all language other than English, from all government functions. Anyone making any submission to a government department or agency should have to do it personally, & in English. Make all applications for welfare be required to be done in English, & the bleeding hearts would be amazed at how quickly our asylum recipients would master English.

Schooling must be conducted in English only, & all foreign language TV & newspapers , particularly publicly funded TV, must be banned.

If these people had some reason to learn the language, they just might, but only might, become useful citizens, rather than an intentional drain on the taxpayer.

Hasbeen,

"Schooling must be conducted in English only, & all foreign language TV & newspapers , particularly publicly funded TV, must be banned."

That'd make it bloody hard to learn a foreign language!

[Sorry, couldn't help myself].

Hasbeen,

Why stop there...why don't you call for Oz to wrap itself up in warm fuzzy blanket and block all possible outlets to the rest of the world....just like you've done with your psyche.

We could change our name from Australia to "Insular".

(You're a hoot!)

I think the author of the opening post thinks this forum is British based!

Personally, I don't care what they do with the schools in England, but one thing is for sure, in Australia I would never advocate turning over the running of the schools to the parents.
We have teachers for that job. If you want to control everything your child learns, teach them yourselves at home.

Hasbeen, there were many native languages in Australia, and English is only a recent one.
Maybe we need to push our kids to learn some indigenous languages?

It is none of anybody's business whether, what and how other parents teach their children, including languages.

However, those who wish to have children and have them educated by others, should pay for their education themselves (or find other donors who will fund their studies).

Although I dont agree with the original post I do feel a bit like a hypocrite because I remember in the 1960's the classes in Italian and Greek and the worship of Catholicism for the recent Italian and Greek Catholic migrant kids

It seems to me that today these 1960's Catholic Greek and Italian kids assimilated long ago and Im betting that the 2010's Muslim kids from the Middle East and South Asia will eventually do the same.

The only way forward is to welcome these people and include them in our day to day lives rather than to shun them and exclude their beliefs and cultures from this country..it worked in the 1960's with the Greeks and Italians and in the 1970's and 80's with the Vietnamese and Khmers and it will work today with our new recent migrants.

Crowie,

The people that you mention were not indoctrinated from a Sacred Text that tells them not to mix with their neighbours.

Have you not heard of the Koran?

Dear Is Mise,

<<The people that you mention were not indoctrinated from a Sacred Text that tells them not to mix with their neighbours.>>

But suppose they were indoctrinated that way - what then is your issue about it?

If their Sacred Text told them not to mix with their neighbours, that would surely include not shooting or bombing them, nor would it allow trying to convert their neighbours or asking them for welfare or any other services or favours.

Had this been the case with the Koran, then I wouldn't see why your objection!

The only schools the government should finance are public schools which are open to all students regardless of religious and ethnicity. There should be no chaplains in public schools and no taxpayer financing of non-public schools.

Children should have the opportunity to associate with children of different backgrounds. Australia should not be in the business of financing anything to do with religious belief or non-belief.

Iftikhar wrote: "Bilingual Muslims children have a right, as much as any other faith group, to be taught their culture, languages and faith alongside a mainstream curriculum."

I agree with that. They should have a right equal to any other faith group. As far as I am concerned no faith group should have any such right.

S. 116 of the Australian Constitution states: The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

The above means that religion should be no business of the Australian government.

Posted by david f, Friday, 2 January 2015 1:37:01 PM

" ... S. 116 of the Australian Constitution states: The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, ... "

That's true dear *DavidF* but how do we reconcile parliamentarians all standing up and saying a Christian Prayer before proceedings commence?

And if the catholic church (whose leadership is rightly loathed and despised by some if us) is allowed to have their own schools and only hire catholics and have their own special forms at the court houses that they may be excused from not conferring information told to them in the confessional then why not the Muslims and others too?

It is not for the state to favour any religion as I see it and further I am of the view that children's rights should be enshrined such that they may not be indoctrinated by their parents or otherwise, which means no religious schools except for those of the age of majority.

Dear Dream On,

We don't reconcile it. The Australian Constitution may be violated with impunity as long as the violations are neither brought into court nor subjected to the action of law enforcement bodies. In the case of parliamentary prayer the courts can rule that those who are not in parliament do not have interest sufficient to sue. If the attorney general or others in control of the actions of law enforcement do not direct the police to act there will be no action. Since the legislative and executive branches of the government are one and the same and there is not the separation of powers between the legislative and executive bodies envisioned by Montesquieu the attorney general is subject to parliament. Making the laws and enforcing them should be separate, but they are not in the Westminster system.

Twice law suits have been won that have judged that the funding of the chaplaincy program by the Commonwealth is not a valid action of the Commonwealth government. Twice the government has bypassed the courts. The latest method is to give direct grants to the state for the purpose of continuing the chaplaincy program. In short the Australian Constitution usually can be ignored or bypassed if the government of the day chooses to do so. Australia is only a government of law if the government of the day agrees to subject itself to the law.

david f,

Maybe the Government should finance only public schools but the truth of the matter is that the burden on the taxpayer would be much greater without the church schools.
The Catholic school system saves the taxpayer heaps.

By the way, a child of any faith may be enrolled in a Catholic school and Catholic schools do employ teachers of other faiths.
Many Muslims have enrolled their children in Catholic schools as, in the absence of Islamic schools, they see the Catholic system as more ethical than the State system.
My youngest son attended a Marist school in Brisbane and in his final two years there were two Hindus in his class.

Hasbeen,

"Schooling must be conducted in English only, & all foreign language TV & newspapers , particularly publicly funded TV, must be banned."

That'd make it bloody hard to learn a foreign language!

[Sorry, couldn't help myself].

Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 1 January 2015 10:45:30 AM.

Yes & that should stop immediately, if not sooner.

Have you forgotten that the worst male Prime Minister the country has ever seen was a Mandarin speaker.

With that in mind there is a solid argument that learning s foreign language in Oz will probably rot the brain, leading to really dreadful cases of stupidity associated with ideas of grandeur.

On the precautionary principle alone, we should not take that chance.

Is Mise wrote: Maybe the Government should finance only public schools but the truth of the matter is that the burden on the taxpayer would be much greater without the church schools.
The Catholic school system saves the taxpayer heaps.

Dear Is Mise,

Under the present system our public schools will continue to get short changed as parents with children in religious schools will in general not care about the children in public schools.

Is a goal of our educational system to see that every child gets an adequate education or is it to save the taxpayer heaps?

Is the goal of our educational system to see that every child gets a good scientific education instead of the creationist crap that they get in some religious schools or is it to save the taxpayer heaps?

Is a goal of our educational system to see that children grow up with children of different backgrounds and learn together or is it to save the taxpayer heaps by creating a fragmented society?

The present system is possibly cheaper, but we should have something better. Under the present system our public schools will continue to get inadequate funding, and although segregation will not be complete there will be too much of it. It would probably cost more money to get something better than what we have now, but our children deserve it.

I can think of no better use for our taxes than to fund public schools adequately and see that Australian children get the best education they can have.

I am 89, and my children are all past school age. However, if I had children of school age I would neither want to send them to an Australian public school with chaplains or a religious school of any kind. Fortunately none of my grandchildren live in Australia.

Unfortunately *Is Mise* is spouting utter nonsense, as for some perverse reason the tax payer is in reality subsidising these catholic schools which is worse than a sick joke, the fact of which is easily discernible from the public record.

Thus, these schools are costing the tax payer heaps, not the other way around, at the expense and at the detriment of public schools. Thereafter, it usually costs far more to send a kid to one these schools than it does to send them to a public school.

Further, you can go to any job advertisement right now for a job with one of these perverted places and you will find that catholics are always given preference, that one must have a recommendation from a parish priest as part of the application process and that one must be prepared to wholly support and promote the catholic ethos otherwise no job.

One wonders what that means above and beyond protect the paedophiles, cover up for the paedophiles and when things get too hot move them somewhere else? And upon scrutiny, lie, deny and say it is a matter of the confessional. And when sued, use every dirty legal trick in the book to avoid paying for those whose lives have been shattered and destroyed by bent catholics. And, all things said and done, lay the blame on homosexuals.

Additionally, the only reason that any self respecting Muslim or a Hindu would send their child to a catholic school was if they were legally forced on the grounds that there was no where else for them to go. Such cases represent a tiny minority.

Rarely have I read such utter falsehood *Is Mise* and the fact that the catholic church in Australia has not been summarily terminated goes to the abject immorality of successive Australian guvments.

DreamOn and david f, Catholic children are a part of the public and their parents pay tax.

However the Board of Studies should vet all curriculum and text used to ensure unity of community is being taught and not isolation or superiority on religious grounds. Such schools that indoctrinate and teach contrary to our freedoms of thought should be closed. Terrorists to our freedoms are being raised in schools or by parents that indoctrinate without unemotional comparative critical thought.

Dear Josephus,

Paying taxes is no reason that the religion of the taxpayer should be subsidised by other taxpayers. it's that simple.

Your suggestion that the state vet what is taught violates S. 116 of the Australian Constitution. Catholicism, Islam and most other religions claim they have a truth unique to them. Should the state ban that as you recommend when you wrote: "However the Board of Studies should vet all curriculum and text used to ensure unity of community is being taught and not isolation or superiority on religious grounds."

Superiority on religious grounds is basic to both Christianity and Islam.

Better let them have their schools and obligate them to pay for them. Some Christian and Muslim parents will send their children to public schools to mix with other Australians of different backgrounds from theirs.

david f, The State funding of education is to all children and does not discriminate on religious grounds against the children whose parents hold to certain world views. We however must be certain that the religious schools are teaching for a morally cohesive and free society.

David f, if every taxpayer's religion has an equal right to subsidy based perhaps on the relative number of practitioners, including the neo-religions of scientism/atheism, then there is no longer an ethical reason not to subsidise. There may still be reasons, of course: it may be seen as unecessary churn, it may be seen as undesirable cost-shifting, it may be that some taxpayers who don't feel strongly about religion would rather funds were used elsewhere, some practitioners may feel that accepting a subsidy implies an obligation in return and so on.

On the original topic, while I am entirely happy for those people who choose to follow a doctrinaire approach to religion to educate their children in that doctrine on their own time and at their own expense. Public education might well usefully include an extensive comparative religion, philosophy and psychology component as part of the general liberal arts curriculum though.

We need to place a high priority on teaching children how to think about thinking and religion is undoubtedly an important part of that, but not the whole. Before we can do that though, we have a couple of generations of neglect of the teaching of teachers to fix.

Small steps...

Dream On,

"Unfortunately *Is Mise* is spouting utter nonsense, as for some perverse reason the tax payer is in reality subsidising these catholic schools which is worse than a sick joke, the fact of which is easily discernible from the public record."

Kindly quote the relevant public record, svp.

Dear Josephus,

By giving funds to religious schools the state does discriminate on religious grounds. It favours religion. The state should be neutral. Only public schools should be funded by the state, and it should be left up to parents whether they want to send their children to those schools or pay for an alternative.

I see no reason that taxpayers should finance various world views through subsidies. People may have any world views they like. I see no reason that I should subsidise them through my taxes.

Posted by david f, Saturday, 3 January 2015 10:44:59 AM

" ... By giving funds to religious schools the state does discriminate on religious grounds. It favours religion. The state should be neutral. ... "

Worse still, it favours certain religions above others.

As for children, we all know that children require protection from their own parents at times and I would include in that the right to be free from indoctrination.

Parents should be considered temporary guardians of the unique entity that each child is, not the owners of children as if they were just any old commodity to be infused with any old fanciful belief system. Extreme examples of when this goes badly wrong have often been discussed here and include children being taken overseas to have part of their genitalia removed, or group suicide to join the space people etc

As for the chaplaincy program, it disgusts me that way too many public schools actually demand voluntary contributions to support this and then allow their chaplains to distribute their nonsense on a limited basis.

But then, Australians are a disgusting people in many ways so perhaps we should not be surprised.

*Is Mise* I suggest that you do some simple searches or go and have a read in the Hansard. The fact of the matter ought become plain enough to you soon enough.

If I do not misrecall, josephus, as one of the resident homophobes has claimed in the past the he/she is not a catholic, but I do not recall which if any religious organisation he/she claims affiliation with.

The thing that I have noticed about low life homophobes is that more often than not, the ones who scream loudest about homosexuality are also members of those organisations who feature most prominently at the r.c on child sexual abuse.

Dream On,

"*Is Mise* I suggest that you do some simple searches or go and have a read in the Hansard. The fact of the matter ought become plain enough to you soon enough."

It is common to provide a reference when making a statement and common courtesy to give one when asked.

Dear David,

My personal view is that the tax-payer should not fund schools at all. Period.

However, this is not the present topic and if the tax-payer is to pay for children to study Reading, Writing, English, Mathematics, Science, Geography, History, Music, etc. etc., then it should not matter who provides that service (so long as it does it well), including private schools, religious or otherwise.

---

Dear DreamOn,

<<Parents should be considered temporary guardians of the unique entity that each child is, not the owners of children>>

Certainly. Now who but the parents could temporarily guard their children against the tyranny of the state?

---

Dear Josephus,

<<We however must be certain that the religious schools are teaching for a morally cohesive and free society>>

1. What do you mean by "morally cohesive"?
2. What gives you a right to demand that a school teaches anything in particular (especially against the wishes of the parents)? How is that different to any other state forced indoctrination?

I understand your legitimate concern that schools do not teach their students to become terrorists or criminals, but anything beyond that minimum is itself criminal.

...Iftikhar wrote: "Bilingual Muslims children have a right, as much as any other faith group, to be taught their culture, languages and faith alongside a mainstream curriculum."

I agree, just not here as we are a chritian country, you either acceptbthat, or leave/don't come. And David F, I would suggest the more that comes out of the recent Sydney siege the more chance we have of changing that. Our forefathers did not loose their lives only to allow extremists to have a free reign in our peace loving nation, nor their kids.

I would suggest that while private schools used to provide a better education, like anything, greed takes hold so they are now often dumping grounds for rich parents who work all hours and so long as they pay the fees, for schooling and after care, along with the hefty donation or two, their kids are often accepted, even if they are il disciplined.

Dear rehctub,

You wrote: "...we are a christian country, you either accept that, or leave/don't come." [edited for spelling]

The above statement is wrong.

We are a country with a Christian majority. However, our Constitution in S. 116 states:

"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth."

The Christian religion has no more status under Australian law than any other religion or no religion. We are not a Christian country in any legal sense. Australians are free to follow any religion or none. One does not have to accept the majority religion to be an Australian. Australia's greatest soldier, General Monash, was not a Christian, and there is no reason that any Australian should have to accept Christianity or any special status for the religion.

Australia has had atheistic prime ministers and Jewish governor generals. It is possible that a Muslim may also become prime minister or governor general.

I find it interesting that the people who want free university education are the very people most against free, or subsidised education at school level for all.

It becomes all too easy to see the self interest in academics to keep the public spending confined to publicly funded, higher paying state run public schools, where so many of them & their students find a nice income.

If there was any interest in equity in schooling they would be screaming for the funding to be assigned to the child, & the family deciding what school that fund would support.

Greed is alive & very well in the academic sector in Oz.

Yes David, you're right, we are not solely a Christian nation.

As for the constitution, perhaps it's time we took a look at that because there is simply no way Islam extremists should be allowed to draw their hatred from their religion in this country.

Multiculturalised, yes, muslimised, No!

So what's that you reckon *HasBeen* that higher fee charging private schools pay their teachers less than the public sector? I would be very surprised if that is the case. It may be true of some of the smaller struggling schools but, when you are working with State Awards, everything is flat.

As for funding, here in W.A. at least everything now is far more child per child driven than ever it was. For example, my daughter gets a special once a week teacher from the institute of deaf education. She gets hers hearing aids and batteries subsidised. She also gets the benefit of a daily one on one with a special needs education assistant and when she arrives at high school next year, she will also receive the benefit of all of that plus the special ed centre. Quite a package is it not, wouldn't you agree?

But that does not extend to sending your child to a private school. If you want that, pay yourself.

And of course *IftiKhar* is entirely correct, assuming that you think any religion has any place in schools and of course, I and others do not. Otherwise you end up with catholics breeding catholics and Muslims breeding Muslims, and I can't see how that benefits any but those of a vested interest.

Education sector issues:.

1. A fiber optic network will do more than what we can even currently possibly envisage. Certainly the jump from the old modem to ADSL enabled us to start pushing up and down fat files for reading etc which had hitherto been too slow.

And even for the tech challenged, fibre will enable simple, fat buttoned multi video conferencing for all the family at once or quality on line classes and a whole host of additional benefits.

What we don't need in that is the expense of some dead wood, do little agent in the middle to jack up the prices as the coalition is suggesting. Those profits would be better channelled directly back into the infrastructure, at least until everyone is connected including the bush. Tailor the business model to the immediate priority. It can always be adjusted later.

But coming back to it, the curse on top of our economy and education system is property, which in turn is underpinned by too many people, getting paid way too much, to do way too little. Part of that is becsue of the way the tin pot laws are written.

Welfare is not the problem. Do you really think a highly optimised AusStudy student on $450 a fortnight, who goes to prac from morning to late avo, comes home, eats, showers and then gets about writing 1000+ words of theory is?

No, the problem is with a gross excess of over paid, dead wood, pencil fiddling, doddering old parasites. If they've got a financial security solution already, and in the absence of at least 2 compelling reasons, get rid of them and put them out to pasture and let the younger generation in who can use and take advantage of modern tech.

And I can tell you, the pencil fiddlers in the guvment have never really wanted the best of I.T., as it makes a lot of them redundant.

Worse still, the highest paid public servant according to the ABC gets approx $830,000 a year. That's about $300,000 more than t.abott.

Well, you'd think we'd hear from that person wouldn't you? What a joke. I am in favour of taking the axe brutally to the top end of the public service including the politicians themselves starting with the department that sets their wages.

You see, I recently did a language course at one of the unis for which I was a awarded a HD. But not only was there no real transparency about what the course involved in advance (and product disclosure statements across the board is an absolute must in the internet age) all we got for our $1000 was 13 weeks of 1.5 hours contact once per week. If you think most people are capable of learning a language under those conditions then you're playing with yourselves. And what do they want to do, make it more expensive?

The risk now, is even whilst Oz Unis may be cheaper than those in london or the states, that compared to the up and comers in Asia they are a crappy little tin pot rip off which is wanting to price itself out of the market. But that's Australia through and through isn't it?

What we need is internationally in demand product and services not $500 p.h. plus dead wood pencil fiddlers. And that's the real risk of migration isn't because most locals aren't worth a pinch of sh!t in reality and cannot compete. And a big reason for that is because of the crap that they teach in high schools.

Migrants have the benefit of being trained for the job upon arrival. English straight off the bat in the context of the guvment and legal system. Within 3 months of coming out of Indo my Mrs understood more than what my cousins new after 5 years in high school.

Our high school curriculum is pitiful and a big reason for that is because of religious people and their influence upon same.

rehctub wrote: Multiculturalised, yes, muslimised, No!

Exactly how are we going to become Muslimised? I am certainly not going to become a Muslim, and I doubt that you or most Australians are.

What are you really worried about?

Stealth Jihad:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1596985569/pjmedia-20#customerReviews

This is from an email from a US resident who posts under the name of The Atheist Camel.

"I do not need convincing of the threat Islam represents to Europe and potentially the US. However, Europe is not the US. We have people here, Christians, who are distorting our Constitution for religious purposes … people at the highest levels of the Judiciary and Legislative Branches that hold first allegiance to their God and Bible and second to the Constitution.

Laws are being passed in states making official prayer days; a Supreme Court decision declared corporations have religious rights- just like individuals- that permit them to refuse providing contraception coverage to their employees; Justice Thomas of the Supreme Court says he believes the states are allowed to set up their own state religions. There are tons more such examples of religious activism at state levels. All are frightening.

Add to that a 20-25% vocal and armed minority of fundamentalist Right Wing Christian extremist nutters, FOX News devotees one and all, largely itching for a reason to instigate armed rebellion, and the danger of fundamentalist Christian fanaticism to this nation becomes magnified exponentially.

continued

continued

We have 0.8% Muslims in the US. Compare that to the UK at almost 5%, France at 10% and other European nations in high single or low double digits. They are nations who have largely thrown off Xtian fanaticism. Their greatest threat now is the growing Muslim population that seeks not to assimilate but to displace European culture. But, the US is still THE focal point of Christian fanaticism in the Industrialized World. We still have to battle that which has already been largely defeated overseas. That is a fact, pure and simple.

SO… while I appreciate the threat that is Islam to the US and the world as a whole, the clear and MOST PRESENT danger to the US are far Right Christian fanatics, of whom there are five on our Supreme Court appointed for life, dozens more in elected positions, millions roaming the streets.

Speaking as an American and with all due respect to your knowledge of my country - the threat of a Christian controlled Executive branch, coupled with the Legislative and Judicial branches that they currently control is the greatest danger to secular freedoms in the United States, at least for the immediate future.

I held that position when we first met ... I maintain it now."

I am also an American and agree with the above.

david f, you sprout a lot of bigoted nonsense from ignorance, as if anyone would believe your rantings.

PROPOSAL: If parents decide to privately educate their children and it is not financed by the Government; then parents should be allowed to deduct such expenses from their taxable income. My daughter pays just over $10,000 each year in school fees this would rise to about $20,000 p/a if parents funded the lot. This would reduce her taxable income substantially, this might be worth a look. That way parents of private schools do not pay tax that would fund public schools and parents of children attending Public schools would be responsible for their children's education. Sounds Fair!

Dear Josephus,

Insults are unnecessary. One can disagree and be civil. One can disagree and not be civil. In general I prefer civility.

david f

your pathetic ranting is not going to make God go away. You have a twisted view of history and if you thought just for a moment, if the idiotic Europeans and especially the British had not spent so much time trashing and misrepresenting Christ they would not have the muslim terrorist problem they have. It is secular fools who ignored any commonsense who have produced the probblem.And yes the church has been half the problem especially when they jump into bed trying to appease the god deniers with pseudo science and socialistic garbage.

You seem paranoid that somehow the right to kill the unborn, promote pornography and perverted lifestlyes ( all secular dogmas) is under threat. If you have not worked it out yet it is obvious that God is not about to dissappear. Many of the dogmas you hold dear to will be done away with(where they belong) but His word will remain forever.

Dear runner,

Rather than back up your unfounded statements you prefer to attack me. That's your choice.

I agree. God is not going to go away because she was never there in the first place.

david f,
You have a lot to say about the Christian Church and your posts indicate you are ignorant [lack genuine insight] and know nothing of what is happening in Many Christian Churches today, otherwise you would be better informed. At least attend a few and find out before making ill informed statements based on prejudice.

Dear Josephus,

I have attended Baptist, Catholic, Unitarian, Presbyterian, Russian Orthodox and black Protestant churches. I have attended Taoist ceremonies in Deagon, Muslim religious ceremonies in the West End in Brisbane, the Jewish temple in Camp Hill and visited the Hindu Temple in Helensburgh, NSW.

My daughter attends Buddhist sanghas in Pennsylvania, and the Unitarian church in Wilmington, DE, and I have gone with her to those places.

Possibly the best music is in the Brisbane Catholic cathedral concerts, the Russian Orthodox ritual, the Jewish cantorial chants and the enthusiastic black Protestant choirs.

There has been good food in the Brisbane Cathedral (There is a big spread for season ticket holders.), the Hindu Temple, the synagogue and the Taoist temple.

In some religious services one counts the number of lights in the ceiling. Others have been very exciting such as the service in the Catholic cathedral in Washington, DC with African women in their native costumes dancing down the aisle to African music.

http://www.sundayassemblybrisbane.com.au/ tells about Sunday Assembly which is like a church but doesn’t require any belief in any deity. I am giving a talk there Jan. 11.

Christianity is only one of many religions. They all have their features – some good and some bad.

Although I have no belief in any sort of supernatural entity I have an intense interest in religion. As you have gathered from my posts I am of the view that religion should be no business of government. Government should not use religion to advance its interests and vice versa.

Diarmaid MacCulloch who was a believer in Christianity wrote “A History of Christianity”. It is a fascinating book. Apparently MacCulloch is no longer a believer and wrote:

“I still appreciate the seriousness which a religious mentality brings to the mystery and misery of human existence, and I appreciate the solemnity of religious liturgy as a way of confronting these problems. I live with the puzzle of wondering how something so apparently crazy can be so captivating to millions of other members of my species.”

I share his viewpoint.

Speaking of France David f writes

'They are nations who have largely thrown off Xtian fanaticism.'

Yep and now they have the religion of peace which most secularist are to gutless to crtiticise. They are more than happy to demonise everything Christian and become apologist for Islam. Well the secularist are again reaping the rotton fruit from their idiotic denial of truth.

<<every taxpayer's religion has an equal right to subsidy based perhaps on the relative number of practitioners>>

The biggest beneficiaries of taxpayer funding and, well out of proportion to their numbers and, hugely disproportionate their their input to the commonweal is the Church of the Latter Day New Age Lefties. My God, they have the ABC and SBS and over the half teachers and lecturers preaching their creed and public expense.

Should read: AT public expense