Today the media reports on another child marriage and the older groom has been charged. This comes shortly after another well publicised case involving a 12yo girl.

When will the muslim community stop flaunting our laws and social standards? Here a doctor suggests that there are at least 60 child brides in Sydney alone, so it is no exaggeration to say our laws are being flaunted.

http://www.theage.com.au/nsw/hotline-plan-to-help-hidden-child-brides-in-sydney-20140302-33sqm.html

Then yesterday we read that 40 Australian girls have gone to the ME to be brides for the fighters there, which is against our laws.

On top of this there are some 30 males that have returned from fighting in the ME and are at large in the community with apparent impunity.

This is the price we pay for multiculturalism

One wonders when the government will take a realistic stance and stop further muslim immigration.

come on Banjo show some tolerance.

Dear Banjo,

Accepting that a small part of the immigration into Australia has come from countries with a prevalence of child brides then it is a given by accepting these people, many as refugees, we have shielded the vast majority from that fate. I am proud of my country giving these girls a chance of enjoying a full childhood they might not otherwise been permitted to have. Why doesn't that make you proud as well?

Dear runner,

If I believed for one moment you had a Christian regard for any of these girls I would take you seriously. You sir do not so I don't.

Both families should be shipped back to wherever they came from.

They are not fit to live here.

The problem stems from a lack of donkeys in Sydney.

"The problem stems from a lack of donkeys in Sydney"

Perhaps they should move to Canberra!

Dear Banjo,

What business of yours is it what other people do with THEIR daughters?

Youshu,

we as a mature community, protect those who can't protect themselves.

That's why we have laws that fathers and mothers cant rape, abuse or stave their children.

You, sir must be a sick individual if you really believe society has no rights over what parents do with their daughters.

I hope you don't have children, as by your comments you don't deserve any.

Yes Kirby, he is making an extraordinary statement there. Some are not fit and proper people, that is what we have now.

They do that to their own kids, which means that nobody's kids are safe.

I feel in time to come it will result in community warfare.

Australian policy makers continue to show no interest in heeding the learning to be taken from the awful child sex trafficking in the UK by Pakistanis (Kashmiris).

It is particularly noticeable that NO decision maker of political or administrative stature has to date been held to account in the UK. That is politicians protecting themselves and not even holding their opponents accountable. But why not, when quite obviously the minister for immigration is responsible for assessing and treating risks in migration policy and management?

For as long as the majority are silent and do not assert themselves with their local members, the political parties will continue to be swung by the ethnic tail that promises a margin of votes in seats that could swing either way.

Then again, the simple way is to just keep tipping governments out. YOUR safe seat could be next!

Steele,
Interesting, you are proud that we turn a blind eye to underage marriage. So what other alien cultural practices do you think we should just ignore. What about FGM, forced marriage, the oppression of women, selling children, sex with underage children, bestiality. Or what about the consumption of dog meat, human placenta or maggots. I am sure some new arrivals would love to hold bull fights, dog fights and cock fights with impunity. What about honour killings and kerosene burning of wives or acid attacks. Where would you draw the line, if at all. There are plenty of alien cultural practices to chose from.

It seems you and other multiculturalists have only one goal and that is the widest possible diversity irrespective of the outcome.

When a migrant applies for a visa to come to Aus, they are given information about our laws and society (in 30 languages) so ignorance is no excuse for not abiding by them. It is reasonable for us to expect all to abide by our laws and social standards. Original culture is not an excuse for not doing so.

You must be a Muslim immigrant Yuyutsu. No real Ozzie would consider they had any right to "DO" anything with their daughter, other than to love & protect her.

We don't see our daughters as property, which you obviously do. They are not property to be traded for advantage by their father, or killed by that father, if they do not obey every command.

God I hope some of our foolish ladies on here read your post, & see what horror they are supporting. You have been very careful to hide your attitude to many things, but your societies way of treating women is so ingrained, & natural to you that you let the horror of your belief show through.

No wonder real Ozzies want you gone.

Steele,
I should have added.

The vast majority of migrants do adjust their cultures and integrate with our society, but there are a few exceptions.

When a group of people think that their cultural practices or religious laws are above Australian law it is time to stop entry of persons of that group.

Dear Hasbeen,

1. I'm not a Muslim and never been one.
2. I don't support parents treating their children as property.
3. I never acted that way, contemplated so or personally know anyone who did.

Having said so, just as daughters aren't the property of their parents, neither are they or their parents the property of the state.

What I questioned isn't about the actions of those Muslims, but about yours and your state's - that presumed right to interfere with their life, or anybody else's, imposing your values and social norms on others even while you and your people are not personally affected.

If your description of "real Ozzies" is accurate, then all I can say about them is that "real Ozzies" are pigs, having forcibly grabbed this whole continent for themselves allowing no other way of life here but their own.

While I don't like the practices of the said Muslims, I reluctantly find myself siding with them because you, "real Ozzies", seek to establish your monolithic culture over this whole continent and as the saying goes:

"When the Nazis came to take the gays, I didn’t stand up and object because I wasn’t gay. When they came to take the Jews, I didn’t object because I wasn’t a Jew. When they came to take the Catholics, I did not object because I wasn’t a Catholic. When they came to take me, there was nobody left to object."

---

Dear Kirby,

<<we as a mature community, protect...>>

So you (Kirby) are a community... you have no face of your own...

<<That's why we have laws that fathers and mothers cant rape, abuse or stave their children.>>

You may make whatever laws you want WITHIN your community, that is within that group which willingly accepted its membership.

The problem is that you wish to impose your laws also over others who wish not to be part thereof, then you use brute-force to prevent anyone who doesn't accept your authority from entering this continent.

Had it been a matter of self-protection I would understand, but in this case it isn't.

And rightly so that we would safeguard our own type, our own type covers people from all over the world. Moslem’s are not included because they can not assimilate into community. They still want to stone their wives to death and rape kids.

They have something against law of the land that gives them shelter from what they have escaped from.

All religions are welcome here except the religion that says their religion is the only one to believe in, and we cannot change.

Assimilation is what this country is all about, if you can not ,you are not welcome to shelter here.

When there is nothing left but a bomb crater in your glorious land you will be most welcome to go and live there

Yuyustu,

your comments and attitudes belong in the 15th century.
If you want to live in Australia, you MUST follow are laws.
If you don't like it Leave!

I follow the laws of Australia (and so do millions of others) , so I can feel safe and walk down the street, I feel safe for my children to play and have a good education, that we have clean water to drink and healthy food, were we can work hard and achieve good things for all of humanity. By following simple rules, don't kill, don't rape etc, we can achieve great things.

Only Islam supports child rape and women as dogs and should be treated as such.

You may not be a Muslim, but your immature view on life, you might as well be. Please go live in another country, your not welcome here.

As for opposing laws on to others,
Every human being knows that Murder is wrong, every human being knows rape is wrong,
but you want to be apologise to Muslims, that our view is over the top.

God (or Allah or Budda) I hope if you have children, they have been taken away from you. You don't deserve to live in Australia.

Yuyutzu wrote;
"Having said so, just as daughters aren't the property of their parents, neither are they or their parents the property of the state.
What I questioned isn't about the actions of those Muslims, but about yours and your state's - that presumed right to interfere with their life, or anybody else's, imposing your values and social norms on others even while you and your people are not personally affected".

One proper role for the government of any democracy is to look after the interests of those who are incapable of doing so themselves. It is therefore sensible to codify rules that apply to such people. Australia has codified laws that apply to situations in which young children find themselves. For example people in responsible positions such as teachers, care workers, doctors and many others are obligated to report suspected child abuse situations and that is not only sexual situations.

As far as marriage is concerned no young girl should be married before her body has matured to the extent that she is unlikely to die giving birth.

Every child is entitled to be safe and to be educated to the extent limits of their abilities. That should mean that neither parents nor others should be allowed to inhibit that safety or education.

It is obvious that many writing on this site are ignorant of the details in the UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD
(Adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 1386 (XIV) of 10 December 1959). I keep a copy readily available.

Forced marriage is a basic contravention of
children's rights as has been pointed out.
Children can't consent to being married.

We have laws in this country. You have to be
over 18, unless a court has decided otherwise,
to be married.

So, regardless of the religious context, regardless
of the cultural context, there is nothing that
condones the act of forcing children into marriage.

In 2013 the federal parliament passed legislature making
the coercing of someone into marriage a serious crime,
punishable by up to seven years in prison.

The Chief Executive of the Australian Childhood Foundation
says the message needs to be communicated clearly to
the communities. Child Advocacy groups say this still
doesn't go far enough.

Child marriages are a global problem. We associate forced
marriages with countries in parts of Asia, Africa, and
Latin America. However it's also a custom practised
in some communities in Australia - as we heard last year
when it was reported in the news that an imam in NSW
married a 12 year old girl to a 26 year old man.
The girl is now in foster care and the man has been refused
bail. The imam's case will be heard in April.

However, this problem is not only one that is confined
to the Muslim community. It exists among the Greek, Indian,
and the Middle Eastern communities.

Hopefully with education young girls will come to realise
the freedoms that they are entitled to - living in a country
like Australia. In the meantime, all we can do is remain
vigilant - and report anything that we think is a bit suss
to the proper authorities. The message has to get through
that forced marriages are not acceptable in this country.

Yuyutsu is kind of an eccentric anarchist (going by previous posts) and he lacks the common sense to know when it's time to keep his views to himself.

In this instance he has revealed the flaw in his anti-establishment philosophy and then dug an even deeper hole for himself when he tried to defend it. Some might simply consider this the behaviour of an idiot.

Hi Foxy,

Spot on ! All Australians should, and do actually, come under one set of laws, which recognise:

a) the rights of children,

b) the equality of all men and women before the law, and

c) the rights to freedom of expression, including the freedom to believe as one wishes (but not necessarily to act on those beliefs, and certainly not to impose those beliefs on others - see (a) and (b) ).

Long may that continue.

Deep affection,

Joe

Dear Kirby,

There is no reason why one "deserves" to be in Australia more than another - if I do not deserve, then so do you.

That a particular group of people of a particular culture lays exclusive claims over this whole continent and forbids all others to live here unless they comply with their idea of law, is a scandalous atrocity with no moral basis, founded on brute force alone.

If someone (or some group) makes it unsafe for you to walk down the street or threatens the ability of your children to play and have a good education or your ability to have clean water to drink and healthy food, then you have every right to kick them out and/or shoot them down - that is legitimate self-defence, but whatever such group does among themselves is none of your business so long as it doesn't directly affect you or your own children.

I appreciate the "please": you have every right to ask me politely to leave this country - then I may or may not oblige. By-the-way, I also have a similar right to ask you politely to leave, though I choose not to.

---

Dear 579,

I appreciate that assimilation may be one of your personal goals, but that doesn't mean that you have a right to enforce it on others. Perhaps you could learn from Kirby and ask newcomers to "please assimilate", perhaps explaining to them the advantages in doing so, then they should make their own mind whether or not (and to what extent) to assimilate, then you should respect their choice.

I accept your considering me unwelcome - you are definitely under no obligation to welcome me.

Dear Foyle,

<<One proper role for the government of any democracy is to look after the interests of those who are incapable of doing so themselves.>>

Government and democracy are constitutional terms pertaining to a given society: a society may agree on any constitution they choose, which could possibly include such roles as you mentioned - however, such roles are internal and may not be enforced on people who do not willingly belong to that particular society.

For example, if you really meant it that "Every child is entitled to be safe and to be educated to the extent limits of their abilities", then why apply this principle only to Australian children? Why not to every child across this galaxy? Would you indeed be willing to triple your tax and become impoverished yourself so that all children in the world have it? You should realise that the idea of such entitlement, though not inherently wrong, is relative within the limits of your particular society.

The scholastic idea of a "social contract" is false: no such large-scale contract was ever signed. You are of course welcome to make such contract(s) with any group(s) of like-minded people, if they agree.

The problem is when you attempt to enforce your society's internal agreements over others outside, who never consented to belong. The other problem is that you wrongly assert that everyone living on this continent must implicitly wish to belong to your society. At least with Muslims this seems not to be the case.

Foxy and Joe,
You are correct in what you say, except that education does not go far enough. These parents are informed of our laws before they come here and are informed by others here what they can get away with, or hide. Tough enforcement of the laws is necessary to back up the education. 60 underage marriages in one corner of Sydney in 3 years indicate that the law is being flaunted. Like FGM, 1100 girls at risk per year and no prosecutions means the system is not working.

If we are not prepared to enforce the laws then we have to stop entry of those persons that persist in the alien practices. Each new arrival refreshes the alien practices. Cultural practice is hard to alter and if people think they can hide it or get away with it they will continue to do so.

Yuyutsu,

"The problem is when you attempt to enforce your society's internal agreements over others outside, who never consented to belong. The other problem is that you wrongly assert that everyone living on this continent must implicitly wish to belong to your society. At least with Muslims this seems not to be the case."

Like it or not, in a democracy, yes, there IS one society, and the laws which we or our representatives have agreed to are the laws applying to, and protecting, everybody.

There aren't many societies in the one country - many communities, yes, but only one society with one set of laws, of which we are all, good or bad, like it or not, belong to and contribute to, one way or another. Australia isn't, thank Christ, some backward, feudal society in which each group stays behind its walls and practises its own laws against its 'own' inmates. All for one, and one for all.

Joe

Dear Joe,

<<in a democracy, yes, there IS one society,>>

With due respect, you have it backwards:

No democracy can exist without a society - first comes a society, then it may possibly implement a democracy within.

Now once you already have a society, by consent, then democracy is a feature that is nice to have, but the question of society's existence comes first.

Grabbing a group of people and telling them "you are now a society", whether they like it or not, is clearly a form of violence - and violence is not on, it is just wrong, morally illegitimate. What makes you then consider this situation as better than feudalism? Whether the jail is bigger or smaller, both share the very same evil!

<<and the laws which we or our representatives have agreed to are the laws applying to, and protecting, everybody.>>

Unless we agree to be part of the game, we have no representatives, so neither us nor our non-existent "representatives" agreed to any laws. How would you call a situation when we are being "protected" by a group we never wanted to be protected by, against things we never wanted to be protected against? Even rape can be construed as "protecting us against remaining virgins"!

Dear Banjo,

Some people are going to break our laws
and keep things hidden no matter what.
All we can do is go according to our laws.
We aren't going to know ahead of
time which people are going to break our laws
therefore trying to prejudge what people are going to do,
and which people are going to do it, is extremely
difficult because as I stated earlier - this is a
global problem and its one that is not just confined
to one special group.

We need to make our laws very
clear to people and also as I stated earlier - with
education - and living in this country hopefully young girls
will grow up to realise the freedoms that they're entitled
to - probably the next generation of women will not
comply with forced marriages and will tell their parents
to go jump - this is Australia. In the meantime we have
our laws - and hopefully time will take care of the rest.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

I'm glad that we can agree on some things. ;-)

Dear Foxy,

<<living in this country hopefully young girls
will grow up to realise the freedoms that they're entitled
to - probably the next generation of women will not
comply with forced marriages and will tell their parents
to go jump - this is Australia.>>

I am glad that we can agree on some things:

Should a girl of any age wish to disconnect from her family, telling them to "go jump" and connect with the state instead, seeking its protection and avoiding forced marriages, this will be a good and welcome outcome and when that happens the girl should indeed be protected.

However, the girl must want so and make the decision herself.

Yuyutsu, Hmmm are you sure you have recovered from your head operation ?
Bit illogical there tonight.
When the first people came they made their rules as by majority.
When the second people came they made their rules as by majority.
When the third people came they made their rules as by majority and
that is the way it is now.

So that is way it is and it has always been like that throughout history.
We have made the rules, so live with it !

One rule we have is we do not tolerate intolerance.

Even tolerance must be limited. We do not allow forced marriages.
We do not allow lots of things, and that is the law.

So what sort of a copper were you ?
Made your own rules did you ?

Here here Banyo, it's time we overhaul our limp wristed political correctness approach to anyone who chooses to come here then proceed to implement their ways, ignoring our laws.

Our laws were there before they came, it's just that we have so many soft cocks in this country that we have become the push over we are. It seams our authorities would rather investigate some little old lady for suspected welfare abuse, than protect our own people against the lunatics within these so called Australians.

As I say, while multiculturalism is not a huge problem, muslimism is.

Dear Yuyutsu,

A few years ago I read an interesting article
reprinted in The Age by Phillip Adams. It was
taken from a speech he gave when asked
to speak at a Canberra Conference on "Multi-Culturalism
in the Eighties."

Adams then - pointed out that:

"Yes there will be problems in a society that sees
homogenety as not only desirable but mandatory.
There will be tension between the ethnic groups
and "us," not to mention between and within the
etnic groups themselves. Sadly, many of the problems
that develop will impinge on the children of the
communities, as they fight their disapproving parents
for the right to go to a disco, for the right to
choose a lover "outside".

And "we" will want to intervene when we see those
children subjected to extreme authoritarianism or sexism.
But in the process we'll have a more vigorous,
exciting Australia and in the end, through interaction
and discussion, we'll sort the problems out."

Obviously this has not happened for everyone here.
Yes, some people
have adapted very well -
and more will continue to adapt very well.
But there are others who will select to choose their
own way - and disregard our rule of law.

All we can do is continue to make it quite clear
that our laws are for everyone.
That we expect everyone in this country to abide by our
laws. That forced marriages of children are not acceptable here.
That children are not capable of making decisions about
marriage. They cannot give their consent.
Whether these problems can be sorted out or not - only
time will tell. Hopefully, living in this country, young
girls will grow up and will be able to decide for themselves
the kind of lives they wish to live without being forced
to live the life dictated to them by others.

Dear Banjo,

You wrote;

“Interesting, you are proud that we turn a blind eye to underage marriage.”

Really? Did you even stop to think this might have been seen as a pretty immature sledge? I mean why do it? Is it done just so I have to spend time refuting such crap or is it because your debating skills have become so bereft that crude verballing is all you have left?

How about growing up a little.

There are plenty of men, and sometimes women, engaging in sexual activities with minors in Australia. Indeed in a major town near us it is part of the membership rules for a local motorcycle gang. Some twisted logic says it is a way of stamping out police infiltration and stopping members from turning informers because they are yoked by their deed to the club.

That a certain, very small, section of our community decides to dress this predilection up as the 'rights of marriage' should dissuade nobody from recognising it for what it is, sex with children, and we have very good laws for combating it.

Sending children overseas for marriage is child sex trafficking and we also have strong laws in place to address it.

I am also sick to death of some religious communities claiming the right to interfere with the genitals of our young. Both the Christian and Jewish faiths have sections that want to cut at the genitals of infants and the certain sections of the Islamic faith which wants to cut at the genitals of young girls.

I think it is high time we stop being 'limp wristed' about letting anyone claim religious rights to harm our children in any way including early marriage. We should be a proudly secular nation that steadfastly looks after its vulnerable with the utmost vigour and determination.

Or we can just use the issue to Muslim bash.

Foxy,
How many generations do you propose we wait for alien cultural practices to cease, is it 4 or 5 generations? At 20 years per generation that is 100 years for some to discard old cultural habits. Presently we have some here 3-4 generations and still stick to the original culture with alien ways and old hatreds.

You are prepared to wait 100 years for change? At 20 forced marriages per year that is another 2000 under age girls are forced into marriage in S/W Sydney alone. You are prepared to subject these girls to that? It may even be more, and for longer, as new arrivals continually 'refresh' the original culture.

I take it you propose the same for other alien cultural habits as well?

I do not believe that is near good enough for Australian girls. What other countries do in their country is their affair but not here in Aus.

Presently we have education programs but they need to have the backup of strong law enforcement and bans on immigration for persons of groups that still persist in breaking our laws and social standards.

Although muslims are at the forefront of alien cultural practices, there are other groups involved and the laws must be applied equally across the board.

G'day there BANJO...

These young girls travelling to Syria in order to wed ISL fighters, seems pretty extreme to me ? Do we understand if they travel with the apparent permission of their parents ? Or do they manage to leave in small groups using some subterfuge to avoid parental scrutiny ? Obviously, they have passports therefore, if they're travelling alone, immigration authorities surely must quiz them as to why they're leaving the country unescorted ? Or do they have another older companion accompanying them ? If all these young girls leave unescorted, how do the circumvent the authorities ?

These child brides in Oz, well it had to come, it's a tradition within the Islamic community ? If the report is accurate, surely it becomes a matter for the AFP ? What are they doing about it ?

If as you say, these blokes are returning to Oz having taken part in ISIL activities, in Syria or elsewhere, well lock 'em up ! But before we do so, we must have proof of their activities ? Speculation and aspersions alone won't suffice, if you seek to deny an individual of his liberty ?

BANJO, you know how many times I've denounced and railed against our government, for this apparent inertia or paralysis in making hard decisions on this whole question of perpetrating this notion of Islamization in Australia ? You get so you become sick and tired of bleating about it !

Australia seems to have become far too precious, concerning what different cliques within the electorate might think ? They (our leaders) must govern for the majority it's as simple as that !

Dear Banjo,

How many generations will it take for things to
change? Changes are happening all of the time.
They are inevitable. The only constant in life
is change.

The culture and values of
the dominant population will always have an influence
on people - especially the younger members of society.
We are all creatures affected by our
environments - and the influences that surround us
(including peer pressures).

So no, - it won't take as much time as you tend to
think for changes to occur.
I know that from experiences within my own
family.

Perhaps it would help you to also take a look at history
before you talk about "alien cultures," regarding child
marriages.

This practice existed throughout the globe among royals
for political and dynastic considerations and also
among ordinary folk - (The arrangement of the marriage was based
on monetary worth).

In the Middle Ages children were married at a young age.
Girls were as young as 12.

Just to give you some famous examples:

Isabelle of valaois, the Queen of England on 31st Oct. 1396
at the age of six married the widower King Richard II of
England.

Joan of France, Duchess of Berry - betrothed in a wedding
contract at age 8 days old, she was officially married at
age 12 in 1476.

Bianca of Savoy, Duchess of Milan - at age 13.

Lucrezia Borgia - age 13.

Austrian born - Archduchess Marie Antoinette - age 14 to
France's Louis XVI.

Marshal Tito of Yugoslavia - married his first wife in 1919 -
she was 14 years old.

And so it goes.

In this country we have the rule of law which everyone is
expected to abide by. We have strong law enforcements to
uphold our laws. And we have to continue to make it quite
clear what shall and shall not be tolerated.

I have nothing further to add to this subject.

See you on another discussion.

Fox, "In the Middle Ages.."

No-one falls for your false comparisons.

Regarding migrants, it was the Labour Party in the UK who cared so much about their 'Progressive' ideology and so little about the people who entrusted them with government, that they preferred those Pakistani (Kashmir) migrants who committed the sexual atrocities against minors above the many thousands of other possible migrants.

The Pakistanis were brought in as cheap labour in the British steel industry.

It is interesting how your 'Progressive' ideology puts the flawed immigration and multiculturalism policies and associated political correctness up as first priority, ahead of the risks of rape and molestation of girl minors and ahead of British workers' employment and conditions too.

Not surprising though in view of your support for endless diversity, the diversity-Australia (and the UK)-has-to-have to wipe out any vestige of 'whites' and 'white' culture.

Not surprising either that when you are on a roll you show your roots back in the elite leftist cultural cringe of columnists like Philip Adams. Philip Adams personifies the leftist elitism of way back in the previous Millenium, forty plus years ago and disregarded, scoffed at as a pretentious fool, by the real lefties back then.

Hi Foxy,

I totally support your statement that

"In this country we have the rule of law which everyone is
expected to abide by. We have strong law enforcements to
uphold our laws. And we have to continue to make it quite
clear what shall and shall not be tolerated."

Thank god we don't have different laws for different people on ethnic, religious or gender grounds, as in many more backward countries of the world - our houses of government are elected by ALL the people (or at least a majority of the seats) to pass laws applicable to ALL Australians, men and women, adults and children.

Long may it continue: multiculturalism within a uni-legal framework.

Jo

otb,

Why do you keep addressing your posts to me.

I don't read them any longer.
You've been binned.

o sung wu,
You raise some interesting and pertinent question which I never thought of. My only experience with minors traveling on airlines was to receive our granddaughter from Melbourne who traveled unaccompanied. Her mother had to name us to receive her and we had to show identity. I don't even know if the girls going to Syria were minors or the age classification. I also would need some help to arrange. Perhaps Google would be a good start.

The under age marriages in Aus is a concern and I see no reason for the good doctor, in that article, to be incorrect. She is in a position to know. Concerning also that the males don't want their wives to get out of the house without them or learn English. That would be about control.

I know the frustration of having to keep repeating the issues, but there is no other way. Hopefully some will listen eventually.

Must go. Have to pick my wife up at the airport. If I am late there will be serious consequences for me.

BANJO...

Remember that old maxim for us married men ? '...A happy wife is a happy life...'!

Loudmouth, "Long may it continue: multiculturalism within a uni-legal framework"

That would be a goal.

For example, there is no reason for un-stunned slaughter of large food animals to continue.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/04/30/your-sunday-roast-brought-to-you-by-ritual-animal-slaughter/

There is no dispute that,

"All Australians should, and do actually, come under one set of laws, which recognise:

a) the rights of children,

b) the equality of all men and women before the law, and

c) the rights to freedom of expression, including the freedom to believe as one wishes (but not necessarily to act on those beliefs, and certainly not to impose those beliefs on others - see (a) and (b) )."

The stretch goal is for it be the day to day experience of Indigenous girls, for instance.

Foxy,
You say changes are happening all the time. I ask what changes? The biggest problem with Islam is that they will not change or even compromise. For them it is either their way or the highway.

You say it wont take as much time as I tend to think for change. I cannot see what you base that on. Some have ben here 3-4 generations and still cling to the original cultures. Old hatreds still exist between Croats and Serbs after a century, who knows?

You say we have strong law enforcement. I disagree, for 20 years we have FGM as being unlawful, yet not one prosecution. Now it is shown that 1100 girls are at risk per year. How can that possibly be strong law enforcement?

Joe, how can you agree with Foxy about strong law enforcement when you see the above about FGM and 20 underage marriages a year in S/W Sydney. I think some will only acknowledge there is a problem if they see multible deaths.

It would be a huge help IF we did have strong law enforcement.

Put your hand on your heart;
Can you say that multiculturalism is a success ?

Dear Bazz,

<<When the first people came they made their rules as by majority....>>

This is factually incorrect, but even if it were correct what difference would it make?

Once people identify themselves as a group (or society), they then may organise themselves in any way they like, possibly including the making of rules by majority - but first they must willingly, without coercion, agree to become a group/society.

<<We have made the rules, so live with it !>>

What you say here, unashamedly, is that you attempt to rule others, including those who never agreed to have anything to do with you - that's unprovoked bullying!

<<One rule we have is we do not tolerate intolerance.>>

So just note who is the intolerant side in the context of this thread, who isn't willing to tolerate other groups which do not adhere to their own norms.

<<We do not allow forced marriages.
We do not allow lots of things, and that is the law.>>

That's OK so long as you only apply your laws over those who accepted your authority in the first place.

Telling people "This is MY continent and I will prevent you from coming here unless you comply with MY laws", is a form of extortion and not a legitimate moral practice.

Dear Foxy,

Interesting analysis by Adams.

I understand and share your passion against forced marriages (if indeed they are forced), but as much as you and I dislike or even despise certain practices, you ought to have a sound moral and philosophical ground to actually act on that dislike: just imagine what would happen if everyone starts to prosecute others who do what they dislike.

<<All we can do is continue to make it quite clear
that our laws are for everyone.
That we expect everyone in this country to abide by our
laws.>>

This is a very dangerous statement.

What right have you to impose your laws over all others?
Why should someone be expected to abide by your laws just because they happen to live in this continent?
It makes no sense!
Are kangaroos, wombats, fish and fowl expected to abide by your laws too?
Then why humans? Are they inferior than the above?

<<That children are not capable of making decisions about
marriage. They cannot give their consent.>>

I disagree on the grounds of personal experience because I have once been a child myself.

If someone indeed cannot make a decision, then simply they don't make decisions and if indeed someone cannot give consent, then simply they don't give consent. This utter disrespect to children is designed to serve the system, not the children, so that it gives the system enough time to brainwash/indoctrinate the children (through so-called "education") and turn them into the kind of citizens which the system desires.

<<Hopefully, living in this country, young
girls will grow up and will be able to decide for themselves
the kind of lives they wish to live without being forced
to live the life dictated to them by others.>>

Yes, I absolutely share this hope with you without reservations.

Note that "others" here also include not only the girls' families but also the Australian state and its enforcement agencies.

Yuyutsu said;
What you say here, unashamedly, is that you attempt to rule others,
including those who never agreed to have anything to do with you - that's unprovoked bullying!

Utter nonsense !
They did agree to the rules when they came.
Most have even sworn a legally enforceable oath.

Hi Banjo,

Yes, I agree that the laws are often not enforced, or enforced enough: maintaining equal rights for all before the law is always going to be unfinished business.

And as On The Beach says, it's a set of goals, not something that will be attained once and for all. Multiculturalism is hard work for a society and I'm sure that Foxy would agree with that. But it has to be the goal in any genuinely democratic society (which is also always unfinished business). We all have to get along within a single legal framework which must be strengthened to protect the rights of the more vulnerable, particularly women and girls. Those rights MUST trump culture every time.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Bazz,

"
They did agree to the rules when they came.
Most have even sworn a legally enforceable oath.
"

But were they allowed the option of arriving here and living in this continent otherwise?

Also, what about those who arrived in Australia through the womb (or as children)? They were never asked at all!

"Telling people "This is MY continent and I will prevent you from coming here unless you comply with MY laws", is a form of extortion and not a legitimate moral practice."

Are you serious Yuyutsu?

All over the world the countries have rules/laws for the citizens to abide by. They also have laws about entering the country on a visitor and/or resident basis. Its the way the world is!

You can't, just because you personally don't think that's the way it should be, make such ridiculous statements without looking like a complete fool.

Perhaps you are from another planet where peace and love govern all the residents, there is no crime or corruption and the inhabitants move feely wherever they choose, and they are accepted with open arms wherever they land. No politicians, no need for rules or laws, everyone is good. I think they call it La La Land.

Where Fox is wrong is in always wallpapering over deficiencies in immigration and multiculturalism policies and administration.

Also in labelling any critic, no matter how public-spirited (and often right in his/her allegations) as a 'xenophobe', 'racist' and other slurs. One would have imagined that Julia Gillard's admonishment of such soldiers of political correctness would have have some effect, but no.

It should be obvious for example that the screening of migrants has been deficient, especially where large numbers are involved. Also through the deliberate intervention of governments to reduce scrutiny and accountability for failed policies, and sometimes as a result of favouritism and fraud.

Where both sides of government treat migrants and multiculturalism as sacred cows, pouring millions of taxpayers' dollars annually into promotion campaigns (that are so routinely flattering and dismissive of alternative opinion as to make even a tobacco advertiser blush), supporting lobbyists for both and giving them direct access to ministers, the public is right to wonder if undisclosed secondary agendas are driving the political parties.

There is no doubt at all that sometimes the ethnic tail is swinging the Party Government* dog and the best interests of the Australian public are not being served.

*That is the reality, Party Government, NOT representative government.

As for Australia's 'strong laws' preventing, controlling or even deterring the persistence and growth of introduced toxic political systems, values, traditions and cultures, the answer to that is "Fat chance!", particularly where political parties exist (as they do) and they want to shore up their support and cover their behinds.

Over years, governments denied the introduction of criminal gangs such as the Mafia and the involvement of the political parties themselves,

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/monuments-to-honesty-and-deceit-20090215-881s.html

http://www.smh.com.au/national/immigration-bungle-leaves-convicted-mafioso-in-community-20140523-38ufr.html

What about the 'strong policing' that cannot prevent the sexual molestation of indigenous girls? Whistleblowers shocked by the incidence of sexual disease and harm in Indigenous minors have had little effect in changing the situation. Should multicultural imperatives be allowed to trump Australian law where Indigenous children are concerned?

Hi OTB,

I'll stick by what I wrote: "We all have to get along within a single legal framework which must be strengthened to protect the rights of the more vulnerable, particularly women and girls. Those rights MUST trump culture every time."

I'm not sure that there is any such thing as 'cultural rights' except those which accord with Australia's legal framework and the protection of the rights of the vulnerable, especially women and girls - which are, subtly and indirectly, usually the subject of any attempt to distort or pervert that legal framework.

And the struggle to maintain those equal rights before the law has to go on also within the Indigenous population: I don't believe that the 'old men' should have any special rights over young girls, or that the rights of children should be subordinate to those of older people. In the homes of many remote communities, children are incredibly vulnerable - that's most of the reason why gangs of kids can be found on the streets at one in the morning rather than at home with 'uncle'.

In a sense, the rights and fortunes of young Indigenous people in remote communities is a touchstone of how well the Australian system protects its weakest members. And on that score, it isn't doing too well, and on that score too, the Intervention was only a half-hearted measure.

Joe

It quite interesting really how the subject of Islam has become so topical in the last few years or so ? I guess it's a result of the attack on the Twin Towers 9/11, that has shown the spotlight on the religion, more so than ever in the recent past ?

Everything associated with Islam has been analysed, examined and revealed, sadly it's only the worst elements of the religion that are exposed, such as the topic we now have before us, 'Child Marriage' ? The question I've asked several times now, is there anything in the Islamic religion that's compatible with - initially the Christian faith, and secondly the Australian way of life, our culture ?

The correct answer to the first question; of course there is, many things are compatible between the two religions. If so why is there so much argument between the two, and over what precisely ? I'm certainly no scholar (you all know that), to me at least, many of the Islamic practices we continually witness, seem to emerge from the middle ages, like the strict adherence to Sharia law, an almost medieval practice in my opinion ?

However to the topic itself, it was FOXY who drew attention to several historic references on 'child marriages' from one of her threads ? She quoted various dates; 1396, 1476 even as recently as 1919 to a 14 year old girl ?

Ok I accept, that's what the convention may've been in those less enlightened days, but surely in 2015 we've advanced somewhat ? For instance we no longer engage in capital punishment, place citizens in the 'stocks' burn suspected Witch's, in other words, we've (allegedly) 'gulp'...progressed ?

It's for this reason, I believe that many of the conventions, traditions, even practices which have been pursued by Muslims, are NOT compatible with either the Australian culture, or our unique Aussie way of life ! Moreover, there is very little that 'appears' reconcilable with the essential elements of the Christian faith, the mainstream religion, that is practiced here in Australia !

Dear Hippie,

The pervasiveness of an evil does not make it right. Further, while others do it too, only few states impose themselves over such a large area as Australia, blocking a whole continent.

Of course there is crime and corruption - but that does not entitle you to become a criminal bully yourself, or else how can you expect others to be peaceful and good?

Laws and the legal system are one of society's internal mechanisms and are inappropriate for dealing with those outside that society. We do not for example charge kangaroos and bring them to court for breaking and trespassing into a property and eating their cabbages - that is because they are not part of our society.

Now this does not mean that society cannot defend itself: self-defence is a legitimate pursuit. When feral animals turn to be a pest, we use a variety of measures against them: we erect fences, use dogs to scare them away, de-sex them and if necessary also spread poison or shoot them, but the one thing we never do (though allegedly it was practised in the middle-ages) is to blame them for breaking our laws then take them to court.

Similar principles should apply to humans who do not agree to belong to our society - in the least, such humans should not be treated worse than animals. Should such people become a pest and threaten our peace or even just our property, then surely we should take the necessary measures, which could include expelling or even killing them - but what they do among themselves without hurting members of our society, should be none of our business. One can hardly think of a worse crime than of male lions for example, which when taking over a group of females, kill their cubs of different fathers, yet we don't even contemplate taking them to court for murder - nor should we in the case of Muslims who arrive on Australia's shores with no intention of becoming part of Australian society.

Banjo>>One wonders when the government will take a realistic stance and stop further muslim immigration.<<

Never Banjo, never. The UN is the tool the global social engineers have used to divide all western nations, and we have all signed the conventions. They have worked out not just how to divide a country, but how to divide a civilisation. I look at all Muslims on an ideological basis. Regardless of the Muslims race or westernization they are fifth column and I am opposed to their belief system and culture.

A friend just came back from two decades of living in London, I asked her what she loves most about Australia....she replied flatly,“not having the bloody call to prayer booming into her flat every single day of the year from the two mosques in the area.”................not yet I informed her.

sonofgloin,
I don't want to admit it but I think you are right, I just hope I am long gone before the takeover of Islam. Maybe things will get so bad in UK and Europe that our polys will be forced to act.

The population and electors here can see what is happening but the polys continue to ignore it and go along with the ideology of multiculturalism as if nothing is wrong. If we gained anything from all this diversity there would be some sense to it, but we gain nothing except conflict between various groups and the introduction of alien cultures that we have to pay the cost of.

The Howard government started movement against MC and stopped use of the word multiculturalism. The Gillard government floated MC a couple of time but got no public support and I had hopes that the present government would by now have officially abandoned MC, but they are too weak to do so. We badly need to stop immigration of those groups that have shown us they will not integrate.

well who would of thought NOrway would take the lead on anything but debauchery

http://qpolitical.com/norway-just-deported-824-muslims-every-american-needs-to-see-what-happened-next/

wonders never cease to amaze. And what a drop in crime

Runner,

Australia is an amazingly tolerant country: just looking at that slogan "Behead all those who insult etc. etc.", isn't that an incitement to violence ? i.e. something going well beyond free speech ? With hindsight, why weren't the parents of that child who held up such a sign a year or so ago, prosecuted for incitement to violence ?

I can appreciate that people raised in a non-discussing environment, one in which dogma is taken for granted (especially the dogmas of a thousand years ago), may be having great difficulty in coming to terms with the modern world and its openness and freedoms, no matter how imperfect they may seem to us who are accustomed to them.

It must often be very difficult to reconcile taken-for-granted beliefs and practices with those of a more open society such as Australia's. Multiculturalism is not a problem-free zone, obviously, but it's what we have to make work.

Joe

Another 300 girls abused in the UK, to quote the article: "One senior investigative source told The Guardian: “If you think you haven’t got a problem in your city or town, you are just not looking for it.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11443868/300-victims-groomed-and-assaulted-by-Oxfordshire-gangs-report-finds.html

Joe, it's not their religion I'm concerned about;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11443868/300-victims-groomed-and-assaulted-by-Oxfordshire-gangs-report-finds.html
Yes, another one, Rochdale, Rotherham and now Oxford and this is the response of the "good" people of Britain;
http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/GettyImages_464738566.jpg

Jay>> Yes, another one, Rochdale, Rotherham and now Oxford and this is the response of the "good" people of Britain<<

.........Stockholm syndrome Jay..........the west’s problem is politically correct policing, there are laws in place and a constabulary employed to prevent or apprehend criminals....but the cops focus is directed away by the brass......sensitivity over the law....and that is what the cops now enforce.

Joe>> It must often be very difficult to reconcile taken-for-granted beliefs and practices with those of a more open society such as Australia's. Multiculturalism is not a problem-free zone, obviously, but it's what we have to make work.<<

Joe we are not the problem. From 1948 to 1973 we managed to integrate people from over 40 nations......In 1973 the first Muslim Middle Eastern Immigrants arrived and 40 years on they still hate everything about Australia excepting the welfare system. We have had no integration from them and they have been treated no differently than other immigrants.

It seems we have accepted every single other immigrant group, and they have accepted us...they and us became “we” thirty years ago...no Joe, we don’t have to “make it work.” These zealots among us do not number in the tens or hundreds, there are thousands of zealot muslims in every city of Australia.

We just have to enforce the laws of the land regardless of race or creed....zero tolerance, and I believe our cops are doing a better job than the poms and Europeans who have lost fair dinkum and replaced it with a mandated “cultural sensitivity syndrome.”

Sonofgloin,
The British establishment haven't "lost", their hatred of lower class indigenous Britons has led to this situation.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/03/professionals-blamed-oxfordshire-girls-for-their-sexual-abuse-report-finds

"Police and social workers in Oxfordshire had a tainted perception that girls as young as 11 consented to sex with men who raped and brutalised them, an independent report into the failure to stop their exploitation has said."

"One police officer recorded that a 13-year-old having sex with an older Asian man was in an “age-appropriate relationship”. Another sergeant described how a 14-year-old girl had initiated sexual intercourse with two men. Social workers, the report said, appeared to tolerate the underage sex the girls were having with much older men."

This is the calibre of personnel produced by a Liberal education, these are the concrete results provided by diversity training, anti racism and cultural sensitivity training.

I understand that one of those blokes who married an underage girl is due to be sentenced shortly.

We will then see just how serious our judiciary view these crimes. You can bet that the perpetrators will use their culture and ignorance to lessen their responsibility.

In the meantime we still await prosecutions to take place in relation to a few cases of FGM.

Banjo,
He got ten years with a minimum of seven and a half, that's a fairly substantial sentence, we can't really accuse the courts or police of inaction once these cases are brought to their attention. They could further strengthen the system by requiring Imams who intend to solemnise marriages to register as civil celebrants and then institute background checks, mandatory reporting of suspected abuse etc for all people applying for certification as celebrants.

Jay,
I saw the news article regarding the seven and half year sentence the bloke got, but also there was some speculation as to whether he would appeal or not. I have been waiting for some clarification before commenting.

I accept that seven and a half years is about all one could expect in this day and age and should still act as a deterrent to others.

However, should the bloke appeal, there is every likelihood that the sentence will be reduced, so will have to wait and see.

Then there is the matter of the celebrant that carried out the service and the girls father for his participation.

One thing that does distinguish us from the UK scandal, is that in the UK the police and other authorities failed to act, whereas here the police did act on information received. Let us trust that will continue.