"Australia's first Islamic faith political party intends to field Senate candidates in all states and territories at next year's federal election and also contest upper house seats at state level.

The party, to be announced Tuesday, will be known as the Australian Muslim Party, Fairfax Media can reveal.

Founder Diaa Mohamed defended the timing of the announcement days after the Paris terrorist atrocities, insisting there had never been a more critical time for the Muslim community to have a political voice in Australia.

As a devout Muslim, he said he would never condone the killing of innocents as seen on the streets of Paris and Beirut in the past week but said the Australian Muslim Party would also never support military action in a Muslim country in response to terrorism."
http://www.centralwesterndaily.com.au/story/3495992/australian-muslim-party-aims-to-contest-federal-and-state-elections/?cs=12

Comments?

As we have had the Christian Democrats party and the Family First party etc, I doubt anyone can say we can't have a Muslim based party,

Australia is a democratic country, and if we can have mad political groups like One Nation, the Sex party, and the Hunters and Shooters party (or whatever), then surely anything goes?

We live in a democracy. People are able - and should be able - to form whatever political parties they want. And we, as citizens of this fine democracy, are free to vote for whatever political parties we want.

I can't see the AMP doing well in the House of Representatives, at least not in my seat - it is a very safe Labor seat and I can't see some Muslim upstart changing that.

Senate voting is a bit different; but I vote below the line so that I can decide where my preferences go. Conservative parties get placed towards the bottom; religiously conservative parties even further down. If they stand for the Senate in NSW, they will probably be preferenced below the Liberals and Nationals, but above Family First, Christian Democrats and the DLP - all of whom have a track record for being obnoxious pricks, whereas the AMP will be an unknown quantity. If they demonstrate themselves to be obnoxious pricks then they go into the same basket as the religious right parties.

I'm not sure if Democracy and Islam are even compatible, so I think its a little bit laughable, but hey we want them to follow our rules not theirs so we can't complain now can we...

This is where the immigrants start officially telling us what to do in our own country..

Whats that? Oh its been happening for years already, sorry.

Get the required 500 names and you've got yourself a political party. Get 10 people elected to a parliament you've got yourself party status. Big Clive tried and failed, Hanson tried and never got to first base. Many have tried, and many have failed. Wait and see, no religious based party will ever get my vote. Might get the 500 names, might get some votes around the Lakemba Mosque but it would take a lot of luck to win a senate seat.

the abc will now be divided. Do we back the Islamic party or the Greens/Labour/Turnbull. Hard choice for them. Now their hatred of all things Christian will be divided.

It would be absurd, stupid and any other adjectives describing BS to have a Muslim political party. Muslims do not believe in democracy nor in constitutions. Allah is their only authority. How on earth would they get registration with their beliefs? This has to be a socialist joke!

Muslims apparently have a means to discipline members who incur their disapproval. It is called a "Fatwa" and I believe one was issued to Salman Rushdie for the offense of writing a book. Until there is a Fatwa issued on the members of Daesch it is quite impossible to take them seriously.

An Islamic Party would get almost no support in Syria from native Syrians. A Syrian would take offence if you were to ask what is his/her faith - Islamic, Christian or Judaic. If his/her faith was Islamic, he/she is not interested in whether or not you were of the Sunni, Shiite or Alawite branch.

Anyone who wants to listen to a political leader who, in intellect and integrity, stands head and shoulder above any political leader from the West that I can name right now, should look at the full interview of President Bashar al-Assad by Charlie Rose of "60 Minutes" transcript at https://candobetter.net/node/4347 . The article also has the the full unedited 56 Minute video embedded. That interview can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coXejz5V5Aw

Bashar al-Assad, the elected President of Syria, is of the minority Alawite branch of Islam.

"When asked whether he considered himself an Australian or a Muslim, Mr Mohamed was emphatic with his response.

"I'm a Muslim first, absolutely".

Mr Mohamed was born in Australia."
http://www.2ue.com.au/news/im-a-muslim-first-an-australian-second-20151117-gl0wn6.html

Of course they should have a political party, then they can show everyone how politically weak they really are and how poor their public policies are also.

Get them out of the mosque and into the rough and tumble of politics and they will see their ideology in the spotlight.

It helped us marginalise the religious right, it can help against them too.

It will be interesting. Any party can have a policy to change the
constitution and if they do not make their policies clear then there
are plenty who will.
One policy is to establish a Theocratic Dictatorship.
Close all Parliaments except for rubber stamp assemblies.
Oh yes, ban beer, wine etc etc. (now that would start a civil war)
Repeal all legislation, and legalise Sharia Law.

Now some moslem countries must have legislation to cover things that
did not exist in AD650.
eg Radio spectrum allocation.
Standards for motor cars, left hand drive etc.
Electrical standards.
A multitude of things like that.

ie unless Allah sends a message.

Seriously, well I was serious about the above;
There are some specifications that a party must comply with other
than having 500 members. Are there any trip wires in those specs ?

Just read the specifications.
The only requirement is 500 members on the electoral rolls.
They can even campaign for their candidates without being registered .
They just cannot have their name on ballot papers etc.

Check out some of the odd political parties registered with AEC;

Australian Sex Party
Bullet Train for Australia
Coke in the Bubblers Party
Pirate Party Australia
Smokers Rights Party

All part of the democratic process. Lots of one issue parties with a bee in their bonnet.

//Check out some of the odd political parties registered with AEC//

Never mind the AEC, you only have to look as far as the Senate. The Motoring Enthusiast Party? Really? Taking up one of the seats in our national house of review? Talk about a single issue party.

I can't wait for the day when the Trainspotters & Bird-Watchers Party get a Senator up...

Still, it's the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried so far.

Is Mise, wouldn't you put your religion/God before your country?

Toni Lavis, I am amazed we haven't had a 'White Christian Males of European Origin' party up yet! I would imagine they would get at least a dozen supporters from this site alone for a start.
Mind you, the Family First party is close to being that anyway :).

//Toni Lavis, I am amazed we haven't had a 'White Christian Males of European Origin' party up yet!//

You're not from NSW, are you Suse? Over here we have the Christian Democrats and the Rev. Fred Nile MLC. He's been a rusted on part of NSW state parliament since before I was born. Every year he and his mates get together on Mardi Gras eve and pray for rain, which gives you some idea of what spiteful little prick he is. Object to Mardi Gras all you like, but praying for rain is childish and petty.

So yeah, we already have that party. Thankfully he's never had ambitions for a Federal seat and so the rest of you lucky buggers have been spared his crap.

Suseonline, 'White Christian Males of European Origin'

Your obsessive bigotry and mission to be their punisher for allegedly being responsible for all of that is wrong in the world.

-But isn't it your cover that you have a tame, house trained 'White Christian Male of European Origin' at home, who 'adores' you of course and always minds his P&Qs (or else, eh Suseonline).

Heh, heh, so last Millenium radical feminist: they had either 'evolved' into a lesbian or had a tamed 'almost a girl' Mangina with an open wallet doing house chores. Back in the days when feminists boasted that their 'men' had been trained to sit to pee, more hygienic (and subservient).

General Comment

Here is the proposer of the Muslim Party in an interview on Sky News. Might as well get it from the horse's mouth,

https://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/videos/10153230905541728/?fref=nf

The irony of the leftist 'Progressives' and radical feminists supporting Islam. Leftist 'Progressive' and feminist political correctness being turned back on them.

Still, Muslims SHOULD be up-front and speak for themselves. Instead of allowing shifty politicians like Shorten and Turnbull to put words in their mouths, the exchange for votes in marginal seats of course.

Link again,

http://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/videos/10153230905541728/?fref=nf

Hope it stays up.

Muslims in England want the death penalty for anyone who deserts Islam. Do you think it can happen here?

//Muslims in England want the death penalty for anyone who deserts Islam.//

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Interesting to see if the homosexuals throw urine at the members of the Islamic party like they did to Fred Nile for decades.

No Toni, I am from WA, but I have seen Fred Niles in action on TV...a nasty piece of work alright. Someone that OTB and Runner could look up to.

I can see why OTB would be happy to see a new Muslim political party, as he imagines it would upset the feminists he is so frightened of.
We don't scare as easy as you do OTB.

Suse "White Christian Males of European Origin Party" We do, but its name was too long so they shortened it to 'One Nation', unfortunate for them they are too liberal for some on here.

Here is a party we all can relate to. Its coming to a nut house, sorry Parliament, near you. With policies like "PUDDLES deeper than 3 inches will be marked by a yellow plastic duck." surly this will resonate with voters, and with outstanding candidates such as Mick the Mad Brick, it can't fail.

http://www.loonyparty.com/

Toni, I met the Rev Fred again during the last NSW election campaign, hates The Greens, we are all going to burn in hell. Yes comes across as a "nasty piece of work" driving around in his old white Mercedes thinking he's god. After his wife died he remarried a woman half his age, some would call that a "dirty old man!" but as the SMH asked "Here's a man, 70-something years old, marrying a woman of 55. Are they really going to procreate?" If not in his own estimation he is making a mockery of marrage

We are stuck with the Rev Fred until 2023, he'll be about 90 then, should he live so long.
Prays for rain before the Gay Mardi Gras, sorry Fred god must not be listening, its usually a fine night. To sum him up in a word, Bigot.

Beach, I always take you as a devotee of the Australia First Party and its leader Jim Saleam

Suse,

"Is Mise, wouldn't you put your religion/God before your country?"

Unequivocally, No. I swore an oath to serve my country and I don't think that it is any less morally binding because I have long since been honourably discharged from any physical obligation.

As for the Rev. Fred; I've met him on occasions and had a few good yarns with him, I disagree with him on a lot of issues but I found him to be rather a nice person.
It is rather childish to base one's assessment of a person on TV perceptions.

' No Toni, I am from WA, but I have seen Fred Niles in action on TV...a nasty piece of work alright. '

yeah know Susie you regressives and feminist much prefer pollies with alley cat morals.

Here's a chuckle from Armchair Critic:

>>I'm not sure if Democracy and Islam are even compatible<<

One day you should get up out of your armchair and visit the outside world. Maybe your travels could take you to Indonesia, where democracy now flourishes in the largest Muslim population of any - over 200 million, 88% of the population and fully 13% of the world's Muslim community.

Or perhaps to Turkey, where 98% of the population is Muslim but whose constitution - like ours - guarantees religious freedom. They have been a democracy for 65 years.

The ignorance on display here is beyond belief sometimes.

Thanks, Pericles, I always enjoy a good laugh.

I'm sure that the people of West Papua would share your joke and there are plenty of Muslims in Turkey to whom Kemal Ataturk was/is an unspeakable traitor and who are trying their best to undo his historic work.

Not one of you seems to be aware of the fact, or doesn't care about the fact, of the laws of the swearing of the loyalty to the Queen, the Parliament, and the Australian people and their Constitution. How would Muslims fit in with those requirements? Or, how many Muslims would be prepared to adapt to those requirements. People like Husac is NSW were permitted to swear on the Koran (their is no restriction as to the religious book), and I suppose Ed takes his oath seriously. But, it makes him an apostate. How many Muslims in Australia are that brave?

The leftists and feminists are the 'useful idiots' who have cozied up to Islam for donkey's years with their deeply flawed, 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'.

Oh the irony for them of a political party for Muslims! -The hive will be buzzing furiously as they try to get the narrative right on this one.

I can just see the Australian Muslim Party campaign slogan: 'Send a terrorist to Canberra'.

Thanks Is Mise, for a classic example of the "I can't fault your logic, but I will write some rubbish anyway" response, that has in recent years become the standard knee-jerk posting model here.

>>Thanks, Pericles, I always enjoy a good laugh. I'm sure that the people of West Papua would share your joke and there are plenty of Muslims in Turkey to whom Kemal Ataturk was/is an unspeakable traitor and who are trying their best to undo his historic work.<<

Let me explain it to you again, Is Mise. This is the bone of contention:

>>I'm not sure if Democracy and Islam are even compatible<<

I pointed out that the potential for the coexistence of Muslims and democracy is not in doubt, by giving examples.

You gave one instance of political manipulation in West Papua, and one opinion of how "some" people in Turkey might feel about Kemal Ataturk (1881-1938). Not the most convincing rebuttal, it has to be said.

Your views on Muslims - unless of course you are being deliberately provocative, which is always a possibility in these pages - are well known. But you are making the classic neo-con error of assuming that all society's problems stem from people who don't share your religion. And you will support any argument, however flimsy and insupportable, that seems to be "on your side".

The answer is not, despite what the scaremongering media would like you to believe, to bomb the crap out of everything in sight. That is just their way of selling you more newspapers. What you people keep forgetting is that bombing the crap out of people continues to create more problems than it solves. It is as if Vietnam (1955-1975) never happened.

To keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a definition of... what, do you think?

'To keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a definition of... what, do you think?'

Yeah Pericles like the French has been sucking up to the Islamist for the last 40 years. Keep being apologist, ignore the rape culture among the muslims, remain blissfully ignorant of their ideology, keep allowing them to perpetual victims and expect the same result eh Pericles. There is none so blind

Perecles,

"You gave one instance of political manipulation in West Papua, and one opinion of how "some" people in Turkey might feel about Kemal Ataturk (1881-1938). Not the most convincing rebuttal, it has to be said."

Democracy in Indonesia is a joke and West Papua is not 'political manipulation' but genocide, it is certainly not democratic despite the "democratic" selective, manipulated vote in that occupied territory.
Nor does Australia's gutless acceptance of Indonesia's annexation of West Papua make it any more acceptable.

" But you are making the classic neo-con error of assuming that all society's problems stem from people who don't share your religion"

An here was me thinkin' that Irish Republicanism, the which I favour, was started by good upstanding Protestants that I have always revered.
The IRA, bye the way, has also had its fair share of Protestants.

One would have thought that you would be well up on the Theocratic Muslims versus the "Apostate Muslims" in Turkey.

There's no chance that The Australian Muslim Party could form a quorum, their spokesman worships at Parrammatta Mosque, his Imam is well known for his views on the irreconcilable differences between the 40 or so sects, clans and sub groups in the Australian Muslim population.
"Community" as Australians would understand it is a completely alien concept to Muslims in the West, if it's one thing they do well it's sectarian strife and ethnic hatred, even if such a party does gain it's 1500 registered members the Sunni hardliners will ruin it for everyone.

The NSW Greens are proud of the fact we have an extremely competent parliamentary member of the NSW Legislative Council in Dr Mehreen Faruqi. After filling a casual vacancy in 2013, Mehreen received the support of the parties grass roots membership, showing their confidence in her ability, Mehreen won the number 2 position on the ballot paper for the Greens and was easily returned at the last election.

http://www.mehreenfaruqi.org.au/about/

Paul1405,

That's quite a back-flip after you and leftists scourged Tony Abbott for years for his Christian beliefs.

Why the difference where Islam is concerned?

Beach, there is no back-flip on my part, I am tolerant of at all political beliefs, the loony Christians, the crazy Muslims, there is room for all. There is even room for people such as yourself, Pauline Hanson and Jim Saleam along with your radical extreme right policies.
I support the notion of secularism in politics, any party based on some kind of religious fundamentalism is dangerous, and is not going to get my vote, but they have their right to exists, just like your mob.
Tony Who? Yesterdays rooster, today's feather duster! his replacement seems not to exhibit the same religious zeal, therefore might do well.

It is essential to note all political policy is based on a world view whether Christian, Islam or Atheism. They all have a view on how to form policy on secular issues. There is no policy devoid of a world view. The history of Western society has been developed by Romanism and tempered by the developments in Christian thinking over the last thousand years. Atheism is a recent emergence in Western culture but it is based equally in a world view that has become more focused in promoting anti-god views rather than than in an actual cohesive world community. Whatever political world view reigns people need a cohesive positive World view not a negative, destructive, chaotic and conflicting system of public policy. Governments should be there to serve not rule.

"tempered by the developments in Christian thinking over the last thousand years"
Josephus, can you honestly say Christians have been tolerant and understanding of differing opinions to theirs since the year 1015?
Modernism began with 'The Age of Enlightenment' in the 18th century, which had its roots in the bloody French and American Revolutions. Fostered by men of science and others not of religion, who challenged the existing doctrine of the Christian religious on social, political and economic issues.

Paul 1405.
Balls, they did not, that is the position taken by people who never actually bothered to look into what Carlyle, Mill, Smith, Jefferson and the others actually believed.
What's more the principles of liberalism were developed by Europeans for Europeans, they were never intended to apply to Arabs, Africans and Asians.

A Muslim party headed by a businessman, well good luck to them.

I am interested in what their platform will be, and their attitude to some of the more unsavoury Islamic organisations such as Hamas and ISIS.

Paul,

I notice that your Dr Freaky does not express her freedom as a Muslim to wear a burqa and submit to her husband and master.

Jay Of Melbourne,
Balls, "they were never intended to apply to Arabs, Africans and Asians." How do you know what was the "intention" of such people in the 18th Century. it may well have been, but then again it may not have been.
Spoken like a true white supremacists.

I was simply commenting on Josephus's claim that "The history of Western society has been developed by Romanism and tempered by the developments in Christian thinking over the last thousand years." Today Christian fundamentalists hold to the belief that all in the bible is literally true. Have you ever read the bible to see what such people believe. Less than 200 hundred year ago mainstream Christians were still executing people for heresy, Cayetano Ripoll was the last known in 1826 in Spain. Excommunication continues to this day, As an antidote to the spreading 'infection' of Modernism, Pope Leo XIII, in 1902, had created the Pontifical Biblical Commission to supervise and monitor the progress (or lack thereof) of Catholic scriptural scholarship. It consisted originally of a dozen or more cardinals appointed by the Pope and a number of 'consultants', all deemed to be experts in their fields of research and study.
According to the New Catholic Encyclopaedia, the Commission's official function was (and still is),
'to strive... with all possible care that God's words... will be shielded not only from every breath of error but even from every rash opinion'.1
The Commission would further undertake to ensure that scholars 'Endeavour to safeguard the authority of the scriptures and to promote their right interpretation'

" Excommunication continues to this day,...."

So what? It's done in football clubs as well.

Paul 1405,
Modern America was founded by a religious sect and their money stated, "In God we Trust". The rise of atheism in America is a recent phenomenon. France was strongly Catholic.

It is apparent from your claims you do not know what Christianity is! Read the gospels especially the teachings of Christ - that is Christianity. The writings prior to that give the background and context to the emergence of Christianity. The OT gives the history and life of Israel; Christians are not ancient Jews.

Obviously you prefer to believe secular atheism has formed our society and values. Former USSR communism is your example of a modern atheistic secular society.

Josephus, and Czarist Russia before it is an example of a modern Christian state? Same mob, different song sheet. No, New Zealand is my example of a modern secular state. Please the Soviet Union was never an example of a modern atheistic secular society, in the true sense of what such a state should be. The USSR for most of its existence was a totalitarian state run by a despotic tyrant in the form of Joseph Stalin.
The separation of church and state is vital for the well being of society. One of your own the Rev Bill Crews, a man I much admire, said so on TV just the other day.

//So what? It's done in football clubs as well.//

No it isn't. Football clubs just kick you out of the club, which is not the same thing as excommunication and you know it. Excommunication is not just ostracism wearing a different hat (a mitre, presumably); the religious faithful believe it imperils their immortal soul. In Roman Catholicism it prohibits a person from receiving the sacraments, including penance and the last rites (which are just the sacraments of penance, eucharist and the anointing of the sick). Under catholic theology if you die while excommunicate, you are guaranteed eternal damnation in the next life. To the religious faithful, the prospect of eternity in the lake of fire is somewhat more concerning than just being booted out of the club, which is the worst sanction a football club can impose.

Paul 1405,
A society with taboos is not a secular society.
There's separation of church and state but no separation of religion and state, it's illegal to speak certain phrases in Australia and all political parties continually agitate to increase the scope of speech laws and declare more and more forms of free speech Haram or Taboo.
Furthermore this idea of liberty has been distorted by those at the top of Australian public life, we're fast approaching a society which is totalitarian in that the people have no say in the way their society is structured but still have their freedom and some limited opportunities for personal development.
It's a clever program, like Left Socialism Islam is now a part of the system, it's actually a forming bulwark against criticism of the Canberra regime, if you support Islam you're part of "Team Australia" if you don't you're a social pariah who needs to be stripped of his liberty and right to speak.

Toni,

You forget that in the world of football one can also be barred from football grounds for life and be arrested/ejected if one attempts to gain entry to a ground.
For the faithful that is hell.

Jay,

"A society with taboos is not a secular society."
Are you saying it's not a secular society unless you can openly shag your sister and eat dogs?

//You forget that in the world of football one can also be barred from football grounds for life and be arrested/ejected if one attempts to gain entry to a ground.//

First world problems...

Jay of Melbourne, was that you, Banjo, Ttbn and your other 'Reclaim Australia' comrades I spied in Sydney having little fisticuffs with the opposition?
A fine looking bunch of Australian 'nationalists' they were too...

Suze,

From what I remember of the last reclaim rally, the majority of the violent attacks came from the bogans from the anti reclaim protesters.

After years of left whinge protesters using violence to get their views across, I smell more than a whiff of hypocrisy.

Really Shadow Minister?

You don't think there were plenty of 'bogans' on both sides of those little rallies?
These people join any group they can that displays any chance of violence they can join in with.
All are simply racist rednecks...

Perhaps it is time for the Christian leaders to put aside petty agendas and differences among themselves and ACTUALLY support Christians standing as Independents for senate representatives and perhaps articulate this to those that they are supposed to lead. Who knows Christianity could even grow to be again a Vibrant force in our nation as the Islamic believers are endeavouring to do for their faith and principles of Sharia law, etc?!

Citizen initiated action, that is exactly what we don't need...anymore faith- based groups adding their own forms of religion and gods into the mix.
Religion and politics should not be allowed to mix.

Suze,

You are right there are violent redneck bogans on both sides of the protests. I don't support either side, but I find it amusing when left whingers complain about violent protests from others when they are perfectly happy to use force to highlight their cause.

Looking at the photos, the anti reclaim protesters have no claim to the moral high ground.

So can there be a law to outlaw anyone who does not support aethism? ! Get real unless you support a dictatorial or Communist system? China has Communism with Chinese characteristics which means 70 million Party members control and "govern democratically" the remaining 1,330 million citizens.

Suse'

"Religion and politics should not be allowed to mix"

Good to see that you are finally against Islam; it's taken some time, but welcome aboard!!

Is Mise, tell me where I have ever suggested Islam and politics should mix?
Don't be silly.
I dislike the Islam religion just as much as I dislike any religion.
It is all rubbish...

Says Susie brandishing her own form of faith based philosophy.

Dear Josephus, at least any form of faith I might have is based on science or common sense, and not on myths and fairy tales...

Melton unrest explained.

Reclaim Australia: Oppose Fundamentalist Islam. oppose Nationalism, oppose 'Racism" ie any mention of Anglo-European Australian ethnic interests, explicit support for Jews/Zionism but no mention of Palestinian ethnic interests.

No Room for Racism: Oppose fundamentalist Islam, oppose Nationalism, oppose "Racism" ie any mention of Anglo-European ethnic interests, explicit support for Palestinian ethnic interests, no mention of Jewish ethnic interests/Zionism.

There's basically no difference between the two groups, they're two sects of the same denomination, it's a sectarian dispute.

This is not a chicken or egg situation, No Room For Racism started the violence by attacking Reclaim members at Federation square in May, now they have a rival gang formed on the sidelines of these rallies who are attending primarily to fight with ANTIFA and their allies. Having personally attended No Room For Racism protests I can attest that they are primarily motivated by racial hatred of Anglo-European Australians with their supposed socialist dogma as window dressing.
Their rivals, (whoever they are nowadays) are motivated primarily by a desire to engage in combat with "Left Wing Bigots", their supposed Nationalist leanings are inconsqequential and poorly articulated.
In the end the inevitable melee at Reclaim events is of no import whatsoever, it's just street fighting for it's own sake and actually masks or deflects criticism of the very dubious nature of the movement and it's very real failings.
Reclaim as a whole is premised it seems on "Diversity minus Islam" and which now extends to Diversity minus Islam, minus Nationalism and minus any overt reference to Anglo European Australia.

Susie, I can guarantee you have read more fairy tales than I have in my lifetime as you seem to be a girl who believes in the term.

I am a student of history and physics, seeking observable facts that do and have happened. Most science today is theoretical and can only be evaluated in written equations. So you assume Christians do not believe the reality of physics, when we claim God created all reality.

Claim all you like Josephus, that still doesn't make any God real.
I might like reading stories about werewolves and vampires, but I know they aren't real.

Politics and religion definitely does not mix well.
One only needs to look at Cory Bernardi and his 'beliefs' to see that fact.

Suseonline,
Religion and politics is a way people see the world. All people have a way of understanding the world including yourself.

Buddhism is a religion and does not have a deity but a way of understanding the world. Atheism is primarily a negative view of deity and a way of interpreting the world. If you are atheistic or agnostic you will interpret the world through that lens. You are equally religiously zealous in your view of the world and you conflict with others views and are just as hostile to others views as is evident here, by degrading their views as fairy tales. Fairy tales is your view of others views and not the view of others, which identifies your disdain for others views. You need to show factual scientific evidence to disprove others views, not just emotive slogans

Atheism is a religion the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Suse,

Islam is both religious and political,
"Religious concepts and practices include the five pillars of Islam, which are basic concepts and obligatory acts of worship, and following Islamic law, which touches on virtually every aspect of life and society, providing guidance on multifarious topics from banking and welfare, to family life and the environment."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

Good luck in separating religion and politics in Islam.

The likelihood of mankind/woman kind being evolved progressively from a random mutation of two cells in a Swamp is as scientific as a 747 Jumbo being evolved from an assembly of pieces of junk in a scrap yard. Some Great Designer has been at work and I do not think it was sexist "Mother nature". Einstein believed that science without religion was lame as well as the reverse. Politics and religion (however it is conceived) will always be mixed as beliefs are an integral part of being human, so get real, get over it and do what Your God or your own wisdom tells You what to do without forcing Sharia or any other Religious variations down everyone's throats.

Suseonline, "Religion and politics should not be allowed to mix"

Says the poster who would throw open the doors to thousands of Muslims, without regard to the corrupt political systems and toxic culture and traditions they introduce, resolutely maintain and lobby for at every opportunity. Hasn't the left and Labor learned anything from Rotherham, UK?

<Rotherham council ignored child abuse by Asian gangs because of 'misplaced political correctness', report concludes

Damning report into the Rotherham child sex exploitation scandal finds council riven by 'bullying, sexism, suppression and misplaced political correctness'

Misplaced political correctness by Rotherham’s Labour led council combined with a staggering culture of denial allowed more than 1,400 vulnerable girls to be routinely abused by gangs of Asian men, a withering report has concluded.

Children as young as nine were groomed, trafficked and raped by members of the town’s Pakistani community, but a desperation to avoid being labelled as racist meant councillors turned a blind eye to the appalling abuse for 16 years...>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11391314/Rotherham-child-sex-abuse-scandal-council-not-fit-for-purpose.html

and,

<Muslim group wants sharia law in Australia

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils wants Muslims to be able to marry, divorce and conduct financial transactions under the principles of sharia law.

In a submission to the Federal Parliament’s Committee on Multicultural Affairs, the Federation has asked for the change.

It argues that all Australians would benefit if Islamic laws were adopted as mainstream legislation..

Ikebal Patel, president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, agrees the very word sharia could invoke notions of a fierce, unjust, male-dominated legal code...
However, Mr Patel believes everyone would benefit if sharia law were utilised in a pluralistic society such as Australia...

But author Ida Lichter, who has written on the lives of Muslim women in both the West and predominantly Islamic countries, disagrees.

“The members of the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation in Britain have drawn attention to these oppressive laws that they escaped by migrating to the West, and they’ve said that women are much better under legislation based on universal human rights,” she said.>

As usual, Is Mise and his bosom pal Onthebeach need someone to yell their racist rants at, and today it is me.

Is Mise, I don't care whether Islam mixes politics and religion as we don't have an Islamic government here.
Onthebeach, where have I ever said I want thousands of Muslims living here?
I really don't care what religion, if any, that immigrants to this country have, as long as they are law-abiding citizens who contribute to society.

As for the unlikelihood of humans beings '...evolving from the random mutation of two cells in a swamp...' (?) , well that is no more unlikely than some random invisible being flying down from the sky to whip up a new world in 7 days here on earth now is it?
The fact remains that no one will ever know the truth of something that happened so long ago anyway.

Suse,

"Is Mise, I don't care whether Islam mixes politics and religion as we don't have an Islamic government here"

you also said "Religion and politics should not be allowed to mix"

So now you do care yet you don't care.

That makes sense!!

Suseonline,

You are obsessed with and are forever scourging 'Whites'(sic) and particularly people of Anglo-Saxon origin. According to you they are responsible for all that is wrong in the world.

If they happen to be male that is all the worse for them, where you are concerned.

Then there is your obsession with the Christian religion, esp Roman Catholicism. How many hundreds, thousands, of drive-by shots have you had at Christians?

You have always been an apologist for Islam, forever deflecting any criticism onto Christians (and 'white men'!) instead. That is your belts and braces radical feminism of the previous Millenium: 'The enemy of your enemy is your friend'.

Is Mise, silly as usual. I am only discussing Australia here, and I thought that was obvious.

Onthebeach, there it is again! Your paranoia about feminists is getting tedious now.
And you are the one constantly bringing up the subject of white men, not me.
I think feminists want equality with all men, not just white men, so I think you are being hysterical for no reason old boy...

Suse,

"Is Mise, silly as usual. I am only discussing Australia here, and I thought that was obvious."

So you're happy with the new Muslim Party, that's good; so we can now take it as said that it's OK to mix religion and politics.
Muslims are defined as being members of Islam.

You do change your mind a lot.

Is Mise, you continue your silliness...
Didn't I say I don't like politics and religion being mixed?
Obviously I wouldn't like a Muslim party, just as I don't like the Christian Democrats party or the Family (God) First party.

I just don't like the thought of any crazy religious politicians trying to force their views onto me, like the truly loony Tea Party members in the US.
Hell, I even put the mad Fisher and Shooter party (or whatever!) in front of any religion-based party on my ballot papers.

Susie,
So to have a view to shoot wild animals. To surgically abort humans in the womb is an OK world view, to which Family First and Christian Democratic Party object. So you believe in causing death to innocents is an OK World view, no wonder you are OK with Muslims.

Josephus, I never said I was ok with abortion did I?
I am just not ok with forcing any woman to do something against her will.

Abortion is legal in this country and that will never change, so get over it.
No political party in power would ever commit political suicide by trying to overturn that decision.

Suse, "I just don't like the thought of any crazy religious politicians trying to force their views onto me" Here in NSW we've had the Rev Fred doing that for years with his Christian Demo's Party of happy clappers.

Funny story: At the last state election I was doing pre-polls for The Greens down at the local town hall, along with the Liberals, ALP, Shooters and the Christian bloke. Most of the time things are quite at these pre-polls, so everyone gets on ok, talk about things in general, don't tell Is Mise, but I got on well with the bloke from the Shooters,he came everyday, was about my age, nice bloke, though he didn't like Dave, so what, not everyone does. The Liberal bloke had to leave and no replacement had turned up yet, so the CDP bloke said "I'll do the HTV's for you for a while" When things were quite I said to the CDP bloke "What do you think of those homo-sex-uals fellas? That got him going full on, they will burn in hell! "Then I asked; "Fred (not his name), what do you think of the Lib candidate Bruce N-S? Got the reply, a good bloke, a real good bloke. "Well, he's one of those pooofters, you want to see burn in hell, and now your helping him get back into parliament, ha, ha. Well, since he wasn't a local, and god hadn't told him, he wasn't to know the Liberal Bruce N-S is openly gay, got the Fred D-nile from him about Bruce, no he's not, no he's not! The 3 of us said "Oh, yes he is. Oh yes he is." Bruce N-S got back in comfortably. We all had a good laugh about that one. We did all think the christian bloke a bit strange, a bit over the top.

Paul1405,
Be honest rather than reactionary to this question.

What views has Fred Nile "FORCED" upon you that has taken away "YOUR" rights? You made the claim verify your statement with personal fact.

If you were a smoker, yes he has been influential in having it removed from advertising and included in workplace safety by removing you to over 6 meters from other workers, children and patrons etc. Yes he has forced you to pay more for cigarettes because he believes it is bad for your health and triggers lung cancer forcing taxpayers to pay for your cure.

What has he foisted upon you unjustly?

Suse,

"As usual, Is Mise and his bosom pal Onthebeach need someone to yell their racist rants at, and today it is me."

What's racist about having a go at Islam and Muslims?

Islam is a rerigio/political organization and Muslims are its followers, and there are Muslims in most races, so where do you get the racist bit, if not from a well of ignorance

Is Mise suggested Suseonline might have derived the term “racism” in respect of anti-Islamic views from a well of ignorance. May be ignorance in Suse’s case but the pro-Moslem lobby that promotes terms like “racism” and “Islamophobia” and “bigotry” is not at all ignorant and is inventing Newspeak to fool those who at least half want to be fooled rather than confront truths that make them uncomfortable.

A few days ago I wrote to the ABC and SBS dhimmis protesting about their term “anti-racist” to describe hoons who confronted clamour from Reclaim Australia. I pointed out what the ABC/SBS ideologues already knew, that a religious cult is not a race and was being translated into “race” to denigrate - without need for argument - as “racist” those who spoke out against it.

Certain forms of conflict with religious cults, such as harassing or discriminating against their adherents, can rightly be termed “bigotry” even if not racism, but one must remember that it is not necessary to read much of the Koran to see that Islam is bigotry on steroids.