Dear Hasbeen,

Shall I offer you my head so the Christian country of Australia can finally match the Islamic Daesh in cruelty?

«Anyone making such grandiose statements of disrespect for
[1] us,
[2] our country &
[3] our laws»

I have full and deep respect for [1], you and all the people of Australia.
I can have neither respect nor disrespect for that which does not exist such as [2], because this continent (and surrounding islands) is not yours or anybody else's for that matter.
I have nothing but contempt for laws that are imposed by some people against others without consent, such as [3].

If I were to accept that you and your people own this continent merely because your ancestors happened to have superior military and maritime power in the 18th century, then I would similarly be forced to accept the legitimacy of Chinese-communist control over the miserable people of China and Tibet as well as their attempted control over the people of Taiwan. Indeed I would then be forced to accept the legitimacy of every bullying boy in the schoolyard.

To disrespect an individual judge is wrong (though it should not carry a punishment).
To disrespect your law and what the judge stands for, is a necessary moral response in opposition to violence.

NNN:

“It's all serious rather than comedy, which seems a serious matter to you.”

What is serious to me is that people do not use these forums to seek attention for things other than their opinions.

“So they can't define what has to be done and anyway it's just stuff that used to be done.”

Obviously they can define it. Standing up is respectful and sitting down is disrespectful. What they have to show is why this is so. What is the reasoning behind it other than to bully and intimidate people?

Dear Yuyutsu,

I have no wish to argue with you.
Everyone in Australia must obey laws established by
our elected governments. Equally, all Australians are protected
by the rule of law. Australians are free to protest
the actions of government and to campaign to
change laws. However, no one is "above the law."
Religious laws have no legal status in Australia.
I can't make it any clearer for you. Elected parliaments
are the only bodies able to make our laws or delegate
the authority to make laws in this country.

Non recognition of the legitimacy of any of our laws
will not stand up in our courts.

phanto
As I'm not cracking jokes in Mr Graham Young's Forum but making opinions there's nothing more to be said . Seriously .

"Obviously they can define it. Standing up is respectful and sitting down is disrespectful."
Ah but they don't say that in the definitions in the Act . It would be a joke ( banned under the Dead Serious Phanto 2017 section 666) to write " all persons shall incline the spinal column forward by 20-45 degrees when the attendant says "Stand" or get the slammer for a fortnight". Bowing is deviating from "stand" so legally the woman obeyed if her spine is upright , more than the wobbly ones.
Do not laugh , smile or lighten up even if a phantom.

Dear Foxy,

You have no wish to argue with me, yet you do.

No wonder you complain that you can't make it any clearer for me, or convince me of that which is untrue in the first place.

* People in Australia are fully able not to (that is the antonym of "must") follow the laws of your elected government. Yes, they might be persecuted as a result and suffer gravely at the hands of those evil forces, so what does it prove?

* It is simply not the case that "all Australians are protected by the rule of law" because one can only be protected against that which they wish to be protected against.

* No one is "under the law" unless they willingly accept that position. You seem to - I don't.

* Elected parliaments are the only bodies able to make YOUR laws: this does not imply that they are the only bodies able to make laws in general, which is obviously a false statement.

Undoubtedly, non-recognition of the legitimacy of any of your laws will not stand up in your courts, just as a leopard cannot change his spots - this fact we agree on, but it doesn't make your laws one iota more legitimate.

"* Elected parliaments are the only bodies able to make YOUR laws:"
That's only because the British empire said so, so probably no-one has any authority beyond their own keyboard. The Poms said the Governor-in Council ( the Cabinet or wooden box) appoints judges with equal pecking order to Parliament. Judges can block laws by the peoples' house cabinet and make their own common law with a side board of plonk . That's the law with peanuts or chips.