God has created diverse human beings to live in this tiny global village of one family. Creation by its very nature is diverse with different species, different communities, different cultures and languages. These differences represent the beauty and wonder but diversity is sometimes not fully appreciated, resulting in all sorts of clashes.

A civilisation is measured not by the rights it grants its majority but the privileges it allows its minorities. Muslim families are as entitled as any other religious group to schools that nurture their children's faith. Muslim pupils should be educated in Muslim schools because the current system is marginalising them. Teaching Muslim children in a Muslim school would remove the "problem of them being exposed" to values that conflict with Islamic faith. Muslim pupils are disadvantaged and marginalised in the city's state schools because the cultural heritage of the curriculum is "European and Christian".

Multiculturalism is not about integration but about cultural plurality. It is not about separation but about respect and the deepening awareness of Unity in Diversity. Each culture will maintain its own intrinsic value and at the same time would be expected to contribute to the benefit of the whole society. Multiculturalism can accommodate diversity of all kinds – cultural, philosophical and religious – so that we can create a world without conflict and strife. Britain can assume the role of accommodation and concern for all peoples, for our planet and indeed for our survival. Multi-Culturalism is even more important and crucial after 9/11 and 7/7. Muslim youths are also likely to feel alienated by a focus on shared Brutishness, rather than multicultural diversity. Rather than promoting a single British “us” teaching should acknowledge that “us” can be diverse and plural. Children should be encouraged to explore differences in appearance, history and religion to reduce social and educational fears.

Muslim community in all western countries need Masajid, state funded Muslim schools, Halal meat, sharia laws, time off for Friday afternoon prayers in the Masjid, two religious holidays per year and Muslim cemeteries. West must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different.
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

How are things in London this morning? are you able to pull a crowd or is that why you come here? yes in the perfect world I once longed for I thought I could only find it in God, every word I consumed told me that was both the best and only path to one humanity, my God while you would say was a Prophet, was not your God.What do we do with the dozens of other Gods, think the number men have worshiped is well over two thousand? are their followers to be loved? are they part of humanity? are those like me, who admire true followers of all Gods who truly love others, but no longer follow a God are we to be loved? or despised? do I have the right to live as I wish? is life only about worshipping our God or are we free to worship no one? is there life without God?

//Muslim pupils should be educated in Muslim schools because the current system is marginalising them.//

Bollocks. The wider world outside of schools is multi-faith. Schools should reflect that.

//Teaching Muslim children in a Muslim school would remove the "problem of them being exposed" to values that conflict with Islamic faith.//

People being exposed to new ideas is not a problem. People like you who promote wilful ignorance as some sort of virtue are the problem.

//Muslim pupils are disadvantaged and marginalised in the city's state schools because the cultural heritage of the curriculum is "European and Christian".//

By that logic, Asian students should be disadvantaged for the same reason. But from what I've seen, they do just fine academically. Why aren't they disadvantaged by the cultural heritage of the curriculum?

//Muslim community in all western countries need Masajid//

Fine.

//state funded Muslim schools//

No, bugger off. If you want private religious schools, you fund them privately.

//Halal meat//

Fine.

//sharia laws//

Go f%^k yourself. The law of the land should apply equally to all citizens. You don't get to have your own laws just because you believe in a particular God. It would lead to chaos.

//time off for Friday afternoon prayers in the Masjid//

If it's unpaid time off, fine.

//two religious holidays per year//

Does everybody else get these public holidays as well? Because if not, piss off. Why should you get more holidays than the rest of us?

//Muslim cemeteries//

There's little enough room for grave plots as it is. Just get cremated. Or donate your body to science - they'll appreciate it more than you once you're dead.

Tony Lavis: Well said and good job!! I was going to reply to this but you've jumped in first and have it covered.

I really can't be bothered with peanut and his Islamic lies and delusions.

Hi there IFTIKHAR...

Welcome to our Forum, I don't believe I've seen your epithet before? Anyway, all I wanted to say to you; when Muslim's put away their guns and explosives, and their terrorist methods, maybe you might find more acceptance within Western Society. A Society you're obviously very fond of, more so than your own, by the level of welfare, you and your kind regularly enjoy at the (reluctant) bidding of the ordinary Aussie taxpayer.

A word of caution too my friend; as a retired police officer with many years of service, radical Islam might just take some pause, and re-think their terrorist agenda against the West. Further, Australia, is predominately a Christian country, and shall endue - just as long as the practitioner's of those many divergent Christian faiths wish it to remain so.

There's rapidly coming a time, when the already sorely tested patience of the West, will ultimately become exhausted. and when that comes to pass, radical Muslim's will be utterly obliterated for all time.

he is well known here o sung wo, it comes to me to be the voice of a group some call wretches and much worse non believers,,, in any God,now we are quite a few in number and growing, world wide,in this country the census tells us a third, what of us? ten times the number of Muslims in this country, are we to live free to believe what we wish? what if we are right? if no GOD ever existed?if murder in the name of Gods can no longer be justified, all of them, if regimental living is forced on us or some in the name of a fable? this poster is part of the problem not the solution.

Hi there BELLY...

I must admit I don't know the fellow at all BELLY. Nevertheless my message remains unchanged, if these muslim radicals try to hurt our way of life, the religion's that Australians like to devote their time to (by the way I'm an atheist ever since the Vietnam War), or worse occasion violence upon me or mine - well they better watch ou, is all. Thanks BELLY.

I submit to the will of God.
Now gimme, gimme, gimme, me, me, me!

We shall enter your land from afar, after declaring *independence* from you.
But we won't change to suit our new context.
No, YOU must change to suit us!

Actually the ancient story of human diversity is that God caused a united people to disperse in discordant confusion (Babel) not united a diverse people together.

In the US government funds to religious schools is against the law. There are no chaplains in the public schools. People may send their children to religious schools, but they or their religious organisation must pay the entire cost. The schools also must provide a secular curriculum which includes adequate instruction in science and the humanities. I believe it should be that way here. Religion should not be any of the government's business, and government should not be any of religion's business.

shockadelic yes share your views but, yep but,the wish to spread their faith, a faith unlike the Christian one, has not changed from its invention, a faith like every faith that tells us our life is about worship, we need to understand, fighting fire with fire, in this case ,misplaced zeal is not worth the effort, if we want the majority of Muslims, to like us, confront this type of zealotry we should use modern debate over a sometimes primitive view
In the end evolution stands and faith can never remove that truth

Dear Belly,

Islam like any other religion has changed since its invention. Originally Muslims regarded their religion as just for the Arabs. They discouraged conversion as Muslims paid no taxes in the conquered territories, and they did not want to decrease the tax rolls. At that time Muslim universities were open to all whatever their faith while Christian universities were open only to Christians. Unfortunately Islam became a missionary religion later and entered its Dark Ages which they are still in while the Christian world was leaving the Dark Ages. Both superstitions, Christianity and Islam, have caused great suffering. They resemble each other in their division into many sects and their belief in nonsense.

Dear David,

«People may send their children to religious schools, but they or their religious organisation must pay the entire cost. The schools also must provide a secular curriculum which includes adequate instruction in science and the humanities. I believe it should be that way here. Religion should not be any of the government's business, and government should not be any of religion's business.»

Indeed, "science and humanities" is not a religion, but it is a particular world-view. Religions offer a different world-view, so different in fact that there is not even an agreement about what life is for.

What you are asking, is for your particular world-view to be taught for free by all tax-payers regardless of their world-view, except that those who want to pass on their different world-view to their own children must not only pay for it, but also pay for the forced indoctrination of their children with your world-view.

Sounds quite similar to what Iftikhar is asking (and I intend to address my criticism to his original post separately, time allowing). Does "missionary" and "crusader" rings a bell?

So you want separation of government and religion? Fair enough, I want it too, but separation means SEPARATION, not domination, and it must include all world-views, not just religious!

Let each parent choose for themselves how their child is to be educated, then they must naturally foot the bill. If certain groups of parents want to pool their education-finances among them, then so be it.

Dear Yuyutsu,

What you say would be legitimate if parents did have a right to indoctrinate children with their worldview without interference. However, a child has rights also. A child living in a modern society has the right to be informed about that society. Some Amish in the US recognise that. They have a tradition of Rumspringa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumspringa

Young people are allowed a period where they can become acquainted with the outside world. At the end of that period they may choose not to be part of the community or come back to the community. I do not wish more discussion with you and will not respond further to your posts.

I think diversity is really great. Great provided it is diverse nations, & not divers populations with in nations.

Those who want to be Muslim should stay in countries predominately Muslim rather than bring their stupidity where it is not wanted.

To Iftkihar. Four thoughts.

1). What you are talking about is not diversity, but supporting seperation of education based on religion. Diversity would be if schools were for everyone, and each of their cultural heritages were welcomed to be embraced. Or diversity would be a merging of customs within society. What you are talking about is to remove Islamic culture and education from the nation that the Muslims reside in. So to buffer the Muslims from the problems of the culture that they reside in.

2). While I can respect your or anyone else's intent to protect your kids from harm done in our culture (any culture), what your asking to do is not just protect you kids of cultural issues, but also rob them of accepting the nation they live in by total rejection of the culture.

3). It is the job of the parents to raise their children up in a way to avoid the pitfalls that they know of in their community. But you can't buffer them completely from society. If drinking or drugs are an issue you're concerned with. Then teaching your kids to be mature and drug free, regardless of friends and peer pressure, is your job. If you go further to go to a privite school, or even a boarding school, then that is on your expense and your privite income. Not public taxes or the government. On the other hand, if your intent is to do more then buffer your kids from the harm of society, but to teach them to reject the society they live in. Then you should move to a different society. There's no reason to expect a society to give up who they are for people who don't want to be there anyways.

(Continued)

(Continued)

4) that all said. If it is still important due to the integrity of a minority's people and culture, to be able to have their own schools and own laws. Then I would ask that Islamic countries be the change they wish to see the rest of the world to adopt. And by that I mean, let the minorities in their countries live safely, and have the equal right to teach their own religion (not Islam), and live by their own laws (not sharia laws). Without that example that is given in Islam nor in Islamic countries; there's no reason to give Islam a special privileges. Because they are unwilling to offer the surrounding communities and cultures that are not their own.

Dear David,

I can understand why you wouldn't want to discuss any further and respond to my posts:

Many times you commented here, quite skilfully, about the historical atrocities of the Christian church - such as how it murdered Hypatia, etcetera. Yes, the medieval church behaved awfully and trampled underfoot all rivalling worldviews, so did communism.

You consider it important and acceptable for parents who adhere to sciencist humanism to indoctrinate not only their own children, but all others as well with their modern nonsense, but deny other parents the right to shield their children from this damaging philosophy. This exposes your attitude to be on a par with the medieval Christian church and communism. It must feel awful.

Regarding Rumspringa, the Amish people choose to have it for their own good reasons, not because they would face law-enforcement authorities otherwise. It is up to Muslims to choose whether or not they want to have a similar tradition, for their own good rather than to forward your ideology.

Not now soon it is truth we would be condemned if we proposed separation as trying to install apartheid, separatism is a threat always, know it is getting a bit old but what about me? why should I like a third of my country men and women a nonbeliever change any thing to suit any faith? Diversity must not become a word that supports separatism *evolution an unavoidable truth*

Good on you, Toni :)

'Diversity' can take some weird forms, which can end up not really being diverse at all, only separatist.

The same with 'inclusion', which I always thought meant that everybody would be included, say in schools, doing much the same sorts of things - but it has been perverted to mean that schools would 'include' different groups by hiving off special class-rooms, courses and teachers to cater for their 'diversity' - in other words, a 'diversity' of monocultures, separate development (where have we heard that ghastly term before ? Oh yes, South Africa) of separate groups, but sort of roughly under the same administration, and maybe even mixing a bit with others.

And so Apartheid could be celebrated as 'diversity' and 'inclusion'. Now, that's perversion.

So diversity of what ? Of people pitching in together and doing the same sorts of things ? Or of different groups doing their own different things and having it all sanctioned by the state - funded by the state, as that half-wit Iftikhar wants. Genuine multiculturalism surely means that diverse people share - or come to share - similar values, notions of equality and fairness and rights and the rule of law. If those values are worthy of hanging onto, then they are worthy for whoever comes here. Of course, people will retain their own languages, dress, food, social relations, etc., but in the context of equal rights, etc.

Joe

I know Muslims who you could not tell are Muslims, I have breasted the bar in country hotels with youth born and bred Muslim,let me tell you those blokes adopted our culture in every way, mum and dad they warned must never know! so but me no buts not every Muslim is a problem, but as a youth I would on my way to work, try to get a seat waay down the back of the bus, see a Christian fanatic, unwanted and unasked would loudly inform us we had a ticket on the bus to hell, it was, a hell of his making, our author is known to push his bent and rusty pram if we want it or not,plenty of room up the back folks spare ear plugs too

Iftikhar,
West must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different.
What & your people don't have to respect others ? Are you unwell ?

We must?the way most see it PC has informed us of much we must do and we Australians have ways of telling the PC brigade what to do with that thought, at the heart of the needless fear building in the west is this, please consider! *we are told we must do this and that, while many Muslims are telling us they will do nothing to help acceptance*

To Belly.

Your last post to me has me a bit confused on your meaning at the end. What do you mean by <*evolution an unavoidable truth*>. Or more or less, what do you mean by it in this conversation? It doesn't seem to be part of the context of separatism or diversity.

You asked why you or anyone else who are nonbelievers should change anything in order to suit a faith. My most simple answer would be to be kind. It is the same charge to give myself about nonbelievers and to other faiths. Why would I or any other person who was Christian change anything in order to suit a different faith, or support a nonbeliever? Because it is a kind thing to offer another person.

My comments to Iftikhar weren't to completely support separatism from society or completely support diversity. There are benefits to both a bit of distance from "problems of society," as well as benefits to a diversity that creates a kind of melting pot of culture. But both of those concepts are different things, and are not diversity. With that in mind I agree with you that diversity should not become a word that means separatism.

(Continued)

(Continued)

With diversity we can share our insights, cultures, and foods, and become more welcoming as a people because we see more differences and are exposed enough to them to be accepting. But with that good stuff, diversity can also b a way to bring in the other stuff you might not want, as well as be a chance to lose your own cultural identity because to many others were adopted or a majority of people of different culture have more exposure then your own culture and it's history or it's customs.

Being completely separate from the culture and community your in I think is only worth it if the community is really that bad. Like if you lived in an area with a strong gang atmosphere in it. Bring separate in that case is good to say out of the trouble that is in that environment, and among those people.

Outside of that, being separate should only be done partially. Live in a world that has elements you don't agree with or don't accept, and distance yourself from those elements only. As well as partial separation for the sake of holding to your heritage and customs is something worth doing also. Possibly to retain a bit of diversity staying different instead of melding together in a cultural melting pot.

The down side is with too much separation people often harden themselves from those they distance themselves from. Forming strong "us versus them" vibes. I think that's what is occurring in Islamic immigrant culture. Leaving their culture of o go to the west were they were taught is mostly evil. So they try to stay as distant as possible and cause a deep rift. It's not something I agree with.

Not now soon, what do I mean? have no doubt I think all faiths all Gods are man made, that we let them ride on our backs tax free, amass massive wealth and try to control our lives,I think if we truly stop the belief our God is the true one the others false we can continue evolving to one day be one people in the end the racism we see here and in other threads feeds on faith in an invented God

Diversity is only good in theory. In practice it is fraught with failure & mayhem. The one good thing I could imagine coming from diversity is that, if people began to start thinking they could eventually see that diversity should include sanity but somehow the Left of every society seems to avoid it at all cost. They make sanity look like something that needs to be villefied so that they can continue their vile ways of indoctrination & exploitation.

individual tomorrow I put aside as market day, have built my garden and supply of useless nick nacks going there, anyone within 100 klm, from my worklife,s end, people from all over the world will be there, selling me dead plants of things to eat, and heaps of useless things I will never use, but it is a walk for a couple of hours in a better world

And since all plants and animals are from God, let's bring all the world's diversity of flora and fauna into every country too.

I see no reason why not. It's all good, it's all God.

Shocadelic ok my country market could do with an extra three thousand bring God,,,all of them,, but bring their money with them

To Belly.

You say all religion is man made. But does that mean all religious and spiritual experiences and events are fake? There's more to the equation then just the stance that all religions are man made. From there my thoughts go to which (if any) religion is right. It is from that search I've come to the conclusions to my own faith. You don't have to agree with my conclusions and my faith, but it seems unreasonable to think all religion (and spirituality within a religion) is man made.

As for the tax free issue. From what I can tell most religions build places of worship that also act as places of refuge. Regardless if the religion is correct or not, in times of natural or man made disaster the places of refuge are a welcome place to have and supported by being tax free. (That and many religions are the means that people are encouraged to go out into the world and help the helpless, be generous, or otherwise make the world a better place).

As for evolving, it doesn't exist. At least not in a social sense. We are the same people with cruelty, corruption, war, and many man made evils as we have ever been. It would be nice to say we are progressing to be better people, but each new generation has to relearn the same lessons that their grand parents or great grand parents learned. Saying that history repeats itself in my opinion is more honest then saying we've evolved. The best we can do is build up cultural structures to protect our future generations. Governments with restrictions on those in power, while still, having the authority and the laws to retain a peaceful presence are one of those social structures. As is family and teachings to be good people (often a main cause in most religions). Even with different government types though we haven't evolved socially. Crime, murder, and serial killers are sill a modern thing. As is greed and corruption.

No Now Soon I believe some force exists that we have not yet fully tapped in to, and it is spiritual, but that no God would bring us in to being, then let over 2000 others exist and claim the credit,just as we talk far differently country to country we invented different Gods, we too exported our God, mostly at the point of weapons evolution its what we teach our kids and know to be true but tuck away on Sundays

Dear NNS,

Since all religions are the product of human action it is ridiculous to deny that all religions are man-made. Please state which religions did not involve humans in their origin.

To Belly.

One thing to distinguish is whether the universe is held by a cosmic and spiritual force, or if it is held together by it's creator, God. Whether we can tap into that force, or whether the things we have and the world itself is a gift of God.

That said though, I'm glad to hear you say you at least believe in a spiritual force. It seems like much of the world is hard pressed to acknowledge at least that much. Even though it seems to be evident in so many ways on too many occasions. Part of my search for God (what true and what's not) started from His answers to prayers.

To David F.

Which religions did not involve humans in their origin. A lot if religions claim that the origin of the story is not with man or with mankind. God created the heaven and the earth sort of thing. The question comes back to if any of those stories are true. Which, if any, are really from God.

However, here is a different thought for you. You say that all religions are the product of human action, so they must be man made. But there are two holes in that line of thought.

First the underlying idea that God doesn't act on His own. If any story from any religion is true about how God or gods intervened with the world then that shows it came from God's actions not man's.

Second, the idea that man created religion can be countered on the premise of a religion's teachings, traditions, laws, celebrations, and rituals were given to man. That they didn't originate from men, but were given to them. This is the premise of a prophet. Giving a message is from God not from men.

From these two points you can look into whether

a) God has intervened in in the world. (Miracles, answered prayers, or in general that God or something intervened type of moments).

And/or

b) Any of the teachings or prophesies from a prophet turned out to be true.

NNS sorry look you should know I think you have only the best in mind for humanity, know too true believers in any faith are the best we have, but surely being part of the 30 percent in this country who put no religion on our census forms I and we have the right to think no God ever existed? if he/she did why let so many others exist, why kill in his/her name? why acts of pedophilia by his/her servents? I refuse to not think as I wish

Dear NNS,

You are free to believe in rubbish for which there is no evidence. For ages humans have controlled other humans by saying that God, Zeus, Apollo or other creations of the human imagination speaks through them. If there was such a thing as a God he, she or it would not need Jesus, Mohammed or any other intermediary. He, she or it could speak to us directly. You are free to believe in rubbish, but more and more humans are becoming aware that it is rubbish. Without an Inquisition or other instruments of control humans are free to reject the rubbish.

To Belly.

Thank you for the encouragement. I've got the impression that my thought and opinions are like a scourge to everyone else here. If that's your thoughts too, I wouldn't be surprised by that anymore. But thank you for the uplifting thoughts that you think I have the best in mind for humanity.

If we are talking about rights, then yes I think you and everyone else has the right to believe what they want and to think as they will. If we are talking about the truth then I would encourage anyone the same way my dad encouraged me when I was younger to investigate on my own about God and what is true and what isn't.

If we go more then that though, there's one more element to the equation. Regardless if my faith is true or not, many people hate the idea of religion being publicly taught, or to have religion shoved down their throats. On the other hand if a certain religion is true and isn't taught it's to the detriment of the community around it that no one goes to and teaches. It is in that light that many Christians feel a calling to save others. The knowledge might be enough to bring a nonbeliever to God and save their soul. I can't say if that's the same motivation from a muslim's point of view, but I have to assume that many who teach, do so because they believe it is good to be an outreach the rest of the community. With that in mind I don't think it's my gift or my calling to save people (hopefully I can still teach though). But in spite of any religion being true or not, there is a dynamic of a need to share the truth and a countering dynamic of those who don't want to hear anything resembling religion or a belief in God.

(Continued)

(Continued)

As for your questions here are my thoughts.

<If he/she did why let so many others exist, why kill in his/her name?>

I don't know why God let do many other false religions come and go. But my best guess is because we are a fallen people, and God allowed our lies about Him or about other gods to be there along with our other lies in the world.

Regarding those who kill in God's name, I don't think I know of anyone who can say they kill because God told them to. In the bible there were times where Israel was at war with the nations in Canaan. In those times I think there are parts where God said to Israel to go to war as an extension of His judgment of the people of Canaan. Outside of that kind of thing, It's my impression that religion has been used to fuel wars by identifying the people as the same people under the same beliefs. However by using religion in that way, I think it's been done in spite of what that religion teaches. My understanding as a Christian is that Jesus said to turn the other cheek, and that there is no teaching to kill in God's name.

<why acts of pedophilia by his/her servents?>

I wish I knew. Best guess is that mankind is a broken people, and a lesson to trust God instead of trusting men. (Not that that teaching is alone, because there's also a teaching that it's wise to have many advisers. But just that we should put the amount of trust we give to God only to God, instead of trusting ministers to be free from corruption or as much evil as the rest of us can be part of). Either way I wish I had a better answer so to cleanse the church from pedophilia and other abuse.

To David F.

Am I free to believe what I want? Or is it your job to try and shove your opinions down my throat?

Conversely you are free to disbelieve in the world around you. In modern day events of people's lives that shed light on a spiritual and supernatural side to the world, you are free to not believe any of it. But it's living in the dark if you can't tell there's something more out there. You're free to believe that way though. Several people do.

I've given you counterpoints to the assertions you gave earlier. There's no need to get ugly and angry as you seem too inclined to do.

david f, if God "spoke" *directly* to people's minds their heads would explode. Hence special intermediaries, who may have evolved to a sufficient level over many reincarnations.

"but more and more humans are becoming aware that it is rubbish"

The particular representational forms of "God" may be inaccurate, but modern science actually postulates that consciousness creates the universe. That's a mighty powerful Consciousness!

Ancient people intuited this, but did not know how to express that, so anthropomorphised it.

It is the materialist universe that is the soon-to-be-extinct outdated belief.

Dear NNS,

You are a human being as I am. I believe you are a sincere human being. We are often at odds and will continue to be at odds. My first awareness of you was when you posted "Hear me out." It was you who wanted to shove your beliefs down other people's throats. I merely reacted to you. Taking exception to your nonsense is not shoving my beliefs down anybody's throat. It is you who claim to be saving people not me. It is you who are concerned about people going to hell if they don't subscribe to your particular brand of nonsense. I believe hell is simply something made up which frightens gullible people. It is not a good thing to frighten gullible people. We will all die, and that will be the end for us. There is no need to be frightened of anything after that.

I like this quote:

Go to heaven for the climate.
Hell for the company. :)

To David F.

Don't try to con me on your feeling of me. I know you don't think I'm sincere or anything else that has a positive attribute. So with respect, cut the BS. Since we've met in these forums, on every conversation I've been in, even ones that have nothing to do with religion, you have tried to shove your views against Christianity down my throat. Trolling me would not be an exaggeration. Conversely, though I've started one conversation to teach a belief, I haven't followed anyone around to repent or go to hell. As far as I'm aware I can talk about multiple subjects without it being reduced to coming back to insults. You on the other hand start out with insults in some of the other conversations. Baring your teeth from the get go in new or old styles of animosity to me or my faith. (Again even when the conversation has nothing to do with my faith or my religion).

If your criticism is for me to not shove my beliefs down your throat, then my reply is two parts. 1) live by your own standards. Don't expect others to act on standards that you don't even try to live up to yourself. 2) Am I allowed to even talk about my faith? If not then it's not about shoving my thoughts down your throat but your attempts to oppress Christians from expressing their beliefs.

On the other hand, going back to a previous point you said, I'm free to believe what I want. In reply I ask am I really free to do so!?

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

You have every reason to be upset with David.

So long as he only criticised your views, your faith or your actions, oh well, this is what this forum is about.

But in his last post, David has crossed a red line by attempting to criticise YOU, falsely claiming that YOU are just an object, specifically a human ("You are a human being as I am.").

Both humans and donkeys are made of essentially the same: bones, flesh and blood, etc. Neither has any value beyond the utilitarian value they possibly happen to have for others, who might use them at pleasure, work them to death, then maybe do something useful with their remains: saying "You are a human" is no different in essence than saying "You are a donkey".

You are not an object! While at present you are using an object, i.e. a human body, to interact with the world and express yourself, this is not you, just a tool that you currently use. We are already suffering enough due to this delusion of identifying ourselves with those human bodies - no need for someone else to come along and try to reinforce and further deepen that delusion in us.

You need not put up with this and you should not discuss anything else with David until he apologises for this grave insult.

Dear NNS,

I am not trying to con you. I think you sincerely believe in your silly, stupid version of Christianity with its hell and its restrictions on sex. Sincerity in itself is not deserving of respect. Just because you are sincere does not mean you are reasonable or right.

Not all Christians believe in hell or have Puritanical attitudes. Catholics such as Hans Kung and Protestants such as Bishop Spong are also sincere Christians, but they do not have your attitudes. I have respect for their version of Christianity. Some Christians have respect for other religions or even for other people who do not believe in religion at all. You only represent a narrow fundamentalism. Fundamentalists are not restricted to Christianity. I find fundamentalism or intolerance unpalatable wherever it appears.

You are free to believe anything you like. However, beliefs can translate themselves into action. Your beliefs about abortion translated into action will bring back the backyard butcher whether you want it or not. In my opinion a world where your beliefs were translated into action would be a worse world than the one we have. Many people including Christians have a more tolerant, open view than you have. "The Scarlet Letter" by Nathaniel Hawthorne describes the world that would result from the adoption of your beliefs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scarlet_Letter

In Australia that world is a world of the past.

To David F.

Three points.

1). You don't have a good grasp of my beliefs or my attitudes. However in your lack of understanding you opportunistically fill in the gaps yourself to turn your ignorance into a running theory that keeps going until it's corrected. With this in mind I ask you to stop reaching past what you don't know. Your not that good at these kinds of conclusions, and it harms the current conversations being discussed to interrupt the subject matter to correct you. Just stop because you aren't good at it. At the very least, that would be more sincere.

2). Based on our conversations in the past I have to now act on the assumption that if you don't reply to a point it means you didn't see it. (Or actively ignored it). So with this in mind the point is worth repeating.

If your criticism is for me to not shove my beliefs down your throat, then my reply is two parts. 1) live by your own standards. Don't expect others to act on standards that you don't even try to live up to yourself. 2) Am I allowed to even talk about my faith? If not then it's not about shoving my thoughts down your throat but your attempts to oppress Christians from expressing their beliefs.

3). Of course our beliefs should affect our actions. If it doesn't then that shows that we didn't actually believe it to begin with. This is not a conversation about abortion, but your stance on that shows your true meaning. People are not free to believe what they want. Your attitudes on free thought is much more oppressive then I think you realize. And that line of thought is in line with this conversation topic of diversity and religion. (Even though abortion isn't on topic. Try to fight that battle in that other discussion, here is a different subject matter).

Dear NNS,

I gather that you're a bit upset when others don't see matters the way you would like them to. I feel the same way.

SMH afternoon edition 24/7/18 a 14 year old *child bride* bought in to this country under a false name! burnt to death after petrol tipped over her, police investigation if it was done to her,but me no but Mr author we will NEVER ACCEPT SUCH PRIMITIVE PRACTICE IN THIS COUNTRY

To Belly.

Only 14 years old? Sad at any age but that is so young. :( May God give her peace after such a horrific death. If this was done to her I hope the perpetrators are caught and put in jail. (Or deported).

To David F.

You do whatever you can to avoid the points I've given you, if that makes this easier for you. As for your criticism of not getting along. That might be a fair point, but in my observations of my attitudes, I would say I get up set when people are rude and disrespectful, or if they are manipulative and deceiving. If they are long conversations I might get tired of my perspectives not being taken into account, especially if I've tried to take theirs into account. But that takes time to lose patience in that way. I can walk away from those conversations and give myself space from those individuals.

As for you, I'd suggest you to not be disrespectful and see if that changes my approach to you. Try not to get so angry when others hold a different view then yours and they don't change it for your sake. If you can avoid being angry yourself, there's a good chance others won't be angry with you (even if your views are different).

Dear NNS,

I don't think you have made any valid points except one. It is good to control anger and not let it master one. It is good to accept whatever external circumstances one encounters and live with it. There are some things we cannot control and other things we can control. If we can tell one from the other and do what we can about the latter we will be better off.

Although I find little in your views to agree with I don't think you are manipulative or deceiving. Perhaps it would be better if I did not have an interchange with you as we have so little common ground. However, If I do respond further to you I will try to do so without anger.

We live in the same world but see it very differently.

David F.

If you can respond without anger or disrespect I would appreaciate it.

Having different views of the world can help broaden our understanding of the world and strengthen our views by challenging them. So we see more of the merit of them through being challenged, or we see the faults in them by being challenged.

It's when it becomes a personal attack that this dynamic is wounded or breaks apart. When I first saw your posts in reply to the topic I started, I thought that this was a civil person willing to discuss their views and others. But after I didn't change my stance, your tone quickly changed to become more aggressive and threw in several forms of a personal attack. I wish I could say that I'm strong enough to turn the other cheek and not reply in the same manner, but that is my struggle. Still working on that.

If this helps or applies to you, here is some advise that has helped me when I was younger. Don't take it as an insult if someone doesn't agree with you. For me that helped me see their perspectives a little clearer and see their merits or faults a little easier. If that would help you, then I recommend it.

Also, just try to be respectful. It's not an attribute earned, it's more often an attribute shared. More often then not people respect those who respect them and disrespect those who disrespect them. In that light to treat others the way you want to be treated puts the first step towards a better relationship, regardless who they are or your different views. Since being treated respectfully is something everyone wants, there's no reason to not give it generousity before it is earned, or shown that they don't deserve it.

Dear NNS,

It is good advice to try to be respectful. However, can one be respectful to the person without being respectful to the person's views? You and I are both human beings and can try to respect one another. I think your religion is horrible. Can I respect you as a person and still think your religion is horrible? Can you accept that?

Yes admit it, my last post was pure emotion, gee I HATE the miss treatment of women and children! not entering in to the men suffer too debate, we know that is true but this is horrific,yes WASPs too do wed children, but this poor kid is a victim of a faith! that makes an art out of harming women and children! goggled the subject and AT LEAST 64 cases are under review! poor fella my country!

Dear Belly,

The legal, marital age in some states of the US is quite low.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_marriage_in_the_United_States

In 19 states there is no minimum age, and children of any age can be legally married.

Yes banning of abortion creates some problems but also so does the opposite. Generally John Stuart Mill on Liberty makes sense. However allowance of abortion could create a lack of responsibility with respect to sexual behavior. When the policy of sex is for children and marriage there is no doubt of the responsibilities of the different parties. Also the power dynamic between the sexes of child birth is more equalized. It comes down to a balance of rights and power- the right of the woman, the right of the stable society, the sexual needs of humans, the rights for children to be wanted, etc. I'm reluctant to dismiss the experience of a thousand years by the churches as madness and patriarchy.

david f yes true does that make it right? or just remind us even pre Trump America had its share of hillbilly idiots? wrong in any culture and proves some of us have not yet evolved

Dear Belly,

Of course it doesn't make it right, and it is part of hill-billy Christian, fundamentalist culture, but I was just pointing out some flaws in my culture. As I am a US citizen it is my culture. It is my country that elected Trump president. At the moment I am very concerned at the condition of my country. I am more worried about the state of my country than I am about Islam. I am more worried about the self-righteous Christian ignorance than I am about Islam. I think it is more reasonable to be concerned about what is in Australia and in the US and recognise the dangers here and there. Some Islamic practices are abhorrent, but we should recognise our own flaws. To me Pauline Hanson, Corey Bernardi and the gang around them are a great danger to democracy and our continued presence in an enlightened world.

I did not know that david f would love to know more, my hopes and dreams are for America's youth the anti gun/mass shooting drive fills me with pride in them,this country in my youth worshipped at the feet of your country maybe we got that wrong but Trump? America PTY LTD has a need for it heart to start beating again

Dear Belly,

I have an Australian wife. When I retired in 1987 she asked me if I would come to Australia. She came to the USA for me, and I came to Australia for her. I am 92 and expect to be around a bit longer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Williams

"Williams was expelled by the Puritan leaders from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for spreading "new and dangerous ideas", and he established the Providence Plantations in 1636 as a refuge offering what he called "liberty of conscience"."

Providence Plantations, later called Rhode Island, was the first unit of government anywhere in the world with separation of religion and state. Williams' ideas have been incorporated in the US Constitution, and I am proud of that as I am about many things in the US. If you want to communicate directly send me your email via Graham Young.

To David F.

Yes you can be respectful, even to those you don't respect their ideals. Being fair and being kind are all that is needed to be respectful, and you can do you this to anyone.

Since you are 92 I would expect you to have the experience to show respect to those you don't get along with, or don't agree with. Being respectful to a boss because he or she is your boss. Being respectful to a plumber, an electrician or anyone else you hire to work for you, because they are doing a service for you. Some possibly doing what you are not knowledgable to do on your own. Being respectful to a kid, because even if they are acting up, they are just a kid, so being fair and kind is what should be done (even when it comes to discipline).

I am none of these things to you, but those kinds of examples I'm sure are in your life and should give you the skills to be respectful to anyone.

(Continued)

(Continued)

Watch yourself. When we first met here before you knew me you barred your teeth with disrespect, before you came to hear my beliefs and ideals you filled in the blanks for what my ideals are as an excuse to show more disrespect. You hated me for two reasons and two reasons alone. That I am Christian, and that I shared my faith in this forum. Now we've talked in other conversations and you can say you know a bit better my views, (you still fill in the gaps on your own though so again watch yourself), so with a little more knowledge you can claim you know me well enough to hold back your respect. However since you did this from the beginning I see no merit in that.

I have no respect for you either, but it isn't because of your beliefs. I doubt I will ever agree with you on many things, but it is because of your behavior that I can not respect you. For me, being fair is what I focus on when relating to you. Your unkindness makes it a struggle to be kind in return. I can be fair though, and avoid going down the same paths of belittling that you explore in your vendetta against Christianity that I have become a focus for to you.

Watch yourself and your actions. See if you can agree with what you do. If not make note of it, and change to be the man you would respect in other people.

I say this last part because regardless if they are things I do or don't do, your criticisms of me are the things I see you do yourself. I can not easily respect a person who holds a crooked scale, and measures others by standards they don't care to hold up on their own. By your own criticisms measure yourself. By your own ideals watch yourself. Be better then you've been, regardless of respect, because you've held me at a higher standard to live by then you hold yourself to.

david f 72 is my age but in truth feel much younger you at any time, can get my e mail from GY my formal education is not much but my determination to learn has served me well, my country, like yours, is better for its diversity, much better but that word has been used here and in other places to forget respect for the hosting country and its customs is a need if it is to work, a day must and will, come when no faith will be able to tell us who should govern and how they govern regards

Dear NNS,

I have no vendetta against Christianity. It is a faith that has inspired many people to greatness in art and in philosophy. I object to your type of fundamentalism which believes in hell and has a puritanical fear of sexuality. That type of religion as I have pointed out is not restricted to Christianity.

I respect plumbers and electricians because they are doing something useful and needed unlike many missionaries who have served the needs of imperialism.

Dear Belly,

Graham will forward emails. I don't think he will give out email addresses.

To David F.

You say you are ok with Christianity. Just not my version of Christianity. But I think you are against any form of Christianity that people feel worth while to share. Namely to express anything Christian is enough to be counted as a missionary. After all the only thing I expressed was that knowing God and focusing on Him makes people better then they were before.

What is Christian if that isn't? Yet right away you called me out as a missionary. A term only because I shared a Christian understanding to a mixed group.

From my estmate the only Christian you would be ok with us a silent Christian, who never shares their faith with anyone. Lock the Christian doors inside you, and hide it from the rest of the world. That's the only kind of Christianity you would be ok with.

So here's my challenge. Look at the first conversation we were in, and tell me how my form of Christianity is a missionary form. If all you've got is that I shared my version of Christianity then no that basically says your against any version of Christianity. Here's a link to that conversation. Yours is the second post, already going into your views against missionaries. What did I say in the first post that was so missionary?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106

...or on second thought. Scrap it all. Forget any of this. You were probabley right before when you said:

<Perhaps it would be better if I did not have an interchange with you as we have so little common ground.>

That might have to be my choice as well. I'll avoid you. And if we meet again, I'll just keep my mouth shut. Tell whatever lies you want about me or my view. After all you, you know it so well.

But regarding anything else. I'll still voice my views, and my understanding.

Dear NNS aka undead human,

You are pretty good with the insults calling me a liar. I won't insult you in turn. I believe you are utterly sincere in your beliefs. I just question the worth of those beliefs. I watch my language. You are an undead human. Someday you and I will both be corpses. However a fetus is not an unborn baby. It may or may not develop into a baby. you and are potential corpses, but we are not undead corpses as there is no such thing as a undead corpse or an unborn baby.

Actually I know you pretty well as you have told me much about yourself. You have told me you know very little about other religious beliefs, and yet you are sure your belief is the true one. I think that attitude condemns you more than any words of mine can.

I live among Christians as I live in a retirement village called Prins Willem Alexander Village which was set up for the Dutch community. Most of the residents are either Dutch Reform or Catholics. One resident used to work for Billy Graham before he retired. In retirement he is a chaplain at a local hospital. I have not met any who has expressed themselves in the way you have. No one has tried to convince me of the truth of their beliefs. We are all old people who live and let live. I am happy here and will probably die here. It is not a sexual hotbed as we are all old. however, I have nobody worrying about the sexual activities of younger people. The old people here including me get visited by their younger descendants who are all products of sexual activity as far as I know.

David F. Though you have never had anyone try to convince you of their beliefs, have you tried to convince anyone else that their beliefs are the evil of the world. A thing of gunboats and imperialism?

Take it into account that I stood up to your assertions and tried to defend my faith. Perhaps that was a wrong approach. When I started the conversation from before all I wanted to do is share my understanding. Expecially since I've seen so many mis understand or misrepresent Christians. I did not think the idea of loving God was potent enough a topic to be attacked as hard as it was while also be entirely avoided as a subject.

I will try not to be angry with you, but for now there is no reason for me to be near you. Enjoy your retirement home, and the friends you have there.

NNS wrote: "Though you have never had anyone try to convince you of their beliefs, have you tried to convince anyone else that their beliefs are the evil of the world. A thing of gunboats and imperialism?"

Dear NNS,

I have been approached quite a few times by religious missionaries of various sorts. JWs and Mormons have come to my door. People have stopped me in the streets to give me pamphlets. Once I picked up a hitchhiker, and he started in on his faith.

I have never come to anybody's door, stopped people in the street or in other ways tried to convince people of anything who have not first
approached me. When you started a string on the net asking people to hear you out you were just one of a long line.

That missionaries have been agents of imperialism is simply historical fact.

//Yes you can be respectful, even to those you don't respect their ideals. Being fair and being kind are all that is needed to be respectful, and you can do you this to anyone.//

Aww, that's cute. A lecture on respect from the chap who's approach to respectful debate is to start dishing out personal attacks when people enquire about his moral convictions. XD

Get your hand off it, mate. You're fooling nobody but yourself.