Jose'

Update on the nutter who lit the fire at Old Parliament House. Yes he is aboriginal, but he is also a member of the extreme "Sovereign Citizen" movement, believing no laws white or black apply to him. Disowned by mainstream aboriginal protest, he took it upon himself to act as he did. No sooner bailed, and he's back behind bars for breaking bail conditions.

Dear Paul,

I think in order to have any kind of democracy there must be separation of religion and state. I was shocked when I learned that Australian taxpayers actually support religious schools, and such matters as employment and social service agencies are managed by religious groups and funded by the government. It seems to me a violation of S. 116 of the Australian Constitution. I also think the Westminster System is undemocratic. Not only should there should be separation of religion and state, but there should be separation of judicial, executive and legislative powers. In Australia the executive is part of the legislature. The Westminster system in Australia and the electoral college in the US are both undemocratic. However, it is not as undemocratic as China which doesn't have a choice of parties. In any system which has any sort of representative government I believe there will arise a political class. The United States was originally set up with the idea that there should be no political parties and no political class. That only lasted for the first president.

If the government is dealing with secular issues of State like water, food, energy transport, security etc then religion is not involved.

If Government is administering ideas, attitudes, and social behaviours then religion is involved. It means Government is entering a person's life with areas of control. It means we have reached the point when Governments want to control ideas, attitudes and social behaviours which runs into conflict with personal religious views.

Western Governments is joining communism by removed the democratic right of a persob to freedom of ideas, and social attitudes; this area is being pushed by the cmmunists in the community to equalise all persons and remove any shame, guilt or inadquacy, to uphold one view and that is decided by the elite.

Dear Josephus,

The communist governments were not for separation of religion and state. The communist governments pushed atheism. Separation of religion and state means that a person's religion or lack of religion is not the business of government. The first person to use the phrase, separation of church and state, was Roger Williams, a Baptist minister. He headed the Rhode Island colony which was the first unit of government anywhere in the world which had separation of chuch and state as an official policy.

From Barry, John M, Roger Williams and The Creation of the American Soul, NY: Viking (Penguin), 2012

"The Bay's leaders, both lay and clergy, firmly believed that the state must enforce all of God's laws, and to do so the state had to prevent error in religion. This conviction they held fast to, for their souls and all the souls in Massachusetts plantation depended upon it.

Williams recognized that putting the state to that service required humans to interpret God's law. His views were not fully formed-how Massachusetts dealt with him would itself influence their formulation-but he believed that humans, being imperfect, would inevitably err in applying God's law. Hence, he concluded that a society built on the principles that Massachusetts espoused could at best only lead to hypocrisy, for he believed that forced worship "stinks in God's nostrils." At worst it would lead to a corruption not of the state which was already corrupt, but of the church, as it befouled itself with the state's errors. His understandings were edging him toward a belief he would later call "Soul Libertie." pp. 3-4

Williams was probably mindful of the persecution of Baptists by the Church of England.

Separation of religion and state is a democratic, not a communist idea.

David, I agree that the State should not get involved in religion, but it should be left to society, education, and the Church. The Church should not operate as a State instution but the wisdom of the educated community. It has been unfortunate that the Roman State got involved in religion and Later the English State, though one flowed from the other.

Government education should only be involved in dealing with secular issues of the State like water, food, energy transport, security etc then religion is not involved.

Dear Josephus,

A member of the community may or may not be religious. It is up to each individual to decide for him or herself. Most often a person follows the religion of parents. Government should simply be neutral.

S. 116 of the Australian Constitution states:

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

In my opinion the Constitution is violated by government support for religious schools.