The Coalition's religious discrimination bill
passes after an all-night sitting despite
some Liberal moderates defecting to help add more
extensive protections for LGBTQ students.

The bill is now to be voted on in the Senate.

Apparently this bill has caused a great deal of controversy.
I thought it would be interesting to discuss it on the
forum

What are your feelings regarding this bill?

Perhaps I had the wrong end of the stick, but I thought that religionists and their views were to be protected; but the Bill seems to be more a weapon against Christian (mainly) organisations who will be stopped from discriminating against certain minorities - i.e people acting in an Un-christian manner in their private lives and in public, but still wanting to attend - say a Christian school for example. It's one thing to accept that people can be, do or say what ever they want: entirely another to expect others to bite the bullet and accommodate them. Never has it been truer that rights for one person are lost in the name of rights for another.

People who are not Christians don't need to abide by Christian dogma; but neither should they expect to take advantage of Christian schools, Christian employers, etcetera.

I've got to admit that I'm a bit confused as far
as this bill is concerned and if anyone can explain
it in full, I'd be grateful.

People should not be discriminated against on the
basis of their faith, gender, sexuality, race,
and so on. But legislation has to be workable,
and I'm not sure who or what this legislation protects.

Does this legislation support non-discrimination against
one group without discrimination against another group?
Is it fair to every one?

I have no idea.

The idea behind this bill is both wrong and ridiculous.

Wrong - because private people and their [truly-]private organisations ought to be able to freely choose whom they associate with, for whatever reason (good, bad or none). While it is true that people ought to not discriminate against others without good reasons, so long as all they do is to refuse to associate with them and do not hurt them otherwise, that should remain a matter for their own conscience, not for the state.

Ridiculous - because no police/judge can ever tell whether a given behaviour was religious or otherwise. Suppose for example that someone is discriminated against for scratching their nose: they could well claim that scratching their nose was a religious act and indeed, under certain circumstances that could even be true! What if someone was sent home because they wore pajamas for school, could it be claimed for certain that their wearing pajamas was not a religious act? under certain circumstances it could well be!

I am glad that this law did not pass the senate.
No human law can protect religion - only God can and indeed does protect His devotees.

The legislation hasn't passed both houses and almost certainly won't before the election.

There is in this bill a rather absurd idea of protecting something
that does not exist.
I am refering to the protection of Tans people.
It is scientifically impossible for transition male to female or reverse to exist !
There is no way you can change every cell in your body from xy to xx or reverse.
So we have legislation that insists you have changed all your billions of Chromosomes. !
Why not a bill to protect the Bunyip ?

Channel 9 News tells us that the Morrison
government has passed the religious discrimination
bill in the House of Representatives following a
marathon overnight debate.

However, they add that it is looking unlikely
that the federal government will fulfil an
election promise to legislate the bill before
Australia heads to the polls, after the draft laws were
sensationally dropped from the Senate agenda.

At one stage 5 Liberal backbenchers crossed the floor
to vote with Labor and the crossbench on a change to
the law designed to protect students being expelled
because of their sexuality or gender identity.

This all sounds like there's a complexity of issues that
need debating and therefore they won't be
solved anytime soon. Rightly or wrongly.

Some people say - actions not words are needed here.
But if the issues are complex - isn't it right that
more debating takes place rather than passing legislation
that will do even more harm?

Dear Bazz,

I'm not sure how transgender works.
I thought it's people who were born into
the wrong body. Are you saying that's not
possible?

This bill was simply an attempt to level the score as payback for the gay marriage legislation and is supposed to address a problem that doesn't exist under current law.

Once again the church shows itself to be totally obsessed by sex in whatever form it takes and needs to assert itself as the sole proprietor of the guilt and shame industry it represents.

The limited remaining Parliamentary time would have been better spent on something worthwhile but seeing the government clumsily wedge itself was somewhat entertaining.

A terrible piece of unwanted legislation supposedly designed to protect the rights of the religious, but at the same time giving them the right to discriminate against minorities.

THIS MOB JUMPED THE GUN

Recently here in Brisbane the so called Christian school, Citipointe, demanded parents sign a contract which would allow the school to expel students it identified as homosexual and/or trans-gender. The contract lumped these students in with paedophiles and those engaging in bestiality and incest, according to the school there is no difference between such people.

A petition of 155,800 signatures, including those of most school parents condemned the contract. The fruitcake who drew up the contract school principle Pastor Brian Mulheran is now on extended leave in Hell. This kind of thing is what the Morrison legislation would legitimize, hate, bigotry, stigmatized and segregated.

The thing has been shelved, due to hijacking by woke weirdos and the Left, including 5 such creatures from the government side. That’s something that could not happen in the Labor party. If there is no party discipline, there might as well be no party. Morrison has made a fool of himself again.

Bring on Dutton. Now! No more of these nonsensical attempts to please miserable minorities who don't like you or vote for you no matter how much you kowtow to them.

Let's get back to a normal, free existence where their are differences, but with the 'different' taking responsibility for themselves and not expecting the majority to do it for them.

I guess we'll have to see how this all pans out
after the election.

Seriously, would any religious person here want to be served by someone who despises their religion, who would otherwise tell them to leave their premises, but only serves them in fear of authorities?

Same for atheists: suppose you went to a hairdresser, a baker, a chiropractor, a [non-subsidised, truly] private school or a private tutor for your child, etc. and they told you: "Get out, you are not a Christian/Muslim/Buddhist" - would you then tell them: "provide me with your services or I call the police"? Would you even be comfortable receiving their services either due to making such threats or after the police came and forced them to provide it?

Yuyutsu,

You've raised some very valid points.

Of course we can only speak for ourselves and what
we would do. People as individuals think and behave
differently. Laws are supposed to treat us all
equally - but of course the reality is often very
different.

Regular morning commentator, Terry Barnes, wonders why people identifying as gay, etc, etc, make up only about 3% of the population, but they dominate almost all of our media time, "splitting and potentially destroying" governments, with shouty activists denigrating and excoriating 97% of the population.

Many, if not most, of the 97% are concerned about it too, and we had damn well better do something about it at the coming election.

Yeah, the next election is going to be a difficult
choice. At present I'm not sure who I'll vote for.
I'm still weighing up all the options. I'm not too
thrilled with either of the two major parties.
Although I'm leaning towards the Coalition at present.

NB. The incumbent government threw something away that took lawyers 3 years to perfect. True conservatives need to preference genuine conservative candidates at the next election with a view to those candidates having the balancd of power over whatever mess gains government - loopy Left
Liberal, or Green Labor.

The conservative candidates that I like are members
of the Coalition.

Fortunately, the Senate saw the problems of the bill as amended by the Labor Party and five coalition supporting the Labor amendments and it has been shelved.

It was supposed to protect religious and scientific/ biological opinion, but it did the very opposite and protected perversions of natural science and allowed legal action to be taken by LGBTQRS against people expressing their beliefs.

It catered to the hostilities of the Paul's of this world to show hate and disgust but closed the mouths of the people of faith to express their facts. Students from the school have been vilified by Gay prrotesters outside the school which has led to the withdrawal of the enrolement by the principal. Gays are alowed to express hate of Christians but not people of faith who believe there are only two genders - male and female.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/some-of-our-students-have-been-vilified-citipointe-christian-college-retracts-contract-20220203-p59ti0.html

Paul made his hate filled statement, "The fruitcake who drew up the contract school principal Pastor Brian Mulheran is now on extended leave in Hell. This kind of thing is what the Morrison legislation would legitimize, hate, bigotry, stigmatized and segregated'.

"The conservative candidates that I like are members
of the Coalition".

If you like them, they aren't conservatives, Foxy. There is no conservatism in Australian politics today, just varying shades of socialism, which is right up your alley. Stick to your socialism/progressiveism, which is your natural default position. Whatever you feel is best for you; but don't fall for the current myth that there is anything conservative about the Coalition. There are a couple of lonely conservatives left, but they are no longer on the quarter deck. Since John Howard, the Liberal Party has gone so far to the left that it is unrecognisable to conservative voters. Time for them to go, and hopefully, for people like me, regroup as a valid right of centre alternative to the Labor party, which I have come to believe, will do no more damage than will the Liberals, whose only hope would have been economic management, but they have blown that now, too, as well as everything else, under the worst Prime Minister since Billy McMahon: even worse than Rudd and Gillard. Cheers.

If you are educating Christian children in the facts of biological science, you will teach them the facts there is only male and female and why this is so in human bioliogy. It is a part of human reproduction and can only happen naturally in that combination and that is the prime reason marriage is important for family.

Of course, for me to now state that is discriminatory as the term is now applied to two people of the same gender. However, that is not how we teach biology and human reproduction at school. The 3% of the population now want inclusion in the acceptable science of human reproduction, which is not science but a perversion of science.

Thanks for explaining ttbn.
I appreciate it.

Foxy said;
I'm not sure how transgender works.
I thought it's people who were born into
the wrong body. Are you saying that's not
possible?

Who said it works ?
Born into the wrong body ? What twins and they got mixed up ?
Well you see it is like this; when the male brings his DNA into; well
I am sure you must understand that.
If a child says he/she is in the wrong body, then I suggest a child
physiologist might be needed and then a physical demonstration of what
the difference is between mummy and daddy.
Such ideas of wrong body is a mental state and probably needs some
sort of reorientation.

Dear Bazz,

Transgender people have apparently existed since the
beginning of time.
Today they're becoming more visible and are speaking
out. It's something that some of us reject. Others
are trying to learn about the problems involved
and are trying to understand.

I remember reading about the friend of former PM
Tony Abbott - who was in the armed forces as a male
and then ended up transing into a female. I can't
remember the name. I'll have to look it up.

Dear Bazz,

I found it. It's transgender military officer -
Cate McGregor.

Here's the link:

http://theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/apr/08/transgender-officer-says-tony-abbott-deserves-more-credit-for-supporting-her

It's worth a read.

Hi Bazz,

Does that include SHOCK TREATMENT?

Hi Foxy,

I have some very good gay friends in Sydney, my youngest son is gay, been to birthday parties where trans folk have been in attendance, never thought to ask anyone what made them what they were, just as I don't ask heterosexual people why they are so, I just accept people for who and what they are.

My really good gay couple friends, we four have sat around, and over a few drinks have discussed their lives and ours. They both had difficulties growing up, which given the loving and caring folk they are, they never deserved the treatment that was dished out to them by uncaring bigoted people, even some family.

Do I have some funny stories about us four. We are such good friends we can talk openly to each other about anything.

Religious Discrimination Bill Passes.
Does that, hopefully, mean that the nonsense associated with religion has now also passed ?

There are elements in society that see anything goes in sex relations and that behaviour violates a Christian conscience and scientific World view.

The Worlds criterion is: if it feels natural it is OK, and currently some are pushing peadophilia and insest as natural among some cultural communities. It has been the influence of Christianity in Western society that has placed restraint, guilt, and shame on those practises; and sanctioned sex exclusively to within married adults.

The entertainment industry is playing everything of a sexual nature as normal behaviour. The Public School system is grooming children for social perversions of sex and gender from six years of age and hiding it from parents.

Christian educators wish to return to the values taught by the Bible and support family values rather than perverted social structures as determined by Marxism.

Jose'

How lucky we are that Christian schools are not crawling with paedophiles.

BTW, you never have said how many paedophiles have been uncovered in your church.

The passage of this Bill will create more problems that it solves.

I bet the Moslems love it.

Watch this space.

I hope that this Bill never again raises its ugly head. How about we have a little trust in most Australians to act thoughtfully and decently without being told to by more and more legislation. Most of us do act that way.

Division are caused by a few loudmouths and jump-on-any-bandwagon politicians like Scott Morrison.

Paul, I would think that in the Churches I attend that probably the percentage of peadophiles would be about the same as in the community. They are human too. Though I know of none myself in the Churches I attend. Though in the community I have known a few, and while attending public school in the 40 - 50 several students into fornication, incestuous and one girl into beastiality.

However, the bible teaches "Thou shalt not have lust in your heart." "Thou shall not comit adultery." Priests hearing these sexual confessions from parisners are triggered off to commit homosexual, peadophile and adultery. They are vunerable and tempted by weakness.

Hi ttbn,

We trusted the Catholic cleargy and other religious to look after our children in their schools and church's. What did they do with that trust, buggered the boys and raped the girls.

Talking with a female friend a while back, in her 60's now, she matter of factly told us how as a young primary aged girl, her sister and friends were sexually molested at Catholic convent school by the parish priest, never reported, never prosecuted.

Quite frankly I am relieved that the bill did not
pass in its current form. Hopefully sometime in
the future they will come up with a bill that will
be acceptable an supported by all without discriminating
any side. At the moment this was not the case and therefore
it failed badly. It needs more work.

The Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner has stated that Citipointe Christian College was vandelised and the principal received death threats. The extreme hatred of Christian values is promoted by the marxist Media and excites violence which they see as social justice.

The Bill which was supposed to protect the freedom of Christians to teach the values of the Bible was amended by the Labor and Greens and five coalition - Dave Sharma, Fiona Martin, and Katie Allen, Trent Zimmerman, Ms McQueen supported in the lower House and failed to protect Christians against this vitriol. Even as Paul was able to vilify the principal with his ignorant tirade.

Josephus,

I think that many politicians felt the bill was
not a fair one. Hopefully it will be amended to
a position where it will be acceptable to all -
not just a select few.

Jose'

Pastor Mulheran managed to vilify himself with his bigoted hateful contract. The school gate protest was peaceful and did not direct anger at any students. Parents were at the protest.

Glad you recognised all that religious pontificating doesn't make a scrap of difference to the number of pedophiles in the congregation. According to you the number of rock spiders sitting in church with you is at the same level as the general community, they mustn't be listening. Given the level of pedophilia exposed in churches, I'd say it probably a great deal higher than the general community.

"Hearing these sexual confessions from parishioners (cleargy) are triggered off to commit homosexual, pedophile and adultery, vulnerable (cleargy) tempted by weakness."

JOSE' WHAT A RIDICULOUS STATEMENT. Minimization and victim blaming. What is the name of your screwball church? I'll do some research.

And we may hope that in the tolerant future politicians will be allowed a free vote on all matters and that a member of, say, Labor will be freely and publicly allowed to espouse Liberal doctrine.
Why keep such good principles only for religion?

The politicians are allowed to cross the floor
at any time now. They can vote according to their
conscience - and many have done so in the past.
Usually not from the Coalition though. This was a
rare move this time and those five who did are to
be congratulated. Hopefully more will have the guts
to do so in the future.

Foxy in the Liberal and National parties members can cross the floor
and vote against their party as allowed by party rules.
However it is not the same in the Labour party.
Cross the floor and vote against the party and you are out of the party.
I don't know about the greens & others.

As far as I'm aware, Labor politicians have never been allowed a conscience vote, and crossing the floor would result in dismissal from the party. I posted this recently, and suggested that it is high time for the Coalition to exert the same discipline on its MPs. If they don't like the party line, they can go independent.

It might not always have been thus.

Figures show that between 1950-2019, Coalition MPs made 96.8% of the crossings, Labor 3.1%.

Whatever, it shows that it is not "unusual" for the Coalition, as you suggest, Foxy. The ALP is much more disciplined than the Liberals are. And this is probably why the bed-wetting Liberals who crossed the floor on this occasion chose to join the Liberal Party rather than the Labor party. They want to be Lefties, but they want to do what they feel like doing at the time. It's always been a surprise to me that the Liberals have been in government at all since John Howard, given the number of slack Lefties infesting it now. I suppose there are still enough people voting the way mummy and daddy did. They have certainly kicked my conservative arse off the block.

We had a so called Australian Conservative Party at the last Federal election, ttbn was a member. They scored less than half a percent of the popular vote, and then disappeared up their own arse, leaving the mug punter members out of pocket. Most of these members left out in the cold are now sniffing about the Palmer Party or One Nation.

Well it looks like I don't know as much as I thought
I did about the two major parties.

I have always assumed conscience votes were allowed on
both sides of politics. At least they should be allowed.

Hi Foxy,

The gay marriage vote in Federal parliment was a conscience vote. They are rear but they do happen from time to time.

Can a Green MP publickly espouse the use of fossil fuelled power stations?
Can a member of The Conservation Society publicly push for the culling of koalas?
Can a member of the Kiata Country Club say that their members must wear clothes at all times?
Can a biker drive a Rolls Royce to a club rally?

Should a religious organization be allowe to expel a person who denies, publicly that there is a God?

Can Elephant Bob from the Shooters and Hooters Party turn veggie and start living on carrot sticks?

Issy I have bad eyes, but what's your excuse. Did you get to shoot a few Boers.

"Should a religious organization be allowe to expel a person who denies, publicly that there is a God?"

Should a person who publicly denies that there is god be in a religious organisation in the first place? Anyone that silly should expect to be kicked out. I don’t understand why an atheist would want to have anything to do with a religious organisation.

However, if the organisation is a Christian school, it is very unlikely that an atheist would be kicked out. The Catholic system my wife taught in didn't insist on staff being Catholic or even Christian. They accepted Muslim students. There is nothing in the Bible to say they shouldn't.

However, the big deal now seems to be homosexuality and transgenderism - which is dealt with in the Bible, and is a sin. People who complain and shout 'discrimination' to any objections Christians might have behaviour which conflicts with their faith are actually expecting those Christians to to deny their faith. What a bloody cheek!

ttbn,
Big plus.

Paul,
I came home a bit early but the score for the ten shooters was 1027 yesterday,
two of the granddaughters hunted for the first time on their own, just turned 18 and got their full licences.
We didn’t count piglets only ones big enough to fend for themselves.

Unless the Bill gives equal right to every citizen to express their belief it has failed. As it currently stands people like Paul1405 can vilify Christians and encourage hate against Chtistians with immunity and he does not have to stand before a Judge and prove the verasity of his statements. He knows nothing of the character of the principal yet vilifys him publicly.

This is an example of character defamation worthy of a trial to have Paul prove his words. This Forum is a public platform and can be accessed by anyone.

Bazz: However it is not the same in the Labour party. Cross the floor and vote against the party and you are out of the party.

Yes, a very Socialist & Marxist approach. The same sort of Rules apply to the Communist Party in China. Only there you most likely get shot.

Is Mise: Can a member of the Kiata Country Club say that their members must wear clothes at all times?

That should be "Mustn't" Been there. Nice place.

ttbn: I don’t understand why an atheist would want to have anything to do with a religious organisation.

A jobs a job. Ay.

Dear Ttbn,

«Should a person who publicly denies that there is god be in a religious organisation in the first place? Anyone that silly should expect to be kicked out. I don’t understand why an atheist would want to have anything to do with a religious organisation.»

Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOl7rLQtkho

Sticking with religion, would the members of the local Mosque be expected to allow an openly homosexual to teach in their school?

Good luck trying to make them adhere to inclusive rules.

No law can define "religion" anyway.

Nobody in their private capacity should be forced by the whip of the law to associate with others they do not wish to associate with - and no reason(s) need be given.

Public affairs are different of course. If one operates on behalf of a public body or receives public support of any kind, then of course the public may also set conditions for that support.

How can a so-called "religious" school accept public funds anyway while its own religious tenets clearly state "thou shalt not steal"?

Yuyutsu,
Because the parents of the pupils pay taxes and because by having their own schools they save the Government money, as was once demonstrated in the City of Goulburn , in NSW, closure of the local Catholic schools saw the Government in the embarrassing position of suddenly having more pupils than it had schools.
The lesson was learned.

Dear Is Mise,

I would assume that the word of God, should one truly believe that a given tenet is, is absolute and non-negotiable, so no corner-cutting is acceptable!

If one knowingly accepts even a cent that was taken from others against their will, and let's face it, even if most Australian pay their taxes willingly, there are at least some who do so against their will and their taxes too are in the mix, then they break the seventh commandment.

Jose'

I stand by what I said about Pastor Mulheran, he vilified himself with his bigoted hateful contract. The way he seen fit to liken homosexual students, and there are several at the school, to paedophiles etc was disgusting.

Issy,

What happened in Goulburn, did they lock up all the rock spiders and the Catholics had to close their schools.

Yuyutsu,
Grow up.

Paul,
The usual antis were chanting that Government schools could educate all the children so the Bishop of Goulburn closed the local Catholic schools and the kids turned up at the State schools and the Government got the message.

Paul, you can open a school of your character values and demand paid up Marxist communists only attend who support homosexuality and gender dysporia and all types of sexual perversions. You are that type of character, but if a school has a teaching that they do not want sexual perverts to avoild conflict within the school and its teaching they have a right to set the rules.

Hi Issy,

I have no problem with private schools, funding wise, and education wise. Our 2 moko's (grandchildren) here in Brisbane go to Catholic high schools, the education is first class. I must say the back to school costs are just ridiculous. Step daughter sent me a copy of the uniform list for our girl going into year 11 (senior high). No joke its $1,000 for all new gear, and not including fees etc. Plus wants to do a one day a week course at college on top of school. If the wife and I didn't put in they would be in real trouble financially, even with 2 good jobs.

PS. kids have pocket money jobs as well, plus sports, plus social life, all costs money. GD is looking at a car soon, she asked me already if I would like to own half a car. I said which half, the costly half?

All education should be private and out of reach of government,bureaucratic ideologues and extreme Left unions. Not all private education is 'toffee' and expensive. Vouchers for parents to choose a school in place of direct taxpayer money to schools has been suggested - and ignored by the power-crazed - many times.

In the meantime, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, you name it, must be allowed to practise their faiths and beliefs without activists trying to bullying them into denying their faiths just to suit said activists who, if they wish, can call themselves whatever they want to; identify as something they patently are not - but they cannot expect other people to agree with, accept them into a group they don't believe in, or change the laws and established moral behaviour of societyto suit their miserable minority.

This is what God does in an atheist's life.
http://www.prageru.com/video/stories-of-us-adrienne-johnson

Been reading up on some of the early Christian sects, You think some modern Christian have some wacko beliefs.

One example The Phibionite Christians

"After dining, married couples begin to have sex, each with another member. The man, however, has to withdraw before climax, so that he and his partner can collect the semen and ingest it together, saying, “This is the body of Christ.” Leaders of the sect who have already reached perfection can perform the rite with a member of the same sex. There is also sacred masturbation, where one can take the body of Christ in the privacy of one’s room."

Dear Paul,

Interesting account - I was not previously aware of Phibionite Christians.

What is it then that you are trying to say in terms of this very thread?

Are you perhaps implying that the state should ban and persecute such Christians or discriminate against them?

Only God knows what is in their heart and only a prophet (and I don't claim to be one) could perhaps tell whether or not their practices are indeed religious. I warned time and again that no law, no police, no judge could ever distinguish between true religious actions and pretenders [unless they employed prophets in the public service, which is not feasible in this day and age].

This is why no state law should ever even mention "religion", simply because they have no way to define it. This is also why there should be as few and as liberal laws as possible because only that can prevent/minimise situations where state-laws oppress religion.

Hi Yayutsu,

No way, as I read it the PHIBIONITE CHRISTIANS were not harming anyone. Why would I want to ban, persecute or discriminate against them.

Previously Jose' put up the PURITAN CHRISTIANS as an example of " Good Godly Christians". Then I pointed out the PURITANS committed genocide against the Native Americans and murdered other Christians, the QUAKERS, those guys I'd have an issue with. BTW Jose' never came back to defend these " Good Godly Christians", I can only assume he approves of their actions.

Paul, my previous point was - do religious people have the rights to practise their religion unhindered? i.e Jews in Israel? I never approved of any religious doctrine or behaviour.

The tennets of Christ teaching strongly condemn murder, adultry and lust which you seem to think is christian behaviour. If you want to find what is true Christian behaviour read the New Testament and notice the values it addresses, instead of what pseudo christians are supposed to have done. People are basicly evil and you seem to delight in the evil of people. Check out the link I gave, God is in the business of cleaning up lives.

Hi Jose'

"do religious people have the rights to practise their religion unhindered?"

Absolutely, providing they do no harm to others, including members of the religion. That was not the case at Citiponte Christian College where Pastor Mulheran acted in a most un-christian way with a hateful contract. He sought to vilify a small number of students because of their sexuality. In my opinion, and that of many others, including Christian parents of the school, that was wrong.

Paul - again you are wrong, the school did not want any form of sexual soliciting in the school and true gays do not know their preferences till adult. They did not want to deal with parents changing the biological sex of their students while students at the school; and they have every right to teach sexual abstanance fefore marriage and develop children not focused on sexual pleasures outside of the marriage committment, and the roles of a healthy family. Of course, you are a child of free love movement and family destruction, being a Marxist Green and a Communist bully hate Christian values.

Hi Jose'

You can label me as you please, Marxist Green, Communist bully. The contract was the brain child of Pastor Mulheran, there was no council or advice sought on the subject. As for your claim of "soliciting" within the school its something you are throwing out of right field without evidence.

Members of an extreme Christian sect are facing murder charged here in Queensland. It is alleged these "good folk" withheld insulin from a child with type one diabetes on the grounds "God will heal", God didn't heal and the child died. It is my opinion if these people have done what is alleged they have committed murder.

Hi Yuyutus,

If we were to go back in time to the very start of Christianity, the time of St Paul, we would not recognise it as in a modern sense. A bit like trying to visualize an oak tree from an oak tree seed. In its infancy Christanity was not a homogeneous sect, but made up of competing groups (sect) with different beliefs, different interpretations of Christ and his teachings. There was no 'New Testament' as such, and followers relied on leaders to guide them. Men like Saul of Tarus (St Paul) and others who have now faded from history, men such as Valentinus and Basilides of Alexandria. These now lost Christian sects were not pseudo Christians at all, but also genuine followers of Christ in their own way. In the end all of the sects, even the one influenced by St James in Jerusalem, faded into history, except the one established by St Paul, from which modern Christanity grew. There is a lot more to the story of Christianity than what meets the eye.

Dear Paul,

I will not even endeavour to tell who is a true Christian - that is not my place. Please note also that in my previous post to you I was not talking about being true Christians but about being truly religious, which is different, but there too it is not my place to judge others.

I mention this also in the context of your previous exchange with Josephus: whether a parent teaches their child about marriage or about free love, whether they seek Western-science medicine for their child or shield their child from it (possibly at the cost of their physical life), which behaviour is "correct" depends on so many circumstances, but first and foremost on what is in their heart, which only God knows and only a prophet can tell.

Once understood that their child chose to be born to them, not to me, it is also understood that it is not my place to intervene. Certainly not the place of a violent immoral body like the State.

Hi Jose

You say;

"The tennets of Christ teaching strongly condemn murder, adultry and lust which you seem to think is christian behaviour. If you want to find what is true Christian behaviour read the New Testament and notice the values it addresses, instead of what pseudo christians are supposed to have done. People are basicly evil and you seem to delight in the evil of people. Check out the link I gave, God is in the business of cleaning up lives."

How often have Christians committed murder etc in the name of God, and justified it as rightest, many times. In the past good Christian folk have owned slaves, and believed they were justified in the name of God. These Christians were reading the same book as you. We can't white wash, or airbrush over these events. As for claiming people are basically evil, I say you are wrong. People are basically good, but good people do evil things.

I have been truly blessed in my lifetime.
I can honestly say that I have found most people
to be good. And the ones who did do hurtful things
had nothing to do with religion. The onus was on
them and their behaviour. Their actions in many
cases were against their religious beliefs. We
can't blame religion for the behaviour of some
people. The people need to take responsibility
for their own actions.

Look at Cardinal Pell. Was his behaviour beyond
reproach? Can we blame his religion for it?
What about Sister Mary Virgilius who used to
cane students for the smallest things with great
gusto. She was a sister of mercy. But there was
nothing merciful about that nun - she had demons
of her own.

Anyone worked out yet how Muslims will be forced to comply?

Is Mise,

The bill has not yet been passed - and we don't
know what it will contain. So we don't know how it will
work and what will be expected. However I imagine that
most Muslims who are religious would comply.

The same
as any other deeply religious person would no matter
which faith they belonged to. I remember when Catholics
were not allowed to associate with people of other
religions and marriage into other faiths was out of
question. Times change.

Also I think if people were not going to comply, they wouldn't
send their kids to a faith school. It wouldn't interest them.

Foxy,
What utter bilge water, religious Muslims will not tolerate homosexual teachers.
Where did you get that guff about Catholics, Catholics have always been allowed to associate with persons of other faiths and my family tree is testimony to mixed marriages, my maternal grandfather was Anglican and his wife Catholic and they were married in an Anglican ceremony in an Anglican church. The boys followed their fathers religion and the girls the mother’s.
On my father’s side it was Scots Presbyterian and Irish Catholic.

Is Mise,

Anglicans look at things differently. However, your
relatives would have had problems trying to get
married in a Catholic church - in a mixed marriage.
Catholics have stricter rules. Of course we can
only speak from our own experiences.

Bilge water? Nah - we Catholics prefer holy water.
Each to their own, I guess.

My father was catholic and my mother C of E but the priest at his
church refused to marry them before the alter.
My father then arranged the wedding in the local C of E church and I
don't ever remember him going to church.
It was attitudes like that that broke down the barriers.

The question of Moslems is different. The ones that follow the faith
religiously (pun intended) are the ones to worry about.
Any disagreement with Mohhomad is blasphemy and the Koran applies the death penalty.
That might not be followed so strictly here because the law on murder
is enforced, but just watch what happens in Pakistan.
A daughter that wants a Christian boyfriend is likely to be murdered
by her parents, and that has happened in the UK but not here as far as I know.
No Foxy there is no similarity between Islam & Christianity when it
comes to such matters.

Foxy,
Make up your mind, either ‘ … and marriage into other faiths was out of the question.” and “…in a mixed marriage Catholics have stricter rules”
You also said that Catholics were not allowed to associate with persons of other religions, which statement shews an utter lack of knowledge of Catholicism and a rather deficient idea of how society works.
My maternal grandparents marriage in the Anglican church was recognised as legitimate by the Catholic Church and grandmother raised her daughters as Catholics.
The Catholic to Presbyterian marriages took place in Catholic churches.

Is Mise,

I was talking about some small aspects of my experiences
growing up.

My father was raised by the Jesuits. And
we had/have very close connections with the Catholic
Church. Priests were regular visitors to our home.
They still are.

Dear Bazz,

I don't know enough about how Muslims practice their
religion. I imagine they are not one homogenous
group who do things in exactly the same way because
they come from different countries, cultures, have
different languages and so on.

If you thin you know better - well lets leave it there.

Foxy
Small aspects?

Didn’t come over that way at all, you can come out of the corner, a bit of turps will take care of the footprints.

Is Mise,

You're going to need more than turps to fix your
persona. Your proclivity for guns now makes perfect
sense.

Issy,

Irish Catholics and Scottish Presbyterians, you don't say!

I was at your house the night Patrick O'Leary yelled across the table after one too many wiskeys at James MacDougall ;...."Jimmy...William Wallace was a liar, thief and a cowered!...and the Holy Father in Rome agrees!"

I believe 16 of your relatives ended up in hospital that night.

Paul,
You seem to have as good a knowledge of Scots history as Foxy does of Catholicism; William Wallace was Catholic as was Clan Dougall.
Have another try.

Issy, they are irrelivent facts. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. So said Rabbie Burns!

Foxy,
You should go down on your Catholic bended knees and give thanks for men with guns.

MEN WITH GUNS! Why is that Issy?

It has been well established that a man with a gun is showing his inadequacy in the sexual department. The gun represents an extension of the male penis. Its firing is a substitute for failed ejaculation during the act of intercourse. How many times in the last fortnight did you fire your gun? You may have been over extended and now require weeks of abstinence.

Paul, now you have explained men with guns what is with women with guns?

Jose'

Women with guns, are women with guns. End of story.

BTW, how are you going on those PURITANS you claimed were an example of good Christians. I can't ask the PEQUOT Indians as the good Christian PURITANS exterminated them all. You were the first to mention the PURITANS.

Back to the topic:

Here's a link on what the Religious Discrimination Bill
is and how it could affect Australia:

http://sbs.com.au/news/what-is-the-religious-discrimination-bill-and-how-could-it-affect-australia/

Foxy,
You introduced thhe guns, why not respond to the post?

I'll repeat what I posted on another thread.

Whatever happened to the fundamental values
contained within the world's great religions
such as caring for the vulnerable.
What happened to practicing mercy, charity, and
good-will towards other human beings and fostering
generosity, humility, honesty, and communal concern
over individual egotism?

What do our religions today really practice and stand
for? Does self-examination figure in any of their
problems? Do they examine and evaluate? Or really
practice what what they preach - and set examples for
their members?

Here is a link dealing with the good and the bad of the
Religious Discrimination Bill. The Law Council's verdict:

http://lawcouncil.asn.au/media/news/the-good-and-the-bad-of-the-religious-discrimination-bill-the-law-councils-verdict

The Bill as it was amended, is a lawers picnic to make money from people of faith and preachers and destroy faith-based schools. As new definitions were given to protect LGBTQIARS rights. Faith based schools should have been able to define their science as fact, which science has been thrown out by the marxist WOKE brigade supported by the secullar media.

This Bill became a document to protect the non-religious and those with perversions of human behaviour, because they screamed discrimination.

Issy, I have given you the facts on the guns. Is that not clear enough for you? Abstinence is a virtue, are ye not virtues? The Holy Father in Rome said; "Stop it, you'll go blind". So I stopped it, and sure enough, I went blind, op next Wednesday.

Foxy,
You introduced the gun, kindly have the courtesy to respond; or aren’t you game?

Is Mise,

Oh. you're still here.

Shoo.

Issy

No way, Foxy didn't introduce the gun, it was a Chinese dude in the 10th century named Chong, with his "Bamboo Fire Stick". Issy do you have a Bamboo Fire Stick? Me thinks the Shooters and Hooters want em' legalised so the little tots can take em' to kindy for show and tell, and demonstrate their fire power by blowing Miss Suezy's head off in front of the class. It will make a nice change from Noddy and Bigears at story time.

Paul,

Ho hum.

Dear Paul,

Let your middle finger do the talking.

Good idea, most intelligent part.

Shoo!

Foxy,
If it wasn’t for men with guns then your parents wouldn’t have been able to migrate to Australia, the Japanese wouldn’t have wanted to build up the post war population with other than their own people.
.
You wouldn’t be here at all and Paul would have long ago been sent to a labour camp, there’d have been no Labor camps.

So go down on bended Catholic knees and give thanks for all those brave young men with guns who made our lifestyle possible.

Is Mise,

My parents fled from men with guns and tanks and bombs.
The people of Lithuania were tortured and shipped to
Siberia. To the Russian Tundra and its interior.
Lithuania suffered a massive loss of lives buried in
the permafrost. Entire cities were emptied. Villages
were destroyed. Many died. Many were killed.

My parents had a choice of staying in Germany, going to
the United States or going to Australia. They chose
Australia because it was the most further away from the men
with guns.

In any case I will let you know when what you say or think
matters to me.

Foxy,
So it matters not about the guns for they are inanimate objects, it’s the men with the guns that matter.
Have you not a good word for the men with guns who’s sacrifices made your lifestyle possible?

Is Mise,

The following link speaks for itself:

http://inquirer.com/opinion/lithuanian-independence-russia-ukraine-nato-invasion-20220216.html

My reference earlier that referred to you and your
gun fetish is a totally different story.

Hi Foxy,

Good link, I'm still hoping for peace, but both sides seem intent on war.

Hi Issy,

80 years today Japan bombed Darwin, 240 people were needlessly killed. For me its the utter futility of war that is wrong. All sides in war think they are right, that's only natural, and nothing will change that. The Japanese at the time believed they were right to bomb Darwin and kill innocent people. There are many reasons that wars happen, none of them good reasons.

Today, ask Putin; Are you in the right? "Of course I'm in the right". Ask the same question of Biden, and you'll get the same answer. The only way both can be in the right is through peace.

Paul,
And how are we to achieve peace with an aggressor?

HEY! This is not a religious war. You are on the wrong thread. The Russian agression is for territory.