Preview Politics in Australia

[Kwality]

Don't mind me too much!

I just get very tired of everything under the sun somehow being Labor's fault, despite the Liberal-National coalition being in power for 27 of 33 years. At what point do you turn around and admit that, hey, perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree?

When its a Fed problem ....

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Labor were the ones behind the plot to kill Lincoln.

And don’t forget that shot that started WW1.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

I shit you not this business in HK is heading fast towards its inevitable Tienanmen conclusion.

This circumstance was always going to end badly.

The culture of the locals was always going to clash with the people of the mainland. The British are again totally responsible for the shit show that will result in full integration by 2047. They ****ed up in the Middle East. They ****ed up in Asia. As an imperialist power they have ****ed up everywhere.

What is Australia going to do for the people of Hong Kong and Kowloon?

Oh I forgot. We’re too busy talking about terrorist women and children in refugee camps in Syria. Not our problem. We’re too busy talking about the treatment of ethnic minorities in China (who happen to be muslims) while we’ve had an appalling record regarding asylum seekers and indigenous Australians.

The whole world is a shit show at the moment. We’ve all ****ed up. We sit on our hands and pick and choose what’s important and not not important. That’s why nobody can take the moral high ground. Total lack of morality and compassion all over the place.

 

[Kwality]

And don’t forget that shot that started WW1.

Wrong bloke, Alby Thomas was after Dr Merv.

 

[Kwality]

This circumstance was always going to end badly.

Amen.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Yep, work until you die suckers, meanwhile he will "retire" on a very nice pension, beyond any mans needs proudly sponsered by the tax payers.

Great cartoon in the Age today. It’s a two parter. First part is a man about Robbo’s age floating in a pool on a lilo enjoying a drink and his retirement. The next part is same man now cleaning around the pool who has been replaced by the treasurer in the pool on the lilo enjoying a drink.

This is what happens when policy drifts along with minor tweaks and hand outs to the rich and aspirational for the past 25 years. The distribution of wealth is out of kilter. The ‘OK Boomer’ generation is copping the brunt of it and deservedly so. Those from the previous generation are as much to blame as plenty of those are still not sharing the benefits of post war growth which started spluttering a long time ago.

We carry on about 28 years of uninterrupted growth but that’s happening because of our migration program. Those who have been here for a long time have gone backwards in living standards for close to a decade. It’s the hidden recession that I keep banging on about.

And then we have the well off and aspirational who voted with their hip pockets at the last election because their entitled positions were under threat. Who’s gives a **** about health, education, people on welfare and a myriad of other important issues? I’m getting my tax rebates and my generous capital gains. **** they even pay me a tax refund when I don’t pay tax.

And the aspirational? They’re all the kids who are waiting to reap the benefits of their parents dying and leaving them squillions of accumulated wealth.

And the younger generations suffer. We‘ll hand them an Earth in dire straights and not as much wealth as those who precede them. Hey but their taxes will band roll my death roll in a public hospital or nursing home. That’s why they can’t buy a house. We’ve sucked them dry.

HOW GOOD IS AUSTRALIA!

PS: Has anybody seen ScoMo?

 

[thylacine60]

First time on politics board. I dont agree at all with what Izzy said to be clear, but one thing that has gone missing in this instance is that he was making the remarks in a church as part of a sermon. Not sure how the footage got out but if he didnt leak then he is actually not shoving his views down the general communities throats like some have reported. Ive taught in plenty of places with high percentage of Kiwi mauuri people and christian religious beliefs are as much a part of their culture as connection to country is to aboriginal culture. For all the attention on some minority groups one culture that is struggling hugely is natives from a pacific island background. They are the only cultural group that has a higher incarceration rate than Australian aboriginal. The hate directed by the media and online towards religious beliefs shows is insane in Australia right now and displays the same level of ignorance that people throw at Folau. Look at social media. Its full of comments like **** your god Israel. Im not Christian and I strongly oppose the views of Israel, but geez the so called social justice movement behaves more and more like the people who they claim to hate by the day in Australia.

The social justice movement. Because social justice is a bad thing.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

The social justice movement. Because social justice is a bad thing.

It’s a terrible thing to have a moral compass and a social conscience. Damn! It’s an affliction.

 

[sherrif]

The social justice movement. Because social justice is a bad thing.

Actually. Anyone studied history? Stalin's communist movement and Hitler's Nazis movement both started up under seemingly just causes. Communism was all about justice and equal rights for workers. Hitler was all about bringing honour and prosperity back to Germany after World War 1. What happened over time was that the behaviour of the seemingly just cause got worse with a change towards the ends justifying the means resulting in more violence as time went on. The Brown Shirts of the Communist movement behave very similarly to the so called social justice movement today in that the communists, while not starting out as a violent group became more and more aggressive to opposition ideas and eventually became a fully fascist movement.

The fact that in recent times self proclaimed anti-fascists’ in Australia (Melbourne city centre in particular) now shout words like Nazis towards various religious groups protesting against abortion or against any other social justice belief is very similar to how many fascist group start. Im well and truly for gay marriage and also pro abortion. However, I believe than everyone has a right to their own beliefs. Social Justice warriors are the least tolerant group in Australian Society at the moment.

Have a look at the Israel Falou twitter feeds. The attacks on his religious views are hate speech from any angle. While the views he said in the sermon were told to a group of religious followers of the bible. I dont agree with the views he said, but respect the rights of others. Ive spent time teaching in Africa when younger. Religion provides hope and joy to so many people in disadvantaged countries. Ran into a contact from Oxfam recently who gained an education scholarship to Australia twenty years ago. When asked about coming to Australia he would say how he was happy for the safety and freedoms in Australia, but was happier spiritially in his homeland.

People in Australia think that social justice should only apply to certain groups that agree with their views. The way Australian people disrespect religion is actually a huge social justice issue for many of the migrant groups the self proclaimed social justice worries claim to represent. Religion is huge in the pacific island culture that Falou came from. Its as important as connection to land is in aboriginal culture. THe Falou attacks are just the most recent examples in Australia's history of how ignorance of cultural differences is resulting in abuse towards a minority group. Ive been all over the world. There is no country with less tolerance for those who view religion differently to the majority.

 

[thylacine60]

Oh look, he read a book.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

I would have thought social justice is in the eye of the beholder. We live in a secular society and it seems to me that many don’t understand point.

 

[Gethelred]

This circumstance was always going to end badly.

The culture of the locals was always going to clash with the people of the mainland. The British are again totally responsible for the shit show that will result in full integration by 2047. They f’ed up in the Middle East. They f’ed up in Asia. As an imperialist power they have f’ed up everywhere.

What is Australia going to do for the people of Hong Kong and Kowloon?

Oh I forgot. We’re too busy talking about terrorist women and children in refugee camps in Syria. Not our problem. We’re too busy talking about the treatment of ethnic minorities in China (who happen to be muslims) while we’ve had an appalling record regarding asylum seekers and indigenous Australians.

I certainly cannot argue with all of this.

The British are the almost singular cause of the current state of the Middle East, coupled with Islamic fundamentalism; had they honored their treaties with the moderates in Arabia, the house of Saud and their fundamentalist Islam would not have spread with their oil money. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq; all of it was once British, and all of it is now ****ed almost beyond repair.

The whole world is a shit show at the moment. We’ve all f’ed up. We sit on our hands and pick and choose what’s important and not not important. That’s why nobody can take the moral high ground. Total lack of morality and compassion all over the place.

You have just described the human condition.

We're always ****ed up. We've always been ****ed up. We argue, and we fight and we disagree fervently to the point of blows. We despise the other, and we can and will attack anything for the slightest pretext. We refuse evidence for propaganda, and we always have.

But that is not to say that there is not something of great worth in us, or that there is no possibility of us getting our shit together.

We did so at Nuremberg. We did so when we formed the UN. We've done so over and over again; we have instituted human rights and we have policed them to the best of our ability. We have instituted the best discovered political system ever discovered, and we have allowed it to take over the world. We have used economics and medicine to cure incurable diseases, we have gone to the moon, we have ensured that that average life is by far longer than it has ever been. All this, and we have still made mistakes innumerable.

It is no consolation, but our existence is as prosaic and problematic as it is miraculous. We are desperately clinging to life, and we will continue to do so; we will compete with each other, but when someone is down and out there will always, always be a human hand there to help you to your feet. We are as children in this unfriendly universe. We will continue to grow.

For what else is life?

 

[Gethelred]

Actually. Anyone studied history? Stalin's communist movement and Hitler's Nazis movement both started up under seemingly just causes. Communism was all about justice and equal rights for workers. Hitler was all about bringing honour and prosperity back to Germany after World War 1. What happened over time was that the behaviour of the seemingly just cause got worse with a change towards the ends justifying the means resulting in more violence as time went on. The Brown Shirts of the Communist movement behave very similarly to the so called social justice movement today in that the communists, while not starting out as a violent group became more and more aggressive to opposition ideas and eventually became a fully fascist movement.

Yes, I have.

Stalin's communist movement is not a thing; he was a member of the Bolsheviks, and as a consequence he is tied to them for his ideology, and the Bolsheviks were almost completely catered towards the obtainment of power. Stalin was the party treasurer, and from that his power and his station was drawn initially.

Hitler was always antisemitic. I'm not going to do your research for you though; trying to argue that he was 'all about bringing honour and prosperity back to Germany' is as much propaganda as anything Goebebls created. Hitler - and all fascist movements - are about taking power, and retaining it. It's part of why they tend towards collapse; once power is obtained, they hardly know quite what to do with it. There is a reason Hitler lost WW2, and it isn't because he was a spectacular martial commander.

The fact that in recent times self proclaimed anti-fascists’ in Australia (Melbourne city centre in particular) now shout words like Nazis towards various religious groups protesting against abortion or against any other social justice belief is very similar to how many fascist group start. Im well and truly for gay marriage and also pro abortion. However, I believe than everyone has a right to their own beliefs. Social Justice warriors are the least tolerant group in Australian Society at the moment.

Fascists groups require niche appeal combined with vagueness to obtain power, then rely on appealing to everyone in order to obtain more power. Power is the point.



This video has within it a fairly detailed argument entailing precisely what fascists are and do, and how they require wealthy individuals to buy into the vision to get what they want (being left alone).

Again, labelling people from across the spectrum as the ubiquitous 'Social Justice Warriors' is disingenuous, and you seem to be wearing out your welcome on this board if you keep doing it.

Have a look at the Israel Falou twitter feeds. The attacks on his religious views are hate speech from any angle. While the views he said in the sermon were told to a group of religious followers of the bible. I dont agree with the views he said, but respect the rights of others. Ive spent time teaching in Africa when younger. Religion provides hope and joy to so many people in disadvantaged countries. Ran into a contact from Oxfam recently who gained an education scholarship to Australia twenty years ago. When asked about coming to Australia he would say how he was happy for the safety and freedoms in Australia, but was happier spiritially in his homeland.

People in Australia think that social justice should only apply to certain groups that agree with their views. The way Australian people disrespect religion is actually a huge social justice issue for many of the migrant groups the self proclaimed social justice worries claim to represent. Religion is huge in the pacific island culture that Falou came from. Its as important as connection to land is in aboriginal culture. THe Falou attacks are just the most recent examples in Australia's history of how ignorance of cultural differences is resulting in abuse towards a minority group. Ive been all over the world. There is no country with less tolerance for those who view religion differently to the majority.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again; freedom to say what you wish is not freedom from criticism of what you have said. Israel and plenty of others have said what they have said, and plenty of people have disagreed. Would you remove their rights to their criticism?

Religion should not be exempt from criticism. That it has been for such a significant part of our history is a blight on it; how many intelligent men and women have been murdered for religious purposes, how far ahead of where we have been would we be now had we not pandered to archaic conceited arrogant patriarchs who told us who we could screw, when we could screw, whether we should support a dictator or overthrow them, whether we should hate our brothers for who or what they are or look like, if we should enslave other humans?

You cannot defend religion, not when it so deeply damns itself. People have their right to worship, and I will never say they do not. What I will say is that religion has killed millions, all in pursuit of broadening their 'brand'. Would we support a business or a government that did that? Would we try to shield them from criticism, on the basis that 'some people are closer to their government than others'? I mean, the Chinese are closer to their government than most citizens are, due to indoctrination (https://quillette.com/2019/11/17/the-art-of-mind-control/); does that mean we should respect theirs and their government's treatment of Hong Kong, or their own politicial dissidents?

The sooner that people stop expecting their institutions to be much more than self serving the better off we all will be.

 

[sherrif]

Yes, I have.

Stalin's communist movement is not a thing; he was a member of the Bolsheviks, and as a consequence he is tied to them for his ideology, and the Bolsheviks were almost completely catered towards the obtainment of power. Stalin was the party treasurer, and from that his power and his station was drawn initially.

Hitler was always antisemitic. I'm not going to do your research for you though; trying to argue that he was 'all about bringing honour and prosperity back to Germany' is as much propaganda as anything Goebebls created. Hitler - and all fascist movements - are about taking power, and retaining it. It's part of why they tend towards collapse; once power is obtained, they hardly know quite what to do with it. There is a reason Hitler lost WW2, and it isn't because he was a spectacular martial commander.


Fascists groups require niche appeal combined with vagueness to obtain power, then rely on appealing to everyone in order to obtain more power. Power is the point.



This video has within it a fairly detailed argument entailing precisely what fascists are and do, and how they require wealthy individuals to buy into the vision to get what they want (being left alone).

Again, labelling people from across the spectrum as the ubiquitous 'Social Justice Warriors' is disingenuous, and you seem to be wearing out your welcome on this board if you keep doing it.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again; freedom to say what you wish is not freedom from criticism of what you have said. Israel and plenty of others have said what they have said, and plenty of people have disagreed. Would you remove their rights to their criticism?

Religion should not be exempt from criticism. That it has been for such a significant part of our history is a blight on it; how many intelligent men and women have been murdered for religious purposes, how far ahead of where we have been would we be now had we not pandered to archaic conceited arrogant patriarchs who told us who we could screw, when we could screw, whether we should support a dictator or overthrow them, whether we should hate our brothers for who or what they are or look like, if we should enslave other humans?

You cannot defend religion, not when it so deeply damns itself. People have their right to worship, and I will never say they do not. What I will say is that religion has killed millions, all in pursuit of broadening their 'brand'. Would we support a business or a government that did that? Would we try to shield them from criticism, on the basis that 'some people are closer to their government than others'? I mean, the Chinese are closer to their government than most citizens are, due to indoctrination (https://quillette.com/2019/11/17/the-art-of-mind-control/); does that mean we should respect theirs and their government's treatment of Hong Kong, or their own politicial dissidents?

The sooner that people stop expecting their institutions to be much more than self serving the better off we all will be.

Im not in any way defending the institution. Im defending the right of people to believe in religion. Big difference. Your post blames a person for the sins of an institution and thats pretty much the point Im making. The same belief system feeds homeless all around the world and is full of people who use the bible as a way of impacting lives positively.

Im not Christian, but I know plenty of people who feel their beliefs are being attacked because they dare to believe in the bible. Christian pro life campaigners have been attacked and called Nazis in Melbourne recently. The media constantly links the sins of the institution with individuals of those who believe in the religion and they are not the same thing. I dont think Israel is exempt from criticism. Im saying that those who attack his culture and religion are just as guilty of bigotry as the person they are attacking.Eg from twitter 'Stuff your dumb god Israel.' In this case Israel is not the one shoving his view down others throats. He was preaching and someone else released it.

Yeah. Actually I was only using the term Stalin's movement because I thought the leader was more known as Im not sure on your knowledge of history without reading any of your previous posts. It if it makes you feel better than yeah the Bolsheviks were the ones who I was referring too. You are completely wrong on pretty much every historical point though and like I said my link to the two movements was simply how bad things have happened when people get attached to a movement too much, so they become unaware of their own behaviour. The novel Animal Farm explains what Im talking about. The Bolsheviks started with the notion of everyone being equal and a party for the people before later violently opposing anyone who challenged their views.Hitler also most certainly appealed to the sense of injustice at the time in Germany over how Germans were treated at the Treaty of Versailles in the early days of the Nazis.Violence from the Nazis did not start for years after the Nazis first called for justice for Germany.

Not sure what the history of fascism has to do with my original post. Im simply saying how facism starts is when a group shares beliefs that involve abusing those who disagree and empowers the group. By the way that video sucked and is wrong. Facsism is more present in disadvantaged countries and doesnt require a wealthy benefactor. Its caused often by poverty ffs.Not that it matters but the Nazis had one of the clearest and most defined ideologies of any group in history. The opposite of vague and the reason why they nearly concurred the world, but thankfully didnt.

Considering the level of outrage in your response you might be interested to know Im not coming from a position of ignorance. I've worked in low social economic schools for over a decade. My current anger is because some groups views get ignored by those claiming to be socially just because it is not popular to speak about their disadvantage. Students from Pacific Island backgrounds are struggling every bit as much as indigenous students. Kiwi Mauuri is more represented than any other cultural group in our prison system incarceration rates. A key reason directly from cultural elders Ive heard is that their traditional cultural views are disrespected and put down in the media combined with the fact that their culture solves things in a physical manner more than other cultures. If someone attacked an aboriginal person for being stupid for their view on land everyone would be outraged and rightfully so. But they dont see they are doing the same thing by attacking christian beliefs to a person from a religious Pacific Islander background and ive heard that directly from some of the kids Ive taught. On more than one occasion from a student deeply upset.

If Im wearing out my welcome then great. Good to see there is Social Justice outrage at any view that differs to theirs even when explaining the perspective of a cultural group that struggles on a daily basis due to the ignorance around traditional culture and traditional beliefs in Australian culture. Way to prove my original point actually.

Yeah, nice last sentence too. Plenty of cultures in the world view religion as the call to serve others and the institution as the opposite of self serving, but I guess they dont have the right to honour their cultural beliefs if it goes against your beliefs. Last time I checked putting down the beliefs of a different race of people to your own was called 'racism'. Which your post has in spades even if you cant see it. I guess we should also just tell Muslims to not pray as well because according to you they are just being trained to 'broaden their brand' and wasting their time in self serving institutions. Spoken to Muslims who consider prayer the most important thing in their life, but I guess you know best. Let me guess you'll be outraged at the racist right if there is any violence against a minority religious group in the future, yet dont get how your attitude to religion is the proven major cause of attacks on religious minority groups in Australia, which is intolerance to those who have different world views to the majority view.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Prince Andrew stepping back from royal duties

The duke says his association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has “become a major disruption to my family's work”.

www.bbc.com

That's pretty much an admission of guilt by Prince Andrew on his disgraceful conduct in my book.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Remember people it’s politics in Australia. Great discussion points though.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Australian citizen jailed for 12 years in Vietnam. Member of a group called Viet Tan. Believes in democracy. Convicted as a terrorist. Where’s the outrage? What is the Government doing?

 

[Kwality]

Australian citizen jailed for 12 years in Vietnam. Member of a group called Viet Tan. Believes in democracy. Convicted as a terrorist. Where’s the outrage? What is the Government doing?

Fighting a fight long gone? Dont see why an Australian wilfully breaking another countrys laws should receive any more or less support than an accused drug smuggler.

Robbo, why do you look for outrage?

 

[Gethelred]

Im not in any way defending the institution. Im defending the right of people to believe in religion. Big difference. Your post blames a person for the sins of an institution and thats pretty much the point Im making. The same belief system feeds homeless all around the world and is full of people who use the bible as a way of impacting lives positively.

Im not Christian, but I know plenty of people who feel their beliefs are being attacked because they dare to believe in the bible. Christian pro life campaigners have been attacked and called Nazis in Melbourne recently. The media constantly links the sins of the institution with individuals of those who believe in the religion and they are not the same thing. I dont think Israel is exempt from criticism. Im saying that those who attack his culture and religion are just as guilty of bigotry as the person they are attacking.Eg from twitter 'Stuff your dumb god Israel.' In this case Israel is not the one shoving his view down others throats. He was preaching and someone else released it.

The person supports the institution. In a Roman Catholic church mass, a bowl is passed around 3 times, in which the faithful place money in the bowl.

Historically speaking, religion was as much a weapon of empire as gun or sword; it was pivotal in the very region you specify - the pacific islands - in converting sovereign peoples to an English/European mindset. Notice, christianity left its rebellious phase centuries ago; in the 1700/1800's, it was very much about being content with your lot on this earth and striving towards living a better life in the next, an ideal mindset for the exploiter to give to the exploited.

And finally, you seem to be of the impression that I am saying these things because I'm hot blooded. I'm really not; I can see why people would choose to say the things they say; your post condemning them is just as much a manifestation of your free speech as their is when attacking religion. This is where what I said originally gets involved; this has almost nothing to do with religion, and nearly everything to do with manipulation by the media to obtain ad revenue.

Outrage is a commodity, because it drives page views and newspaper sales.

Yeah. Actually I was only using the term Stalin's movement because I thought the leader was more known as Im not sure on your knowledge of history without reading any of your previous posts. It if it makes you feel better than yeah the Bolsheviks were the ones who I was referring too. You are completely wrong on pretty much every historical point though and like I said my link to the two movements was simply how bad things have happened when people get attached to a movement too much, so they become unaware of their own behaviour. The novel Animal Farm explains what Im talking about. The Bolsheviks started with the notion of everyone being equal and a party for the people before later violently opposing anyone who challenged their views.Hitler also most certainly appealed to the sense of injustice at the time in Germany over how Germans were treated at the Treaty of Versailles in the early days of the Nazis.Violence from the Nazis did not start for years after the Nazis first called for justice for Germany.

Um, no I'm not.

Not sure what the history of fascism has to do with my original post. Im simply saying how facism starts is when a group shares beliefs that involve abusing those who disagree and empowers the group. By the way that video sucked and is wrong. Facsism is more present in disadvantaged countries and doesnt require a wealthy benefactor. Its caused often by poverty ffs.Not that it matters but the Nazis had one of the clearest and most defined ideologies of any group in history. The opposite of vague and the reason why they nearly concurred the world, but thankfully didnt.

Nazism was a fascist movement, ergo fascism and its formation within a nation is relevant. You compared the Social Justice movement (that ubiquitous, insubstantial blob of humanity that you're insistent exists) to fascists here:

The fact that in recent times self proclaimed anti-fascists’ in Australia (Melbourne city centre in particular) now shout words like Nazis towards various religious groups protesting against abortion or against any other social justice belief is very similar to how many fascist group start. Im well and truly for gay marriage and also pro abortion. However, I believe than everyone has a right to their own beliefs. Social Justice warriors are the least tolerant group in Australian Society at the moment.

... so it's necessary to correct your misrepresentation of said movement as a fascist one.

Considering the level of outrage in your response you might be interested to know Im not coming from a position of ignorance. I've worked in low social economic schools for over a decade. My current anger is because some groups views get ignored by those claiming to be socially just because it is not popular to speak about their disadvantage. Students from Pacific Island backgrounds are struggling every bit as much as indigenous students. Kiwi Mauuri is more represented than any other cultural group in our prison system incarceration rates. A key reason directly from cultural elders Ive heard is that their traditional cultural views are disrespected and put down in the media combined with the fact that their culture solves things in a physical manner more than other cultures. If someone attacked an aboriginal person for being stupid for their view on land everyone would be outraged and rightfully so. But they dont see they are doing the same thing by attacking christian beliefs to a person from a religious Pacific Islander background and ive heard that directly from some of the kids Ive taught. On more than one occasion from a student deeply upset.

... which I have the utmost sympathy for. I know that road, and that world. My family was heavily religious when I was younger. I wanted to be a priest.

However.

Provided the behaviour and the condemnation of the church is strictly verbal, there is no issue with it from me. Would that everyone was capable of having a civil conversation, but I'm not condemning people for their simplicity or their inability to argue. That I'll leave to you.

If Im wearing out my welcome then great. Good to see there is Social Justice outrage at any view that differs to theirs even when explaining the perspective of a cultural group that struggles on a daily basis due to the ignorance around traditional culture and traditional beliefs in Australian culture. Way to prove my original point actually.

Oooooh, now we're rolling!

I'm censoring you now, am I? Little old me? Nah; this thread is - as mentioned - part of the Carlton board, and you were arguing dishonestly. You're trying to make the claim that it's the province of the left wing in this country that is being bigots by arguing these protests. I've outlined why this is wrong multiple times; you can either refute the arguments why, you can stop being disingenuous, or you can leave. These are your choices.

Yeah, nice last sentence too. Plenty of cultures in the world view religion as the call to serve others and the institution as the opposite of self serving, but I guess they dont have the right to honour their cultural beliefs if it goes against your beliefs. Last time I checked putting down the beliefs of a different race of people to your own was called 'racism'.

****ing LOL.

Read the first part. The religion of their ancestors was not Christian; christianity was imported to Pol and Micronesia in order to control the population and make them subservient. If they studied the history of it, they'd have a good deal more to confront about their faith than they do right now.

And this is again where we come back to; people are free to speak, and they are free to practice their religion, but they and their religion are not exempt from criticism. Or would you have us be silent about Opus Dei, a Catholic subset which encourages members to leave their families, to whip themselves and to provide all of their earthly wealth to the church alongside their worst secrets which are then shared with the rest of the clergy? Would you have us be quiet of the various crimes committed by priests?

Or are you trying to censor me now?

Which your post has in spades even if you cant see it. I guess we should also just tell Muslims to not pray as well because according to you they are just being trained to 'broaden their brand' and wasting their time in self serving institutions. Spoken to Muslims who consider prayer the most important thing in their life, but I guess you know best. Let me guess you'll be outraged at the racist right if there is any violence against a minority religious group in the future, yet dont get how your attitude to religion is the proven major cause of attacks on religious minority groups in Australia, which is intolerance to those who have different world views to the majority view.

You're funny.

I have never incited violence in my entire life, and I'm not starting now. I think it's entertaining that you've accused me of being outraged, then also accused me of being the 'proven major cause of attacks on religious minority groups in Australia', minus proof of any kind.

I'll say it again, so that you can get it through your skull, and this time I hope it doesn't go through one ear and out the other: freedom of speech and freedom of association is not freedom from criticism. Christians are indeed free to practice their religion (as are Muslims, and any who would choose to be religious) but their religion is not exempt from this.

I've got a question for you: say you're right, for the sake of argument. How would you stop Facebook and the various online spaces from 'discriminating' against religion, or stopping articles within newspapers from publishing things like what Folau said in a church? Would that not be censorship? And then, how do you stop people from expressing their own right to speech?

This is what you're fighting against. You cannot stop them from saying what they're saying without attacking their freedom of speech.

 

[Kwality]

The person supports the institution. In a Roman Catholic church mass, a bowl is passed around 3 times, in which the faithful place money in the bowl.

Lots of people identify as Catholics, dont attend, dont hear the preachers.
Births, deaths & marriages Catholics, the only time they darken a Church door - these very ordinary people voted in support of gay marriage & dont fit the old stereotype.

Would make a similar comment about the Jewish faith, my grand kids will identify as Jewish in their early years until they are old enough to make up their own mind (it will be encouraged based on the approach of both parents).

Yes, the person does support the institution, but that support is not as may have been in the 20th century.

 

[Gethelred]

Lots of people identify as Catholics, dont attend, dont hear the preachers.
Births, deaths & marriages Catholics, the only time they darken a Church door - these very ordinary people voted in support of gay marriage & dont fit the old stereotype.

Would make a similar comment about the Jewish faith, my grand kids will identify as Jewish in their early years until they are old enough to make up their own mind (it will be encouraged based on the approach of both parents).

Yes, the person does support the institution, but that support is not as may have been in the 20th century.

One year, down on the Mornington peninsula, the local parish got the bishop down from Melbourne, Dennis Hart, to do their prime Christmas service. The bloke then proceeded to deliver one fire and brimstone homily at the service, chastising the crowd for only choosing to be holiday christians, heavy on sin and damnnation.

It was pretty funny; all these young dads and mums, their babies in prams, 'doing the right thing' by their parents and trying on the religious upbringing they'd had for their kids. Their faces went white, and they wondered what they'd walked into. I've never seen a priest misread a room to the extent this one did.

 

[Kwality]

One year, down on the Mornington peninsula, the local parish got the bishop down from Melbourne, Dennis Hart, to do their prime Christmas service. The bloke then proceeded to deliver one fire and brimstone homily at the service, chastising the crowd for only choosing to be holiday christians, heavy on sin and damnnation.

It was pretty funny; all these young dads and mums, their babies in prams, 'doing the right thing' by their parents and trying on the religious upbringing they'd had for their kids. Their faces went white, and they wondered what they'd walked into. I've never seen a priest misread a room to the extent this one did.

Happened at a wedding I was at, thank God the PA went down - imagine how Issy would see that marriage

 

[Robbo's my hero]

One year, down on the Mornington peninsula, the local parish got the bishop down from Melbourne, Dennis Hart, to do their prime Christmas service. The bloke then proceeded to deliver one fire and brimstone homily at the service, chastising the crowd for only choosing to be holiday christians, heavy on sin and damnnation.

It was pretty funny; all these young dads and mums, their babies in prams, 'doing the right thing' by their parents and trying on the religious upbringing they'd had for their kids. Their faces went white, and they wondered what they'd walked into. I've never seen a priest misread a room to the extent this one did.

The only time I saw Archbishop Hart was in a fancy hotel near St Patrick’s being wined and dined by a couple of parishioners. Is that judgemental?

 

[sherrif]

The person supports the institution. In a Roman Catholic church mass, a bowl is passed around 3 times, in which the faithful place money in the bowl.

Historically speaking, religion was as much a weapon of empire as gun or sword; it was pivotal in the very region you specify - the pacific islands - in converting sovereign peoples to an English/European mindset. Notice, christianity left its rebellious phase centuries ago; in the 1700/1800's, it was very much about being content with your lot on this earth and striving towards living a better life in the next, an ideal mindset for the exploiter to give to the exploited.

And finally, you seem to be of the impression that I am saying these things because I'm hot blooded. I'm really not; I can see why people would choose to say the things they say; your post condemning them is just as much a manifestation of your free speech as their is when attacking religion. This is where what I said originally gets involved; this has almost nothing to do with religion, and nearly everything to do with manipulation by the media to obtain ad revenue.

Outrage is a commodity, because it drives page views and newspaper sales.


Um, no I'm not.


Nazism was a fascist movement, ergo fascism and its formation within a nation is relevant. You compared the Social Justice movement (that ubiquitous, insubstantial blob of humanity that you're insistent exists) to fascists here:

... so it's necessary to correct your misrepresentation of said movement as a fascist one.


... which I have the utmost sympathy for. I know that road, and that world. My family was heavily religious when I was younger. I wanted to be a priest.

However.

Provided the behaviour and the condemnation of the church is strictly verbal, there is no issue with it from me. Would that everyone was capable of having a civil conversation, but I'm not condemning people for their simplicity or their inability to argue. That I'll leave to you.


Oooooh, now we're rolling!

I'm censoring you now, am I? Little old me? Nah; this thread is - as mentioned - part of the Carlton board, and you were arguing dishonestly. You're trying to make the claim that it's the province of the left wing in this country that is being bigots by arguing these protests. I've outlined why this is wrong multiple times; you can either refute the arguments why, you can stop being disingenuous, or you can leave. These are your choices.


******* LOL.

Read the first part. The religion of their ancestors was not Christian; christianity was imported to Pol and Micronesia in order to control the population and make them subservient. If they studied the history of it, they'd have a good deal more to confront about their faith than they do right now.

And this is again where we come back to; people are free to speak, and they are free to practice their religion, but they and their religion are not exempt from criticism. Or would you have us be silent about Opus Dei, a Catholic subset which encourages members to leave their families, to whip themselves and to provide all of their earthly wealth to the church alongside their worst secrets which are then shared with the rest of the clergy? Would you have us be quiet of the various crimes committed by priests?

Or are you trying to censor me now?

You're funny.

I have never incited violence in my entire life, and I'm not starting now. I think it's entertaining that you've accused me of being outraged, then also accused me of being the 'proven major cause of attacks on religious minority groups in Australia', minus proof of any kind.

I'll say it again, so that you can get it through your skull, and this time I hope it doesn't go through one ear and out the other: freedom of speech and freedom of association is not freedom from criticism. Christians are indeed free to practice their religion (as are Muslims, and any who would choose to be religious) but their religion is not exempt from this.

I've got a question for you: say you're right, for the sake of argument. How would you stop Facebook and the various online spaces from 'discriminating' against religion, or stopping articles within newspapers from publishing things like what Folau said in a church? Would that not be censorship? And then, how do you stop people from expressing their own right to speech?

This is what you're fighting against. You cannot stop them from saying what they're saying without attacking their freedom of speech.

Pretty sure you just broke the world record for misinterpretation of basic concepts. But Ill give it one last go.

Im not sure how hard it is to understand Im saying they should publish criticism of Falou and his views. His views on twitter and his views in the church. i personally find them abhorrent, but see views expressed in the church in a different context to the views on a public forum. What Im saying is that attacking his culture and his god and their way of life is the exact same thing as attacking someone for being gay. Funnily enough also the exact same thing white people have done to aboriginal culture in the media until recent times. Using the example of one person or event to tar everyone with the same brush and racially descriminate is the oldest trick in the book to silence anyone with different views to the bigotry in the majority of a population. The exact same thing as calling all muslims terrorists because of 9/11. The exact same thing as Trump uses to justify not letting certain racial groups into the country. The exact same China is doing to ethnic muslims. Blaming the link to an ideology rather than the individuals involved. Its where the hashtag #IllRideWithYou originates from as well after the Sydney terrorist attacks. Something I supported im sure yo didnt.

The Roots of #IllRideWithYou

How Monday's hostage crisis in Sydney spawned a social-media movement against anti-Muslim intolerance

www.theatlantic.com

Um yeah genius, I get freedom of speech and freedom of association is not freedom from criticism. Thats my friggin point. Just because those who claim to associate with a just cause doesnt mean they can racially vilify a cultural group and should avoid criticism for their religious hate. In the same way that Israel Falou should be condemmed for his views that attack another group of people for what they think.

The racist undertone of your posts are truly mind blowing. So let me get this right. You view a cultural group as being wrong to take up a religion, so as a non religious person it is your role to tell them they shouldnt believe in what they believe. Kinda just like how white supremacy groups attack religious minorities because they dont believe in the same thing as the religious minorities and they are just telling them what they should believe in.

Yep, gotta love the stupidity of the reference to antifa as antifascist. Kinda like a thief saying they are anti-stealing. Not the best cover in the world you'd think. Pretty sure its clear that they hate religious views. In most countries in the world thats called hate crimes. Things like chanting Nazis insults at Christians or Muslim preaches. Inconvenient I know that the rest of the world doesnt agree that a person shouldnt be abused for the beliefs they hold.

The basic definition of a hate crime summaries a response to the absurd logic in your posts.
'Hate crime is defined as an offence which the victim considers to be driven by hostility towards their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or transgender identity.' So yeah. Thats my point. Israel should be condemmed for his comments on a groups sexual orientation for the one millionth time, but so should the blatant racism of those attacking the rights in others to believe in the culture or religion different to their views.

So just in case you still dont get it FFS. Im not saying stop anyone from posting what they want to post on facebook, online, in a newspaper or anywhere else. Im saying that those who choose to attack cultures and religions different to their beliefs are just as bad as those who attack groups like marriage equality advocates. Considering most hate crimes are racially motivated Im not sure how its so hard to work out that the link to your views is that insulting a cultural group for the beliefs they hold is where racial violence originates from. Not hard to work out just ask any religious minority in most parts of the world.
















I

 

[Gethelred]

Pretty sure you just broke the world record for misinterpretation of basic concepts. But Ill give it one last go.

Im not sure how hard it is to understand Im saying they should publish criticism of Falou and his views. His views on twitter and his views in the church. i personally find them abhorrent, but see views expressed in the church in a different context to the views on a public forum. What Im saying is that attacking his culture and his god and their way of life is the exact same thing as attacking someone for being gay. Funnily enough also the exact same thing white people have done to aboriginal culture in the media until recent times. Using the example of one person or event to tar everyone with the same brush and racially descriminate is the oldest trick in the book to silence anyone with different views to the bigotry in the majority of a population. The exact same thing as calling all muslims terrorists because of 9/11. The exact same thing as Trump uses to justify not letting certain racial groups into the country. The exact same China is doing to ethnic muslims. Blaming the link to an ideology rather than the individuals involved. Its where the hashtag #IllRideWithYou originates from as well after the Sydney terrorist attacks. Something I supported im sure yo didnt.

The Roots of #IllRideWithYou

How Monday's hostage crisis in Sydney spawned a social-media movement against anti-Muslim intolerance

www.theatlantic.com

Um yeah genius, I get freedom of speech and freedom of association is not freedom from criticism. Thats my friggin point. Just because those who claim to associate with a just cause doesnt mean they can racially vilify a cultural group and should avoid criticism for their religious hate. In the same way that Israel Falou should be condemmed for his views that attack another group of people for what they think.

The racist undertone of your posts are truly mind blowing. So let me get this right. You view a cultural group as being wrong to take up a religion, so as a non religious person it is your role to tell them they shouldnt believe in what they believe. Kinda just like how white supremacy groups attack religious minorities because they dont believe in the same thing as the religious minorities and they are just telling them what they should believe in.

Yep, gotta love the stupidity of the reference to antifa as antifascist. Kinda like a thief saying they are anti-stealing. Not the best cover in the world you'd think. Pretty sure its clear that they hate religious views. In most countries in the world thats called hate crimes. Things like chanting Nazis insults at Christians or Muslim preaches. Inconvenient I know that the rest of the world doesnt agree that a person shouldnt be abused for the beliefs they hold.

The basic definition of a hate crime summaries a response to the absurd logic in your posts.
'Hate crime is defined as an offence which the victim considers to be driven by hostility towards their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or transgender identity.' So yeah. Thats my point. Israel should be condemmed for his comments on a groups sexual orientation for the one millionth time, but so should the blatant racism of those attacking the rights in others to believe in the culture or religion different to their views.

So just in case you still dont get it FFS.

Do me a favour - or not - and isolate the 'racist overtones' in any of my posts. Quote them back to me. See if your claim - and the impression you have made of me as a racist - stands up to scrutiny.

Other than that, nice rant, would read again. You're criticising me for generalising where you yourself generalise in your opposition to criticism to Folau; yes, generalising is wrong, but in your desire to smear opposition you tar them all with the same brush, which has been my criticism of your argument all along.

You refer to the opposition of Folau as a ubiquitous group, unindividual and indistinct. Some of the criticism of him is indeed beyond the pale, and some of it is not; in order to say who's on first and what's on second, you would need to discuss each individual case in depth, and it really doesn't matter to me.

You're also assuming facts about me that are not in evidence. Try to avoid assumption; it's a shortcut to thought. People tend towards seeing the logic in that they already agree with, and fail to do so with what they disagree with.

Im not saying stop anyone from posting what they want to post on facebook, online, in a newspaper or anywhere else. Im saying that those who choose to attack cultures and religions different to their beliefs are just as bad as those who attack groups like marriage equality advocates. Attack the belief expressed not the culture as a whole.

On this, to a certain extent, I agree. Where we differ is that you see religion and the institution of it as central to their culture, where I do not.

To be fair, your familiarity with their culture would lead you to having a greater basis for saying so than I would, so I take it at face value, but you misunderstand my own position. I was raised strict Roman Catholic, and it took me years to dismantle my own indoctrination into their practices. You do not come away from organised religion without scars, hence my stridence in this conversation; I do not take to defense of religion well, not after the things it has done and the mindset it holds.

You also seem to be personally offended by this. My apologies to you if this is the case.