Should Muslim Holidays be recognised in Australia? (1 Viewer)

[Jeee]

Damn straight!

Read.

we're a secular country, why should we celebrate any religious holidays?

 

[Jeee]

We don't like your kind around here.

*insert southern accent*

I'm really happy for you, and imma let you finish, but ethnics make
the best food of all time. OF ALL TIME.
*shakes fist homer simpson style*

 

[Omie Jay]

hahahahahaha!!

 

[wixxy2348]

imo tbh

 

[kokodamonkey]

We're not a Christian country, should we celebrate Christian holidays?

We are a christian country.

 

[Cookie182]

We are a christian country.

Not constitutionally and that's what counts.

Otherwise by your rationale we will one day be a "muslim" nation if Islamic migrants were the majority. Would you then contend that?

 

[Iron]

Na pretty sure the constitution ends with God Save the Queen
Parliament still prays to the Christian God before sitting etc

 

[kokodamonkey]

Not constitutionally and that's what counts.

Otherwise by your rationale we will one day be a "muslim" nation if Islamic migrants were the majority. Would you then contend that?

Working on instituting a white only 10kids each requirement babybonus funding scheme. that'll fix the problem.

 

[Cookie182]

Na pretty sure the constitution ends with God Save the Queen
Parliament still prays to the Christian God before sitting etc

Only in the spirit of our ties to the monarchy if you want to be anal, yes I can't argue that (the queen being head of the Church of England). although I have the constitution right here, what section is "God the Save the Queen"?

But you all of people (law/politics) know that our government very much holds true to a clear separation of Church and State- religion never enters the public debate, it is simply "kept quiet" here unlike it's nature in say the US (which ironically is very secular).

We don't legislate based on Biblical Laws. Otherwise if we were "officially christian" this wouldn't read:

Section 116:

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

That is, the government could never enforce what the NSW government has just done. The failure of our constitution (and it would of avoided this debate) is to not include "States" in sec. 116.

Do a CIA factbook- we have no "official religion", the majority of adherence to any faith group is irrelevant.

Note to, of those ~60% how many really give a fuck? I think that is grossly overestimated. Look around Sunday morning, people are surfing, working, playing golf or doing whatever. Last I checked it was closer to like 1-2 % of ACTUAL church attenders; most people just lie on census or write down their "official heritage" (ie from a christian background)- I would argue the majority of Australians live a completely secular life, irrespective of whether they believe in god when they go to bed at night.

 

[Cookie182]

Also Iron, when I get my republic soon and then my secular Bill of Rights,

We will be free from this horrendous monarchal (and theistic) ties!

 

[Cookie182]

Working on instituting a white only 10kids each requirement babybonus funding scheme. that'll fix the problem.

That will do a lot- you know for the millions of WHITES who are of non-christian faiths?

Or is this purely a racial policy?

 

[Iron]

Will be very interesting what Fr Brennan does with the right to life.
There will be a shitstorm I think

 

[Cookie182]

Will be very interesting what Fr Brennan does with the right to life.
There will be a shitstorm I think

hmm it will be

Irrelevant to the topic, but are you a republican?

Also, do you support a Bill of Rights (it will actually enforce your right to religious freedoms), Pell is a liar!

 

[Iron]

Erm probably not a republican. I think we've really missed the boat for all that jingoistic nation-state stuff. The real issue is what shape the new global order will take, because we cant take much more of terrorism, climate change, illegal immigrants thru the old world order imo. The major policy problems today are inherently international; a republic wont help much.

Any Bill of Rights is inferior to the common law imho and results in confused, political decisions which move away from justice for the individual

 

[Cookie182]

Erm probably not a republican. I think we've really missed the boat for all that jingoistic nation-state stuff. The real issue is what shape the new global order will take, because we cant take much more of terrorism, climate change, illegal immigrants thru the old world order imo. The major policy problems today are inherently international; a republic wont help much.

Any Bill of Rights is inferior to the common law imho and results in confused, political decisions which move away from justice for the individual

I of course disagree, but would recommend the new book by Geffeory Robinson QC "The Statute of Liberty" any cliche argument against is carefully considered and destroyed, its a short and great read- it destroys any of the spin that Howard/Costello/Pell and Bob Carr have laid out over the years.

I think a Bill of Rights is fundamental for our future as to avoid the embarrassments we have already seen like the Dr Haneef case, Cornelia Rau etc

 

[Iron]

Lol didnt Robinson marry, like, the biggest monarchist in the world or something?

Any Bill of Rights isnt good. It's very very tricky and there's only a small chance that theyll word it nicely enough to ensure actual rights for those who deserve them. I think that many top officials in Britian have criticised their own Bill as becoming a 'villians act' or something, in that it has seemingly operated to unfairly protect the worst law-breakers.
Idk, to me it just seems so crude and... positivist. Has none of the weight, majesty and graceful movements of the common law.

 

[Cookie182]

Lol didnt Robinson marry, like, the biggest monarchist in the world or something?

Any Bill of Rights isnt good. It's very very tricky and there's only a small chance that theyll word it nicely enough to ensure actual rights for those who deserve them. I think that many top officials in Britian have criticised their own Bill as becoming a 'villians act' or something, in that it has seemingly operated to unfairly protect the worst law-breakers.
Idk, to me it just seems so crude and... positivist. Has none of the weight, majesty and graceful movements of the common law.

meh too detailed to really argue atm, particularly in an unrelated thread.

Seriously though, have a read of that book for a different perspective- let us know what you think of his arguments.

I have no idea who he is married to.

 

[PunjabiBradPitt]

Fuck no

 

[kokodamonkey]

Also Iron, when I get my republic soon and then my secular Bill of Rights,

We will be free from this horrendous monarchal (and theistic) ties!

they are the two worst ideas i have heard all day!

 

[Cookie182]

they are the two worst ideas i have heard all day!

Cool.

Given that every post I have ever read from you spouts the same hard-line conservative, irrational crap...it really doesn't mean much.

Good Day.