Gillard is a true red
Jun 30th 2010, 5:53 am
#31
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,396
Re: Gillard is a true red
You could easily say the same about atheism.
And what about those leaders who are atheist and do the same - a couple of examples include Albania when it was under Hoxha, North Korea, China. Political doctrine can be easily seen along the same lines as religious doctrine, and I would say that atheist doctrine is a form of religious doctrine.
Not all Christians agree with the proposed internet filter, it's far to easy to generalise this as a "Christian supported" proposal. The problem is that many people (both Christian and "other") are not aware that child porn traffic is apparently more likely on peer-to-peer than WWW, and so the internet filter will have very little effect.
So you would want to get rid of 5 of the public holidays in Australia then? And you think ANZAC Day has to change, with public commemorations becoming "non-religious"?
So you would want to get rid of 5 of the public holidays in Australia then? And you think ANZAC Day has to change, with public commemorations becoming "non-religious"?
Jun 30th 2010, 5:59 am
#32
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,396
Re: Gillard is a true red
OK. It's interesting for somebody like myself to wonder if the religious really do sit down and think "what would God do here" and if they really do make decisions based on that.
I would like to think politicians wouldn't base policy on that, but who's to know.
I would like to think politicians wouldn't base policy on that, but who's to know.
Jun 30th 2010, 6:01 am
#33
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,555
Re: Gillard is a true red
Internet filtering is being driven by Stephen Fielding of Family First which is a Christian Evangelical party. Labour cut a deal with him - filtering for support.
Internet filtering is something done by North Korea, China, Iran - So does that mean Christians are reds?
My agnostic nature is a result of Catholic school. RE certainly broadened my horizons.
Internet filtering is something done by North Korea, China, Iran - So does that mean Christians are reds?
My agnostic nature is a result of Catholic school. RE certainly broadened my horizons.
Jun 30th 2010, 6:06 am
#34
Account Closed
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,188
Re: Gillard is a true red
As you pointed out in the previous post, ANY belief is likely to colour your thinking, even if its only AFL is better than NRL.
Jun 30th 2010, 6:13 am
#36
has lost The Game
Joined: Apr 2005
Location: Chippendale, Sydney
Posts: 8,735
Re: Gillard is a true red
Not all Christians agree with the proposed internet filter, it's far to easy to generalise this as a "Christian supported" proposal. The problem is that many people (both Christian and "other") are not aware that child porn traffic is apparently more likely on peer-to-peer than WWW, and so the internet filter will have very little effect.
So you would want to get rid of 5 of the public holidays in Australia then? And you think ANZAC Day has to change, with public commemorations becoming "non-religious"?
So you would want to get rid of 5 of the public holidays in Australia then? And you think ANZAC Day has to change, with public commemorations becoming "non-religious"?
No, far from it - Secularism isn't about killing off religion and all it's artifacts, such as feasts, celebrations and such, it is about keeping religious dogma out of political decision making - Decision making that should be evidence based, not based upon religious teachings etc.
As for the filter, yes you're right, the majority of Christians don't support it, but unfortunately, the Christian right that have been driving it do, and this has been music to the ears of Stephen Conroy - he has legitimately been able to develop a censorship policy that is in line with his religious views, irrespective of the massed volume of evidence to the contrary and the wishes of just about everybody else.
S
Jun 30th 2010, 6:17 am
#37
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,396
Re: Gillard is a true red
So how many public holidays should we have then? There's an awful lot of feasts and celebrations there could be with all the different religions represented in Australia, or should people have to identify their faith or religion to employers and only have personal public holidays relevant to their beliefs (in addition to a few standard ones)?
Jun 30th 2010, 6:49 am
#38
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,230
Re: Gillard is a true red
I suppose I'm thinking about Christian religions. As I said earlier, personally I have no issues with any politician being a practising Catholic/Jew/Whatever and truly don't understand why people get bent out of shape about it.
As you pointed out in the previous post, ANY belief is likely to colour your thinking, even if its only AFL is better than NRL.
As you pointed out in the previous post, ANY belief is likely to colour your thinking, even if its only AFL is better than NRL.
I'm being overly harsh on singling out religion actually. Of course not every who believes in god is a raving extremist and religious beliefs do seem more flexible in general these days. As mentioned above people can have stubborn beliefs in all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons. Extreme and unshakable beliefs of any nature are dangerous.
I guess I'm not so much anti-religion as pro-free thinking and open mindedness.
Jun 30th 2010, 9:38 am
#41
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 65,493
Re: Gillard is a true red
I don't object to gay marriage, and this is something I say out of genuine belief and certainly not simply to be part of the herd. I would play devil's advocate for a moment and ask you why gay and lesbian people would want to be part of an institution that has been for heterosexual couples for centuries? If they live together and are not in open relationships then they are married, for all intents and purposes. Why must their union be called "marriage" for them to be happy? Etc.
Jun 30th 2010, 9:49 am
#42
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
Re: Gillard is a true red
No it means they are just as willing to impose their beliefs on you regardless of what you believe because they know they are right and you are wrong. Just like islamic jihadists.
Jun 30th 2010, 10:56 am
#43
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Northumberland to Maida Vale Perth
Posts: 972
Re: Gillard is a true red
No - I don't think they should be. We live in a so called secular society where religion and the state are supposedly kept separate. Though laws are often derived from religious teachings - theft, murder etc, these are also things that carry a particular benefit for society as a whole.
However, when we start to see religious dogma creep into politics, it invariably leaves one group or another at a disadvantage, and is invariably restrictive in some way.
A good example of this is gay marriage/civil unions. Both KRudd and Abbot said that the union of marriage is sacred and must only be between a man and a woman (because it says so in the bible). So this religious dogma leaves many gay and lesbian couples disadvantaged when compared to straight couples. Yet, the anti-discrimination legislation clearly state that nothing available to one citizen should be denied another. Unless they happen to be gay and want to have their partnership formally and legally recognised obviously.
Gillard represents the best possibility for recognition of gay partnerships that has come along in a very long time. I'm not gay myself, but I respect people who are, and believe that they should have the same opportunities available to them as I do. Sadly religious dogma doesn't feel the same way.
S
However, when we start to see religious dogma creep into politics, it invariably leaves one group or another at a disadvantage, and is invariably restrictive in some way.
A good example of this is gay marriage/civil unions. Both KRudd and Abbot said that the union of marriage is sacred and must only be between a man and a woman (because it says so in the bible). So this religious dogma leaves many gay and lesbian couples disadvantaged when compared to straight couples. Yet, the anti-discrimination legislation clearly state that nothing available to one citizen should be denied another. Unless they happen to be gay and want to have their partnership formally and legally recognised obviously.
Gillard represents the best possibility for recognition of gay partnerships that has come along in a very long time. I'm not gay myself, but I respect people who are, and believe that they should have the same opportunities available to them as I do. Sadly religious dogma doesn't feel the same way.
S
What about 2 mates who live together but want to be classed as married so they don't feel disadvantaged?
Keel
Jun 30th 2010, 11:39 am
#45
Account Closed
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,188
Re: Gillard is a true red
What's wrong with settling for the legal protections of a 'social contract'?
