-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Talking Politics
- Thread starter Legends of 2017
- Start date
easy said:
I find this post quite concerning. So anyone who practices their religion at work but outside business hours should be 'scrutinised'? For what their PC orthodoxy?
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Djevv said:
If its written in the constitution that the workplace is secular, yep.
you use 'PC' as a fix-it-all anti-salve to be applied to anything that counters your beliefs.
no worries. I wont change that.
Baloo said:
lets not forget that Dutton excused himself from parliament and went for a hit of squash during Rudds apology to stolen gen.
unprecedented *smile*. Like Keating said.
Ive taken the Abbott-Dutton unemployed double @$1.85 and I pledge here as I live and breath, I will give 100% of profits to a gay homeless atheist black woman
Baloo said:
It depends on whether we want our pollies to reflect public opinion or lead it. Keating was one who was able to lead it. I prefer leaders.
Secular in this context just mean no church or religion owns the place. Its not some alternative religion which, if you violate its orthodoxy, invites you to be 'scrutinised'.easy said:
Section 116 of the Constitution of Australia precludes the Commonwealth of Australia (i.e., the federal parliament) from making laws for establishing any religion, imposing any religious observance, or prohibiting the free exercise of any religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia
These are my beliefs. What problem do you have with them?
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Djevv said:
To be perfectly honest,
The only real problem I have with the Catholic Church, is that its officers rape small boys in a regular, organised and deliberate manner, resulting in the physical and psychological devastation of whole generations of communities.
That aside, I don't have have any problem whatsoever with you, or anyone else who is not a democratically elected official of The Commonwealth of Australia,
who isnt running a prayer group based on any religion whatsoever, on tax payers time and real estate.
That should be pretty unambiguous?
Panthera Tigris said:
yeah that too.
Except it does increase the level of difficulty of finding a recipient for my political vampire demise gambling altruistism.
easy said:
You seem to be changing you tune here a bit.
I would agree that it is not OK to run a prayer group in business hours. I specified 'outside business hours'.
So its a democratically elected official in a building owned by taxpayer? No religious activity is allowed? Correct?
To me that seems verging on unconstitutional - 'prohibiting the free exercise of any religion'.
Like I said before - concerning.
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Djevv said:
what's wrong with Sunday worship in a consecrated church?
yeah Id be comfortable with no religious stuff in parliament house whatsoever,
no mandalas, no indig' creation stories, no crucifixes, no incense, no 'goddess is dancing' fridge magnets. Hell, if I was the PC fun police and I caught some green bludger meditating when they should be writing policy, I'd slap a ban on 'em.
and I wouldn't really lose any sleep if that viewpoint caused you concern or not
Baloo said:
I disagree. It's pretty clear to me in those circumstances what the individual believes. The leadership element is that (s)he does not wish to compromise the broader party's position. It's bloody hard having a strong set of values and being a politician. However, it's worse if they don't have these values.
lukeanddad said:
Disagree. Fundamentally the MP is representing their constituency. By walking out from a vote they are dodging the issue. Not strong enough in their own convictions nor a strong enough representative of their constituency. It may be an unrealistic view of how parliament works, but it's how it should work.
easy said:
No burkas, no headscarves, no skullcaps, no holy books (even on iphones), no religious scare beards, no circumcised appendages, no colander head gear, no crosses, no dog collars, no st Christopher medallions, no phylacteries, no prayer, no beads, no incense etc. Lets get 'em all in!
And who would legislate this? Parliament! Except one problem the constitution says 'no prohibiting the free exercise of any religion'.
I do lose sleep over this. I wonder what is becoming of our great country when average Joe Blow footy followers want to circumscribe and ban my freedoms!
Baloo said:
Doesn’t this suggest that pollies should be blank pages, not able to make any decision before checking in with constituents?
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Djevv said:
Unless you are Scott Morrison bowing your head and holding hands and praising be to baby Jesus in our parliament, that I just got a 6 grand bill to help fund, when he should be drafting policy to marginalise our nations most vulnerable. Or, unless you are Israel falou broadcasting delusional hatred, further marginalising the kind of people ScoMo hates, then you can rest easy that this Joeblo is happy for you to worship your god freely and in peace.
Djevv said:
MPs can be as religious or atheist as they like... They just can't make laws that violate s 116
I'd guess there are chapels and prayer rooms in Parliament House and scattered throughout govt offices and on crown land like airports and hospitalsand maybe even the G.... Doesn't mean the State is imposing or establishing any religion.
Many MPs go to Opening of Parliament church services...and if they preyed to a Hindu deity I would not bat an eyelid.
YinnarTiger said:
Mightn't be long before Pauline is crying over how yet another bloke has let her Down.