Is Australia next?

Genersis · May 27, 2015

mark46 said:
If allowed, almost all developed countries would vote to allow homosexuals to have the secular right to marry. That is certainly true in the US.
...

I wouldn't be so sure.

While I doubt most polls overstate support, support is normally highest among those least likely to turn up and vote in referendum/elections/ETC. Young people and minorities.
If a referendum was held I think it pretty unlikely it would pass.
I think you'd need support for SSM polling consistently at least above 60% for a good chance of it passing, preferably 65%.
Just my thoughts anyway.

ebia · May 27, 2015

dude99 said:
I pray it does not. At lead the Australian Prime Minister is against it. It probably not pass because of that.

Infact he would know it is wrong as at one time in his life he was training to be a priest.

Doesn't stop him justifying demonising and locking up innocent men, women and children to serve his polical ends.

He's been quite clear that his Religous opinion shouldnt determine politics - except where it's politically convenient that it should.

dude99 · May 27, 2015

ebia said:
Doesn't stop him justifying demonising and locking up innocent men, women and children to serve his polical ends.

He's been quite clear that his Religous opinion shouldnt determine politics - except where it's politically convenient that it should.

That is an entirely different matter. If you wish to discuss the asylum seekers then create a new thread for this.

ebia · May 27, 2015

dude99 said:
That is an entirely different matter. If you wish to discuss the asylum seekers then create a new thread for this.

Just pointing out that the PM has both explicitly said that his religion does not guide his politics, and that his behaviour Bears this out.

pdudgeon · May 27, 2015

ebia said:
Just pointing out that the PM has both explicitly said that his religion does not guide his politics, and that his behaviour Bears this out.

but it should guide everything a Christian does, no matter who that Christian is.
That's what following Christ is supposed to be all about...following Him, not striking out on your own, or following someone or something else.

ebia · May 27, 2015

pdudgeon said:
but it should guide everything a Christian does, no matter who that Christian is.
That's what following Christ is supposed to be all about...following Him, not striking out on your own, or following someone or something else.

Take that up with him, not me.

Fish and Bread · May 27, 2015

FlaviusAetius said:
Frankly I don't give a hoot about these people or trying to follow the ideals of unorthodox or outright atheist Enlightened thinkers.

As for moving, I have neither the means or desire. After all even Malta is crumbling too, so I might as well live in comfort if Satan has truly won over the world with egalitarianism.

I'm not totally clear on this and I don't want to make assumptions. Are you against the philosophy of Enlightenment thinkers in general, or only those Enlightenment thinkers who consider themselves atheists or unorthodox? Do you prefer the thinking and culture of the Middle Ages? What do you think of the Renaissance? To be honest, I'm a little flummoxed in terms of how to reply to this. Obviously, as you are likely aware, most western democracies are based in part on Enlightenment ideas, like Locke's assertion of "life, liberty, and property" as essential rights (Which became "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" in the American Declaration of Independence) and Voltaire's assertions of a right to free speech (an ideal reflected in the 1st amendment to the US constitution, though not in his words). And most of the transition in the world's thinking from superstition to science occurred during the same time frame as the Enlightenment and is considered died into it. You're using your liberty and free speech, which you have in part because of Enlightenment philosophies that were translated into governmental policies, and are typing this from a computer, which is something we probably wouldn't have without the scientific method and the Enlightenment. It's a bit of a paradox. What do you think of science in general?

I'm not sure I've ever run across someone who openly thinks freedom and equality are bad things, and openly opposes the Enlightenment. I've run across people who are implicitly against those things by the conclusions they draw and the things they write, but I think this is the first where someone is openly saying they are against the things and not claiming to be misunderstood.

I'll give you points for intellectual honesty, but it sounds like we have completely opposite world views in general.

Personally, if you're right that God stands against freedom, equality, egalitarianism, and the Enlightenment and Satan is for all those things, I'd have to side with the former Angel of Light turned leader of Hell.

But I don't think God is against those things.

I mean, how could God be against people being free? How could God be against equality as a general concept? How could he object to us discovering and appreciating the world he created using objective methodologies to better quantify and understand it?

I'm glad we moved on from the middle ages to these times, personally.

On a side note, your profile lists you as agnostic. Are you really? If so, how do you square that with wanting to go back to a time like the middle ages where people burned folks who questioned God's existence? How can you be against the freedom that allows you to say what you feel even though it's not been stamped and approved by the Holy Office of the Inquisition?

Have you really thought this all through?

Fish and Bread · May 27, 2015

LivingWordUnity said:
Marriage belongs to God since He is the one who invented it.

No he didn't.

Fish and Bread · May 27, 2015

I think it would be great if Australia went next and affirmed that everyone has equal rights under the law and that gay couples can also have the legal privileges that marriage confers if they so choose. Societies should not make anyone second class citizens.

mark46 · May 27, 2015

pdudgeon said:
but please remember that those early Christians did not consider themselves as citizens of this world.
So while they gave Caesar his due in taxes by returning to him the money he had minted,
as citizens of a heavenly kingdom they were under the rule of God.

Yes, and Christians remain under the rule of God, and should not knowingly continue in sin. This does NOT mean that secular governments should pass laws against all sinful activity. It doesn't even mean that the government won't encourage sinful activity like contraception.

Unless we refuse to pay our taxes, we support many, many sinful activities of government. We render under Casear and the secular state the "right" to make laws for everyone. Unless Christians are forced into a homosexual marriage, I really don't understand the issue with allowing pagans to perform pagan rites of marriage.

pdudgeon · May 27, 2015

ebia said:
Take that up with him, not me.

What I'm saying here is that if the PM of Australia says he's a Christian, then i would expect that he follows Christ in his life, and that his life is not compartmentalized; allowing Christ into some aspects and barring Him from entering in to other parts of the PM's life.

pdudgeon · May 27, 2015

mark46 said:
Yes, and Christians remain under the rule of God, and should not knowingly continue in sin. This does NOT mean that secular governments should pass laws against all sinful activity. It doesn't even mean that the government won't encourage sinful activity like contraception.

Unless we refuse to pay our taxes, we support many, many sinful activities of government. We render under Casear and the secular state the "right" to make laws for everyone. Unless Christians are forced into a homosexual marriage, I really don't understand the issue with allowing pagans to perform pagan rites of marriage.

If the governments (or the people who make up the governments) are not guided by God, then they must be guided by something/someone else. We've seen in history what happens when a government goes off on it's own and refuses to listen to God's counsel in matters.
Things go downhill fast.
On the other hand, when they do listen and follow God's full council, things go well for them and the people in that land.

mark46 · May 27, 2015

pdudgeon said:
What I'm saying here is that if the PM of Australia says he's a Christian, then i would expect that he follows Christ in his life, and that his life is not compartmentalized; allowing Christ into some aspects and barring Him from entering in to other parts of the PM's life.

So, you believe that those in Congress are not "real" Christians because they don't always vote as you think a Christian should vote? After all, our government is over 90% Christian. The hated Supreme Court has a Catholic majority. But they aren't "real" Christians, are they?

ebia · May 27, 2015

pdudgeon said:
What I'm saying here is that if the PM of Australia says he's a Christian, then i would expect that he follows Christ in his life, and that his life is not compartmentalized; allowing Christ into some aspects and barring Him from entering in to other parts of the PM's life.

He is a practicing Catholic.

I'm not defending him on anything.

I'm just point out that anyone relying on "Abbott is a Christian and wont allow it" is not on a good wicket. He'll behave I whatever way he thinks will win the votes from his support base

dude99 · May 28, 2015

Fish and Bread said:
I think it would be great if Australia went next and affirmed that everyone has equal rights under the law and that gay couples can also have the legal privileges that marriage confers if they so choose. Societies should not make anyone second class citizens.

Gays and Lesbians are not treated as second class citizens. Infact gay couples have equal rights as unmarried straight couples. Plus most people don't care less if you are gay or not too.

ebia said:
He is a practicing Catholic.

I'm not defending him on anything.

I'm just point out that anyone relying on "Abbott is a Christian and wont allow it" is not on a good wicket. He'll behave I whatever way he thinks will win the votes from his support base

Abbott has openly stated he is against gay marriage becoming legalised in Australia even with the objection of his sister who is lesbian and plans to have a gay marriage.

ebia said:
He is a practicing Catholic.

I'm not defending him on anything.

I'm just point out that anyone relying on "Abbott is a Christian and wont allow it" is not on a good wicket. He'll behave I whatever way he thinks will win the votes from his support base

I mean to state Abbott openly stated he is against gay marriage becoming legalised despite the objections of his lesbian sister who wishes to have a gay marriage or the wishes of the majority of Australia population that wishes to have gay marriage legalised.

Of course one of the last previous prime ministers who is atheist Julia Gillard was against gay marriage too so you do not have to be a Christian to not support gay marriage. However the bulk of the people against gay marriage are Christian.

ebia · May 28, 2015

dude99 said:
Gays and Lesbians are not treated as second class citizens. Infact gay couples have equal rights as unmarried straight couples. Plus most people don't care less if you are gay or not too.

Abbott has openly stated he is against gay marriage becoming legalised in Australia even with the objection of his sister who is lesbian and plans to have a gay marriage.

I mean to state Abbott openly stated he is against gay marriage becoming legalised despite the objections of his lesbian sister who wishes to have a gay marriage or the wishes of the majority of Australia population that wishes to have gay marriage legalised.

Of course one of the last previous prime ministers who is atheist Julia Gillard was against gay marriage too so you do not have to be a Christian to not support gay marriage. However the bulk of the people against gay marriage are Christian.

Im sure he is personally against it.

But he has also stated, and made clear in his actions, that he doesn't let his religious morality get in the way of his political ambitions.

pdudgeon · May 28, 2015

mark46 said:
So, you believe that those in Congress are not "real" Christians because they don't always vote as you think a Christian should vote? After all, our government is over 90% Christian. The hated Supreme Court has a Catholic majority. But they aren't "real" Christians, are they?

wrong conclusion.

Fenny the Fox said:
Might not be by referendum, but Greenland already passed SSM yesterday, actually. So they were next. Not sure where Australia will fall on the timeline.

thanks for the update.

pdudgeon · May 28, 2015

Fish and Bread said:
I'm not totally clear on this and I don't want to make assumptions. Are you against the philosophy of Enlightenment thinkers in general, or only those Enlightenment thinkers who consider themselves atheists or unorthodox? Do you prefer the thinking and culture of the Middle Ages? What do you think of the Renaissance? To be honest, I'm a little flummoxed in terms of how to reply to this. Obviously, as you are likely aware, most western democracies are based in part on Enlightenment ideas, like Locke's assertion of "life, liberty, and property" as essential rights (Which became "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" in the American Declaration of Independence) and Voltaire's assertions of a right to free speech (an ideal reflected in the 1st amendment to the US constitution, though not in his words). And most of the transition in the world's thinking from superstition to science occurred during the same time frame as the Enlightenment and is considered died into it. You're using your liberty and free speech, which you have in part because of Enlightenment philosophies that were translated into governmental policies, and are typing this from a computer, which is something we probably wouldn't have without the scientific method and the Enlightenment. It's a bit of a paradox. What do you think of science in general?

I'm not sure I've ever run across someone who openly thinks freedom and equality are bad things, and openly opposes the Enlightenment. I've run across people who are implicitly against those things by the conclusions they draw and the things they write, but I think this is the first where someone is openly saying they are against the things and not claiming to be misunderstood. I'll give you points for intellectual honesty, but it sounds like we have completely opposite world views in general. Personally, if you're right that God stands against freedom, equality, egalitarianism, and the Enlightenment and Satan is for all those things, I'd have to side with the former Angel of Light turned leader of Hell. But I don't think God is against those things.

I mean, how could God be against people being free? How could God be against equality as a general concept? How could he object to us discovering and appreciating the world he created using objective methodologies to better quantify and understand it?

I'm glad we moved on from the middle ages to these times, personally.

On a side note, your profile lists you as agnostic. Are you really? If so, how do you square that with wanting to go back to a time like the middle ages where people burned folks who questioned God's existence? How can you be against the freedom that allows you to say what you feel even though it's not been stamped and approved by the Holy Office of the Inquisition?

Have you really thought this all through?

first, let me commend you for your thoughtful post quoted above.
however i have only one correction to make.
The ideas of life, liberty, freedom, and justice originated with God, and not with the Enlightenment philosophers that you've cited.

Fish and Bread · May 28, 2015

FlaviusAetius said:
When questioned by Job about his suffering, his response was essentially "I am all powerful, might makes right!"

I've noticed that. However, I can't get behind that sort of attitude. I do not believe that might makes right. Right down to the core of my being, I feel that is an immoral position. So, if God really feels that way, I'm in trouble in the afterlife, I guess. But I can't pretend it's okay. Might doesn't make right for me, torture is always wrong (Even if it happens in the afterlife- and maybe especially if it happens in the afterlife, because of the eternal nature it is said to have there), freedom and equality are important principles- all of these are things I believe. God being all-powerful and taking the opposite positions would not suddenly make the opposite positions moral for me, they'd make God immoral for me.

I can only hope that some of these interpretations people have of scripture and tradition are wrong, incomplete, or fragmentary and don't reflect the full truth about God and that we are progressing towards a better understanding. After all, Christ came in part to teach us that might doesn't make right- the Roman Empire hung him from a cross, they were the powerful authority there, and he humbled himself and took human form to demonstrate that they were wrong. Jesus was also more inclusive than some religious authorities of the day. I'd like to think that Jesus was pointing us towards a progressive future rather than just saying "This is as compassionate as you're allowed to be" or "All these things are stuff *you* guys should do to be more ethical, but God does the exact opposite. Do as I say and not as I do.", which would be especially odd in that he was taking Jewish authorities to task for saying "Do as I say and not as I do" in other words throughout the Gospels. I mean, I could be wrong, but if I am I'll wind in hell either way, so I as might as well try to hope for the best, right? I'm really not the type to cower before an evil dictator- so I'm just going to have to hope that God is really a benevolent loving kind of dictator.

Is Australia next?

Person of Disinterest

Senior Contributor

Newbie

Senior Contributor

Traditional Catholic

Senior Contributor

Dona nobis pacem

Dona nobis pacem

Dona nobis pacem

Well-Known Member

Traditional Catholic

Traditional Catholic

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

Newbie

Senior Contributor

Traditional Catholic

Traditional Catholic

Dona nobis pacem

Similar threads