ozso said:

Apparently people went there to experience a certain type of atmosphere. The interiors have been changed too, to give "a more clean appearance".

Click to expand...

It's always had a clean appearance.

ozso said:

I meant maybe they simply dislike woke, as opposed to the conspiracy theory sounding reasons you came up with.

Click to expand...

That doesnt even make sense. Woke is not about simply taste.

Woke is about a whole political-cultural change agenda.

Aryeh Jay said:

I would like to see more about ... the accomplishments of Germany during the period of 1933-1945 ... instead of woke transgender drag queens grooming our kids.

Click to expand...

Perhaps a new exhibit on the masculine patriotic oompah flammable fecund way in which the Institute for Sexual Science was dealt with.

On 6 May 1933 ... the Deutsche Studentenschaftmade an organised attack on the Institute of Sex Research.[17][71] A brass band accompanied them as they arrived in the morning. After breaking into the building, the students destroyed much of what was inside, and looted tens of thousands of items – including works by authors who had been blacklisted in Nazi Germany. Following this, the leader of the students gave a speech before the institute, and the students sang Horst-Wessel-Lied.[72] Members of the Sturmabteilung (SA) appeared later in the day to continue looting the institute.[72]

Four days later, the institute's remaining library and archives were publicly hauled out and burned in the streets of the Opernplatz by members of SA alongside the students.

Books burned at the Opernplatz at this time were not solely looted from the institute. Also burned were books by Jewish writers, and pacifists such as Erich Maria Remarque that were removed from local public libraries, bookshops, and the Humboldt University.

A newspaper headline soon after the raids declared the "un-German Spirit" (or undeutschen Geist) of the institute. It was forced to shut down.[9] The Nazis took control of the buildings for their own purposes.[72] The destruction of the institute preceded a wider campaign against sexual reform and contraception, which were perceived as a threat to the German birth rate.

ozso said:

Cracker Barrel loses almost $100 million in value as stock plunges after new logo release.

Cracker Barrel shed almost $100 million in market value Thursday after its stock plunged following the release of a new logo. The new design eliminates a longstanding drawing of an overall-clad man leaning against a barrel, in favor of a cleaner logo featuring just the chain's name.

This is another go woke go broke situation. Where the CEO wants to change the company's image. Apparently not having any appreciation for who her customers are. What the main demographic is.

Cracker Barrel loses almost $100 million in value as stock plunges after new logo release

Cracker Barrel stock plunged as much as 15% after the restaurant chain released a new logo that removes its long-time image of a man leaning against a barrel.

www.cbsnews.com

Click to expand...

What is woke about that???

ozso said:

Why can't they just simply not like the progressive transformations, rather than hyperbolic conclusions like "these customers have been wound up to be hair triggered over every microscopic imagined "threat" to their precious culture".

Click to expand...

Because the whole premise of the thread is that people are rejecting the change because its "woke" - not because they simply dislike it.

Apple Sky said:

Yes, by presenting everyone with fairy tales.

Click to expand...

Like the ones that Dean Odle presents to you.

Western heads of state and government have declared that they would recognise a "Palestinian" state, whatever that may mean.

We assume that this will be implemented at the annual UN General Assembly in Sep, regardless of what Israel does. But where are today's prophets who warn these heads of state and government that their threats are actually directed against G-d and His covenant promises and therefore make Him extremely angry

Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people: let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. For the indignation of the Lord is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain also shall be cast out, and their stink shall come up out of their carcases, and the mountains shall be melted with their blood. And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree. For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, (also known as Edom, a region south of Judea. It represents all the enemies of G-d and His people) and upon the people of my curse, to judgment. The sword of the Lord is filled with blood, it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams: for the Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of Idumea. And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness. For it is the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion. Isa 34:1-8

From most Western countries, we hear only silence! Israel, however, has courageously rejected these threats openly, and we pray that this will continue.

Anyone who recognises "Palestine" now is sending a clear message to terrorists: massacre people, don't release hostages, and you will be rewarded with a state!

The recent announcements by France, Britain, Canada and Australia have emboldened the Iranian-backed "Palestinian" terrorist organisation Hamas.

Hamas' initial response to the announcements of possible state recognition was:


x.com

The recognition of the State of Palestine with full sovereignty is the fruit of our people's continuous struggle and an expression of respect for the rules of international law.

Click to expand...

with the terrorist organisation viewing the statements by the heads of state and government of France, Great Britain, Canada and Australia as a direct consequence of its massacre on 7 Oct 2023.

Instead of putting pressure on Hamas to release the hostages, lay down its arms and relinquish control of the Gaza Strip, Western leaders have sent a message to the terrorist organisation that attacking Israel will lead to the creation of a "Palestinian" state, which will undoubtedly be ruled by Iranian-backed jihadists.

With their approach, European government representatives have not only made any negotiations impossible, but have also indirectly conveyed to Hamas that its attack on southern Israel and the kidnapping of its citizens would be rewarded with statehood.

Hamas leaders can only conclude that their refusal to release the hostages was the right move. As senior Hamas representative Bassem Naim wrote:


x.com

Based on my monitoring of the international scene, what is happening today around the world is not merely a campaign of solidarity — it is a true global revolution in support of Palestinian rights: for freedom and the right to determine our destiny. It surpasses the borders of the great city that is creating miracles and laying the foundation for future glory — Gaza. I do not believe there has ever been a city or cause in human history that has achieved such unanimous and unwavering global support for victory, despite all differences in religion, race, and language, as Gaza and Palestine have.

The road ahead is long, difficult, painful, and costly, but it is honorable and precious. We are moving in the right direction — toward victory and liberation — and the steps are closer than we expect. Our enemy and its allies know this very well.

G-d Almighty will grant us victory, and when He gives, He gives with honor. And in that moment, all who played a role in this glorious epic will be proud — proud of their contribution to the history of our people and our cause.

Click to expand...

x.com

In a joint statement issued by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Sai'qa forces, terrorist organizations that do not recognize Israel's right to exist and vehemently reject the so-called two-state solution, it states:

Welcoming any international effort that supports the Palestinian people and their rights, and demanding unconditional recognition of the Palestinian state and the rights of its people as a political entitlement and historical justice.

Click to expand...

These terrorist organizations have repeatedly emphasized that they will never lay down their arms or recognize Israel's right to exist. They have also repeatedly vowed to continue their jihad against Israel until it is destroyed. Despite their rejection of the two-state solution, "Palestinian" terrorists are nevertheless willing to accept any land Israel gives them in order to use it as a springboard for the destruction of Israel.

In 2017, Hamas published a policy paper confirming this approach. In it, the terrorist organization made it clear that it would not reject the establishment of a "Palestinian" state in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, but emphasized that this did not mean recognizing Israel's right to exist:

Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of Jun 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.

Click to expand...

The paper was mistakenly interpreted by some in the West as a sign of pragmatism, moderation, and acceptance of the two-state solution on the part of the terrorist organization. This is incorrect. Hamas is pretending to support a "Palestinian" state alongside Israel as part of a campaign to deceive and mislead the world in order to be accepted as a legitimate player in the "Palestinian" arena. In reality, the organization clearly states that such a state should be used for

the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea.

Click to expand...

The same document unequivocally states that they will continue their jihad against Israel even after the establishment of a "Palestinian" state:

Resisting the occupation with all means and methods is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws and by international norms and laws. At the heart of these lies armed resistance, which is regarded as the strategic choice for protecting the principles and the rights of the Palestinian people.

Click to expand...

Eran Lerman, senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, noted

There are no signs of ‘moderation’ here, even though Hamas describes Islam as a religion of the middle way and moderation,...

The document aggressively reiterates the familiar themes of Hamas ideology; Palestine is indivisible in its entirety, and the rights of the Palestinian people are eternal and inalienable. No facts created by the Zionist project may remain.

Click to expand...

This is certainly not the right time to talk about a unbiblical two-state solution, as jihadists and terrorists see it as a reward for their atrocities against Israel. It is more important to focus on dismantling and destroying all "Palestinian" terrorist groups and to initiate a process of deradicalisation of the "Palestinians" and their voluntary resettlement in Arab states.


Israel 22,072 km² - Morocco 446,550 km², Algeria 2,382,000 km², Mauritania 1,031,000 km², Tunisia 163,610 km²,
Libya 1,760,000 km², Egypt 1,002,000 km², Sudan 1,886,000 km², Syria 185,180 km², Iraq 438,314 km²,
Jordan 89,342 km², Saudi Arabia 2,150,000 km², Yemen 527,968 km², Somalia 637,657, Kuwait 17,818 km²,
Bahrain 786.8 km², Qatar 11,581 km², United Arab Emirates 83,600 km², Oman 309,500 km²

Under the current circumstances, declarations recognising a "Palestinian" state send the message to "Palestinians" that terrorism and violence are the best way to gain international support for their own state... and everything else.

In the Torah, Moses mentions more than 80 times that Israel must possess the entire land on forever west of the Jordan River, which G-d has promised to them

For ye shall pass over Jordan to go in to possess the land which the Lord your G-d giveth you, and ye shall possess it, and dwell therein. Deu 11:31

That is why we pray persistently to Him that He will fulfil His Word (Jeremiah 1:12) and firmly anchor the truth of His gift of His land to His people Israel in the minds and hearts of the Jews, wherever they may currently live.

May the world's attention on Gaza accelerate the expansion of Israeli sovereignty.

Hentenza said:

Yes

NASA is not hiding God instead they are highlighting His creation.

Click to expand...

Yes, by presenting everyone with fairy tales.

There is a good movie: Paul, Apostle of Christ from 2018 that, I think, is a good portrayal of Paul. The relationship of Paul and Luke is a major secondary topic of the film ( Luke is played by Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus Christ in 2004 film: The Passion).

The movie is faithfully based but not precisely based but it genuinely captures the terror of Christian persecutions during Paul’s captivity in Rome. There are also good portrayals of Paul’s friends Priscilla & Aquila ( Romans 16:3).

This is not a movie for young children even though there is care to avoid any gory portrayal, the terror of the persecutions was real and unavoidable for an honest depiction.

Bible reading is first and foremost and this movie is helpful in bringing history alive.


Little side joke, Olivier Martinez, who plays a good part as a demoted Roman military officer to prison warden. He is a French actor & I remember seeing a YouTube comment saying he had a “bad” French accent. (???).

Did the government send Bolton a year's worth of letters politely asking him to return the documents in his possession?

durangodawood said:

Except you wont find them at Cracker Barrel anymore, where the traditional catfish has been replaced by woke cod.

Click to expand...

Nice one!

Daniel Carlton said:

Yes, I am arguing the affirmative and I will prove not only that idolatry was condemned by the ancient church but also it is as we see in the second commandment- made things that are venerated.

Now my opponents are going to get desperate, engage personal attacks and perhaps even deliberately tell lies. Why? Becuase they are here to defend their church. I am here to defend the faith, one true faith.

There has already been a bogus term introduced - “icon”. An icon is an idol. The people who attempt to make a (false) distinction between idol and icon are simply trying to justify their error and sin.

(Next witness)

Justin martyr.

Credited as the first Christian apologist defines idolatry as “set in shrines and called Gods”. So something that is made and venerated.

Approx 140 A.D.

First apology of Justin martyr - chapter 9.


View attachment 368975

Click to expand...

Icons aren’t idols because no one is worshipping them.

RileyG said:

Oh well. There are bigger fish to fry.

Click to expand...

Except you wont find them at Cracker Barrel anymore, where the traditional catfish has been replaced by woke cod.

She also said she's innocent and never saw anything untoward regarding anyone, including Epstein.

comana said:

Fair enough. Woke is over used and now just means “I don’t like it” as far as I’m concerned. I’m sure they’ll lose some customers but not updating also risks stagnation and decline as loyal customers die off.

I admit I have never been in one. It doesn’t appeal to me to dine in a cluttered country store motif with a country diner menu. No loss or gain to me either way.

Click to expand...

I had their blueberry pancakes and enjoyed their shop. It was neat.

I like to keep things simple.

Don’t like a restaurant? Don’t eat there, but don’t tell others they cannot. Also applies to Chick Fil A et al.

(I’m not referring to you, just in general)

Eh?

public hermit said:

How about providing some quotes so we can get this show on the road? Present your evidence of what you have read, and then folks can agree/disagree.

Click to expand...

Yes, I am arguing the affirmative and I will prove not only that idolatry was condemned by the ancient church but also it is as we see in the second commandment- made things that are venerated.

Now my opponents are going to get desperate, engage personal attacks and perhaps even deliberately tell lies. Why? Becuase they are here to defend their church. I am here to defend the faith, one true faith.

There has already been a bogus term introduced - “icon”. An icon is an idol. The people who attempt to make a (false) distinction between idol and icon are simply trying to justify their error and sin.

(Next witness)

Justin martyr.

Credited as the first Christian apologist defines idolatry as “set in shrines and called Gods”. So something that is made and venerated.

Approx 140 A.D.

First apology of Justin martyr - chapter 9.

OP is more proof 'woke' has jumped the shark in some conservative circles. It is now as splunge as CRT.

BelieveItOarKnot said:

The evil within no one is reconciled to God, nor is evil eradicated from within any believer.

The most we can extract from the arrangement is HONESTY. Otherwise we're simply another lying hypocrite captured within by that same evil present. Certainly not in dominion by any stretch.

The very basis of even being a disciples is hatred of our own life and the life of others, because of the fact of evil's presence. Luke 14:26

No one will stand justified before God. The determination of GUILTY has been set from the beginning, Romans 3:19

Any claim of no evil evil present or no sin just speaks of captivity by it along with false self justification, all demonically sourced

Click to expand...

Honesty about sin, stemming from humility, is key to our reconciliation, and so to our renewal. our rebirth, by God, our freedom from the captivity of that sin (Rom 6). And it's not either/or; read the Parable of the Talents or Bags of Gold, Matt 25. God is expecting, demanding, some return and increase in the grace and righteousness He gives us, rather than our lazily burying the gift as if "investing" it is all a futile endeavor. He demands holiness and gives us the means to acheive it. We mock Him and the sacrifice of His Son (Gal 6:7, Heb 6:6) if we don't begin to grow in righteousness by virtue of our encounter with Him. We can't even love right without Him, and yet a believer does love: "We love Him because He first loved us". Does that sound like someone who is unavoidably enslaved to sin alone? Does satan love God, as the greatest commandent says we must?

BelieveItOarKnot said:

And it's equally clear that the evil present within no one cooperates with God or makes the correct choices.

Paul notes this succinctly in Romans 7:21 stating that even when he does good, evil is present with him. It's not just a choice to only do good. Evil remains part of the quotient.

Click to expand...

Be that as it may, there is a difference between the unfaithful son, and the faithful son. Just denying the difference, or refusing to accept the difference, or preaching the difference doesn't exist, doesn't change the Biblical Fact that there is a difference between a faithful man and an unfaithful man. Shall we not seek to understand the difference, and then accept it when God's Word defines it for us?

Had you read just a little further in Paul's Letter to the Romans, or even considered Paul's words that I posted for you, that you completely ignored, you might understand the difference, as Paul spells it out quite clearly.

A faithful son listens and obeys his mother, regardless of the thoughts or voices to the contrary. A Faithful man "Yield's Himself" to the Words of God regardless of the "other voices" in the garden God placed him in. This was explained to Cain in the very beginning.

Lets look at what Paul actually teaches in Roman's 7.

Rom. 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. (Death)

This was the exact same thing Eve dealt with in the garden. Noah lived with the same dilemma, Abraham, Caleb, David, Shadrack and all men of Faith, even the faithful boy I used as an example, lived under this same reality.

Had you read the conclusion of Paul's message, and believed it, you would understand.

24 O wretched man that I am! "who shall deliver me" from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind "I myself serve the law of God"; but with the flesh the law of sin.

What is the Law of Sin? Is it not, "The wages of Sin is death"? So then, how can a spiritually dead flesh, direct my deeds? If then, I am "Walking" in the Law of God that I serve with my mind, I am walking in the Spirit, not in the Flesh. And if I'm walking (acting, speaking, thinking) in the Spirit, there is no more condemnation because my Deeds are lawful and no longer unlawful. The Law of God is not Sin. So the evil remains as I have no control over temptations, but it has no power to influence my deeds, by which God Judges "ALL MEN", unless I give it the power.

After all, in the many scriptures I posted for you concerning hos god says HE judges men, all of which you completely ignored, not One of them said God judges men by their thoughts. NOT ONE. This should have an influence on you, we will see.

Just as the faithful son doesn't steal the candy bar from the store, even though there is a will and a desire to do so within him. He, with his mind, is serving the law of his mother, not the law of his flesh. In this way the Faithful man "strives against sin" and God knows his struggles, having lived as a man Himself. So when a man of Faith falls, is drawn away in a weak moment, and disobeys God in a temptation, there is repentance and forgiveness available to him. The man, chastised by God, grows in the knowledge of Him and in his weakness he is made stronger having learned obedience through the things he suffered. And this because God chastises those HE Loves, not unlike the loving mother who scold her son for his mistakes, that he might learn not to make them.

But according to the Jesus "of the Bible", there are "many" self proclaimed "Christians" who call Jesus Lord, Lord, but refuse to "serve the Law of God with their mind". Choosing instead to create their own judgments, and go about establishing their own righteousness, the Jesus "of the Bible" says HE doesn't even know them.

So yes, there is evil within a man to test his faith. But to "Do evil", is a choice men make. At least this is what the God "of the bible" teaches. As it is written:

1 John 3:7 Little children, "let no man deceive you": he that "doeth righteousness" is righteous, even as he is righteous.

What should I choose to do? Erase God's Word from my mind and continue instead in your religion? Or should I repent, turn to God, and bring forth "Deeds" worthy of repentance?

BelieveItOarKnot said:

That's just a polite way to excuse the reality of evil present, to in effect, let yourself off the hook when there is no letting evil off the hook for anyone.

We don't have magical incantations and actions to make ourselves sinless.

Jesus quite plainly stated in multiple citings that evil lawless thoughts defile us. It's not optional.

Mark 7:21-23

You can claim that only applies if you act on it but that's never the case.

Click to expand...

Mark 7: 21 For from within out of the heart of men proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: 23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

These are all temptations to disobey God's Law, by the principalities, powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world, that I didn't invite, nor have I any control over when and where the attack comes. As it is written;

1 Peter 5: 6 "Humble yourselves" therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: 7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. 8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: 9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.


You are preaching here that the temptation itself defiles men. You are preaching here that the armor of God is powerless against temptations. That "ruling over" the temptation is futile because it's the temptation itself that defiles a man. But Paul doesn't teach this at all.

Rom. 6: Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

You are preaching here that it doesn't matter if I choose to obey God or not, that the temptation itself defiles me. That when I say "Get behind me satan", it's too late. That "Overcoming temptation" is a LIE, because it's the temptation itself that defiles a man.

Of course, this is wicked foolishness. Jesus was tempted but wasn't "defiled" because HE "resisted the temptation", HE didn't "ACT" on the Temptation. Therefore, there was no Sin.

Why do you think Jesus said, "I came not to do my own Will, but the Will of Him who sent me?

Why do you think Paul said;

Rom. 12: 1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, "that ye present" your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. Does God not give me the free will ability to do this?

2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed "by the renewing of your mind", that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

These Scriptures have meaning to me, believe it or not.

BelieveItOarKnot said:

That's correct. We are actually no better than the worst of sinners,

Click to expand...

Your preaching that there isn't any difference between the Body of Christ, and children of devil is foolishness. Your preaching that there isn't any difference between a faithful man and an unfaithful man is not what Paul was talking about in Romans 3 or 1 Timothy at all. He is saying that if he chooses to continue rejecting God's judgments and laws like the rebellious Jews in the law and prophets did, (Those who had the Oracles of God but didn't believe them) like he did in times past, he will receive the same judgment as them. "For there is no respect of persons with God."

In other words, God isn't going to spare him just because he rejects God Judgments, "In Christ's Name".

durangodawood said:

Srsly tho, the new logo looks like a dog biscuit. A woke dog biscuit.

Click to expand...

Plain and simple. It’s just a logo.

Meh?

ozso said:

Cracker Barrel loses almost $100 million in value as stock plunges after new logo release.

Cracker Barrel shed almost $100 million in market value Thursday after its stock plunged following the release of a new logo. The new design eliminates a longstanding drawing of an overall-clad man leaning against a barrel, in favor of a cleaner logo featuring just the chain's name.

This is another go woke go broke situation. Where the CEO wants to change the company's image. Apparently not having any appreciation for who her customers are. What the main demographic is.

Cracker Barrel loses almost $100 million in value as stock plunges after new logo release

Cracker Barrel stock plunged as much as 15% after the restaurant chain released a new logo that removes its long-time image of a man leaning against a barrel.

www.cbsnews.com

Click to expand...

Oh well. There are bigger fish to fry.

Haven’t ate there in several years. Might go if I choose.

ozso said:

Eh? Woke is all about reshaping culture.

Click to expand...

Ok, then it is a lot more loaded than "they just didnt like it".

Hentenza said:

Quite the naive view. From the UK parliament.

Click to expand...

The outcome of the investigation you linked to confirmed everything I said in my post.

The independent review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales

Sharia councils have no legal status and no legal binding authority under civil law. Whilst sharia is a source of guidance for many Muslims, sharia councils have no legal jurisdiction in England and Wales. Thus if any decisions or recommendations are made by a sharia council that are inconsistent with domestic law (including equality policies such as the Equality Act 2010) domestic law will prevail. Sharia councils will be acting illegally should they seek to exclude domestic law. Although they claim no binding legal authority, they do in fact act in a decision making capacity when dealing with Islamic divorce.

Common misconceptions around sharia councils often perpetuate owing to the use of incorrect terms such as referring to them as ‘courts’ rather than councils or to their members as ‘judges’... It is this misrepresentation of sharia councils as courts that leads to public misconceptions over the primacy of sharia over domestic law and concerns of a parallel legal system.

It should also be noted at the outset that those proposing a ban on sharia councils provide no counter proposal or any solution for anyone seeking a religious divorce. It is clear from all the evidence that sharia councils are fulfilling a need in some Muslim communities. There is a demand for religious divorce and this is currently being answered by the sharia councils.

Freedom of religion must include the freedom to practice that religion and therefore the freedom to accept the practices and disciplines of that religion and the authority of those within that religion. Thus a Muslim woman has the right to seek a religious divorce by such means as their religion permits even though she may be already divorced in civil law. No religious law can be enforced in our civil law. There is no legal duty on a citizen to comply with any religious law. The state may (and should) make that clear to all. Article 11 effectively protects the formation and maintenance of sharia councils, which are voluntary associations of scholars recognised within the Muslim community as having a particular authority. However, all three articles are qualified.

Comparative groups in other religions

Muslims are not unique in creating groups and organisations that provide guidance and decision making according to religious law. Two similar groups are the Jewish Beth Din and the Roman Catholic tribunals.



There are also concerns about Beth dins.

UK Jewish Orthodox councils 'institutionalising marital captivity and upholding discriminatory religious laws'

According to Jewish law, both spouses must consent to a religious divorce. But it is executed by a writ – the “get” – delivered by the husband, of his own free will, which the wife needs to accept.

Without a get, any future offspring of the woman – and nine generations of children – will be “mamzerim”, and would only able to marry another “mamzer”.

Ms Zee said the Jewish councils deserve scrutiny as well as sharia courts, because they contribute to women remaining in “marital captivity”.

Sharia councils and Batei Din operate as bodies under the Arbitration Act 1996, to resolve disputes among community members.

“Unlike sharia councils, where a qadi can issue a divorce in the absence of a husband, it is not possible for a Jewish woman to obtain a get without her husband’s co-operation (at least, not according to classic interpretations). In that vein, a Beth Din does not function as a ‘court’; it is a witness to the dissolution of the marriage.”

She alleges that, in theory, Jewish women can be worse off than Muslim would-be divorcees. A sharia council can issue a divorce without the man’s involvement.


Chained Women: The Jewish wives being held hostage in abusive marriages

An upsurge in cases of men refusing to grant their wives a religious divorce is causing mounting alarm in Australian Jewish communities, but the Government is refusing to intervene in what it considers to be a religious matter.

Outside Israel, Jewish couples can be civilly divorced, but if they do not also obtain a gett, they are considered still married in Orthodox law.

The gett process, overseen by a tribunal of all-male rabbis, strictly requires that a husband must willingly give his wife the gett, which she must willingly accept.

Most of the time this happens quickly and amicably.

But in what experts say is a growing number of cases, Jewish men in Australia are abusing their power in the divorce process to force women into giving up money, property and child custody.

Without a gett, a woman cannot remarry under Jewish law.

If she began a new relationship, she'd be considered an adulteress, and if she had children, they'd be considered mamzerim — often incorrectly translated as "bastards" — and heavily stigmatised.

An ABC News investigation — part of an ongoing series exploring the complex links between religion and domestic violence — has found rising concerns that men are exploiting their advantage in the Jewish divorce process to control and traumatise women who have endured sometimes decades of violence and abuse.

Desk trauma said:

It wasn’t that complicated of a question.

Click to expand...

My answer is I don’t agree with it.