Racial and Religious Vilification

Macca, I confess I've heard nothing about this. Would you happen to have more information, by any chance?

PC madness

Jihadwatch.org's coverage
CBN coverage
CNS coverage 1 & 2
Rasmusin's Weblog

There are some reports on the story to whet everyone's appetite.

As for the incident itself, if it is completely true, then it seems pretty ridiculous to me.

If what the judge said in summing up is true then I believe these pastors are guilty. They misrepresented islam by taking passages out of context. How would you like it if a muslim came along and started saying christians believe in killing babies, they also believe in genocide etc. These are all legitimate claims that could be made about christianity if passages are taken out of context. The bottom line is those guys did not give an accurate presentation of islam and that was the problem. In Australia alot of christians were critical of the pastors in victoria being charged but as more facts came out christians started changing their mind. Of course their was still a significant group who thought they shouldn't be charged no matter what.

Edit: People also need to realise that Australias constitution does not guarentee freedom of speach. Many people talk about freedom of speach as if it was guarenteed simply because it is in some other countries.

I looked at some articles on the catch the fire ministries website. They used the Herald Sun newspaper as an accurate source. This worries me. I've worked in paper shops for years and the number of errors I've seen is shocking. People I know have been misquoted. On one occasion I was there when the statement was made and then read what the newspaper quoted my friend as saying. They were two very different things. In one of the articles it says the US is a christian country because over 60% of people go to church at least once a month. The same can be said of Australia. We need to remember that just because someone says they're a christian or just because they go to church once a month it doesn't make them a christian. The church is plagued in these two countries simply because at one point in their history there was something wrong with you if you didn't go to church so alot of people went sat in church once a week. Their articles also say what a great christian peter costello is. Why has his brother (a baptist minister) spoken so strongly against policies implemented by the government. One of them must be in the wrong.
I've always maintained that the best way to impact on people is to work on your own life as a christian and make sure your living in Gods will and this will naturally impact on the people around you. The description of muslims that I found on the Catch the fire website does not include any muslims I know. They talk about christianity being great but alot of christian leaders have said the resurecetion didn't happen. Without the resurection we have no cause.

TheDag said:

If what the judge said in summing up is true then I believe these pastors are guilty. They misrepresented islam by taking passages out of context. How would you like it if a muslim came along and started saying christians believe in killing babies, they also believe in genocide etc. These are all legitimate claims that could be made about christianity if passages are taken out of context. The bottom line is those guys did not give an accurate presentation of islam and that was the problem. In Australia alot of christians were critical of the pastors in victoria being charged but as more facts came out christians started changing their mind. Of course their was still a significant group who thought they shouldn't be charged no matter what.

Click to expand...

Of course I would hate it, and do hate it when I'm represented as genocidal (good choice!) and I wouldn't belong to a church whose pastor misrepresented anyone's holy book or holy faith! That's just wrong!

Edit: People also need to realise that Australias constitution does not guarentee freedom of speach. Many people talk about freedom of speach as if it was guarenteed simply because it is in some other countries.

Click to expand...

Really??!! Australia??
How does that work out in practice, TheDag?
Ours in the US isn't as total as many of us like to think it is, but it's a pretty good deal for us, and I've always wondered how people living in countries with democratic and parlimentarian systems without that constitutional guarantee openly express themselves. Perhaps more carefully? I've never had anyone I could ask before...

Plan 9 said:

Really??!! Australia??
How does that work out in practice, TheDag?
Ours in the US isn't as total as many of us like to think it is, but it's a pretty good deal for us, and I've always wondered how people living in countries with democratic and parlimentarian systems without that constitutional guarantee openly express themselves. Perhaps more carefully? I've never had anyone I could ask before...

Click to expand...

Generally most governments encourage freedom of speach and if someone says something controversial they then add that people need to be responsible. The current australian government did last year threaten to make government funding to aid/social justice organisations conditional on them not being critical of government policy.