Tuesday, 17 August 2021 2:46:31 PM

When are religions tolerated? Or do political aspirations expand the religious horizon, its application and tolerance.

Attempting to apply the law equally to all Religious believers without any actual religious beliefsl; or in other words look at it from a Secular perspective. Being the messenger of something that begins like that makes it an obviously high risk issue.

Don't shoot me or my editor. I am only a secular Australian citing our laws as they have been cited and applied in my own country of Australia to the religions of this country.

Do you support Freedom of Religion?

If so then we must support those Taliban who are raping and killing as directed by their religion even though it disgusts me to the core and even though I think it is in breach of the human rights of the young girls who will obviously be raped by men of this religion. There is no end to the horror that a religion can wreak on any population that it sees as a threat to it.

Should we acknowledge the Taliban as the new sovereign authority in Afghanistan now that they have taken control of the country and are in the process of establishing a government even though they are unlikely to hold elections that is not necessarily against the law in Afghanistan.

If Yes then we should apply the same standards that we demand for ourselves and countries like ours.

If they are from a sovereign government and they pass a Religious Protection law like we are expecting here in Australia because we will not have anyone outside of the country to tell us what and how to do it We don't allow that to happen here in Australia I heard recently from one or two of our Prime Ministers say that publicly.

Should we protect their sovereign rights when they are the same rights that we reserve for ourselves?

Should we interfere in their internal religious squabbles over interpretations of their Holy Books or should we leave that to their Churches like we do here in Australia as that way there is still no regulation that it gives the appearance of strict control and management when there is none. Should we support protecting the rights of their religious believers to determine these things for themselves.

If we apply the same logic that we demand for ourselves the only thing that we might disagree on is that they are not a Democracy which is not a crime anywhere on the planet as far as I understand that s Democracy is only an ideal that we aim for just like we have been aiming for Human Rights here since December 10 1948 when the people voted for that to become our reality or have they too been betrayed by those seeking power rather than a role as a fair and genuine representative of the people of Australia.

Don't get me wrong as I abhor what they do to children in the same way I abhor what Christianity, Christians and their religions do to defenseless women and children here in my own country; unless of course there is some law that I am missing that applies to this as I have heard very specific statements by Prime Ministers on this issue. As I recall it was Malcolm Turnbull that said that the Catholic Church is free to operate in our country provided it abides by our laws.

Of course the Royal Commission came along and showed us all the constant since before federation rape of children and covering it up even still today and they are being paid largest sums than ever before and no signs of any laws that Malcolm spoke of and no sanctions should they break any as they rely on 116 of our Constitution to hold the country to blackmail through our own legislative systems and that seems to be OK for those in power at any given moment..

Then there was Kevin Rudd who said he did not stand outside the Church and tell them what to do when he was asked about the child abuse issue. He sat with the pope and his political representative and made a concordat that you and I are not a part of except when we ask and they respond like the Queen that it is a matter of protocol.

Of course they were asked which protocol and naturally everything that the executive council is off limits to the people and so no defence is needed while the gets his ends and means and the people of Australia are no wiser. Instead they are a whole lot poorer and their children continued to be abused because the Prime Minister of Australia abrogated his responsibility to the children of his own country.

Later on we had Christian Porter cheat every victim that came forward despite the words of their apology they skimmed a hundred thousand dollars off the top of any compensation call it "acknowledgement" simply because Redress would not pass Human Rights laws that we are obligated to.

Should the Afghanistan government take a note from Prime Minister Morrisson's work to bring us Religious Freedom laws here so that we are all singing from the same book

If Yes then we should apply the same standards that we demand for ourselves and countries like ours. If they are form a sovereign government and they pass a Religious Protection law like we are expecting here in Australia because we will not have anyone outside of the country to tell us what and how to do it.

Should we interfere in their internal religious squabbles over interpretations of their Holy Books? Should we support protecting the rights of their religious believers to determine these things for themselves.

If we apply the same logic that we demand for ourselves the only thing that we might disagree on is that they are not a Democracy which is not a crime anywhere on the planet.

Don't get me wrong as I abhor what they do to child in the same way I abhor what Christianity, Christians and their religions do to defenseless women and children here in my own country; unless of course there is some law that I am missing that applies to this?

Is Ritual murder, ritual rape or ritual abuse ever acceptable?

Depending on the religious view is it possible to determine if a religion is safe or should we legislate to control all of them?

Given the news re the Afghanistan it could be that they are Muslim of sort or the other as that logic appears in their Holy Books.

If they are Sikh, they would likely take themselves of to a psychiatrist.

If they are Christian, then we need to apply the same rules regarding respecting the freedom of religion.

If they are Jewish or any of the other 40,000+ variations of Christianity then we should apply the freedom of religion theory.

If they are indigenous people we should protect them from annihilation by one of the religious groups without interfering with their religious rites and rituals..

Let this be an object lesson - why Australia cannot afford Freedom of Religion Law legislation

What we see in Afghanistan would be a natural outcome here were it not for our secular laws. Laws that the current Prime Minister seeks to undermine with his "Freedom of Religion " legislation , opening the door just enough to allow religious bigotry and biases couched in language mimicking religious 'faith ' but in reality pushing a dangerous politico/religious agenda inspired by extremes first marketed in the United States.

It will apply to Australia once Morrison has his way with his nonsense Freedom of Religion Law.