If you don't agree with it, go!

I found this bit particularily funny;

"Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation"

Go tell that to the "Abo's" who were on the direct end of those "Christian principles"

Then this bit "once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, "THE RIGHT TO LEAVE"

(where should the Abo's go?)

and then finally this bit; "If you aren't happy here - then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here."

....oh, wait I thought that was written by an Aborigine, not one of the invaders.

And those who were sent there for not coveting their neighbours possessions.

Although the above comments are probably reasonable, it's a pity that they both have a go at Australians, not at Muslims who want to change the country to their ways. I assume that, because the English are not particularly blame-free in many areas, you'd be happy for England to become a Muslim state.

Rob

Most people want to change the country they live in towards their own preferences. Whether or not they can depends on how many people they can persuade to hold the same ideals as their own.

It is called democracy.

But so that we do not stray too far off-topic, the concept of a society that neither charges nor pays interest is an interesting one (except for those who work at the Bank of England).

You miss the irony. A new group of people arriving in Australia and wanting "to change the country to their ways" has already happened. About 230 years ago.

Of course such thing happen continuously in every country - here with the Celts, Romans, Anglo Saxons, Vikings, Normans, Asians etc. Getting indignant about it is hypocricy.

It's not about blame. Any country will likely get taken over by the most powerful group - it's a fact of life like water flowing downhill. Debating the rights and wrongs of it is as pointless as debating the rights and wrongs of the colour of the sky.

Cut the bullshit moral superiority and indignation at immigrants wanting to change things - that what immigrants have done for thousands of years. If you want to resist the invaders, then do so, but don't think you somehow have any more moral right than them.

I think there is an interesting disconnect in the original article.

It doesn't discriminate (or apparently understand the difference) between those who want 'x' legal system (might be sharia, might be something else) and those who would use violence to try and impose that type of system.

AFAICS from the original, freedom means,"must remain the same as now" which includes 'Christianity' (would be interesting to know the percentage of Ozzies who go to church on Sundays :-).

If someone wants to campaign for England (whatever THAT is these days, does it even exist except on the football field?) to become muslim, thats fine by me, **as long as** I am allowed to say/proseltise(sp?)/proclaim that the muslim religion is for brain dead morons whose beleifs are 500 years out of date who want to oppress women, homos, and kill non-muslims.

Its time that causing offense was welcomed. If your particular belief cant tolerate offence, IMHO its a pretty poor one that deserves no support from the state.

Indeed.

Depends what you mean by "persuade".

Er, I don't think so. Most countries that have been changed by new immigrants weren't changed by democracy. I don't think the Romans balloted the Celts, or Captain Cook balloted the Aboriginals.

AIUI interest is just disguised...

Hopefully it's a true interpretation of the Qur?ân.

yeah, I know - I view such people as no better than any other terrorist grouping.

What really frustrates me in the whole 'is Islam evil' debate is that there doesn't appear to be any website that lays out the quotes and the extremities of interpretation.

The fact the UK muslim council didn't do this after 9/11 & 7/7 makes me suspicious.

Daytona

No, hang on. A lot of it is opinion and therefore doesn't need to be attributed.

It just happens to make a lot of sense. Why the hell do Muslims want to try to change the country that befriends them? And get all snotty-nosed if they are rebuffed.

Rob

two seperate issues there, and one doesn't neccessarily follow on from the other. Where is the evidence for muslims 'getting all snotty nosed' (aka blowing people up???) if they are rebuffed _specifically for asking for sharia law in oz_?

Maybe some of it is to do with the way the British tried to change India (which then included Pakistan and Bangladesh), then got all snotty-nosed when they were kicked out.

As an Indian once said to me - the British gave us bureaucracy and we perfected it.

Changing a Travellers' Cheque in Allahabad was a real eye-opener for my colleagues.

The opinions weren't easily identifiable, that's deceitful and manipulative afaic.

Daytona

But the whole thing could be opinion. This opinion may or may not be shared by someone else, and the opinion may have been reached by hearing someone else's opinion, but that doesn't mean it's any less valid.

Rob