OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Poupou Escobar]

I think several religious communities are doing a good job of grinding themselves down with impunity.

Victim blaming? Or just an indication of the focus by secular media?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Lol gutless. You have a dig at me personally and run away when confronted.

As you were.

How did I have a dig at you personally? And how does internet confrontation require courage? You're the atheist here. Start talking sense.

 

[Gary Gutful]

It might've been Chipmunk.

Or Happy MEel.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Sure, but is that because she has broken her vows ( so a reason related to her pregnancy ) or simply because she is pregnant?

I don't think they could actually sack her. But they could de-nun her or whatever they call it. I was just being flippant (for once).

 

[Bandwagon]

Well the secular community obviously enjoy the bulk of the privilege in society, but they also tend to hypocrisy by claiming that it is religious people who hold all the power.

It's not really an insecurity on my part - I get all the privilege of secularism by pretending I am also secular - but I believe it's unjust that I or anyone else should have to. Obviously no law is going to change that; being free to discriminate on religious grounds will never trump the benefits of identifying as secular, so it's not a right I will ever personally exercise. But I think others should have the choice where they currently don't.

Hmm, I don't believe this to be the case at all. Traditionally ( since white settlement ) we have been a Christian dominated society, various denominations have suffered some discrimination from other denominations, but as a whole Christians have enjoyed a position of privilege.

I would say this is evidenced further by the fact that there are some gaps in anti discrimination law in the protection of religious freedom, because for the most part anti discrimination law has been written to address specific recognised problems, and persecution of the religious simply hasn't been a problem requiring addressing.

Secularism isn't simply a separation of church and state, it's societal, and it's only quite recently ( relatively speaking ) that the desertion of religion has become more prevalent. So one could say that whist the laws have not changed, certainly society has, and all that has seen is the erosion of the position of privilege the religious have held over and above the secular.

That being the case, one could look at the way this legislation is designed to enshrine a hierarchy of rights, whereby the rights of the religious are given greater import over other basic human rights of the non religious, as a push back from the religious, not as means by which to ensure some form of balance, but indeed an effort to regain lost privilege.

This faux persecution argument is nothing but a lament for that loss.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I don't think they could actually sack her. But they could de-nun her or whatever they call it. I was just being flippant (for once).

Nothing like a good de-nunning...

 

[Bazal]

LMAO at Pou telling anyone to make sense...cracking

 

[Bandwagon]

I don't think they could actually sack her. But they could de-nun her or whatever they call it. I was just being flippant (for once).

Defrock?

I very much think they could. She has taken a vow of chastity, and broken it.

So she could be sacked for rooting, the proof of which is her pregnancy.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Victim blaming? Or just an indication of the focus by secular media?

Not just victim blaming but the years of support for the monsters who have perpetrated some awful things, ringing fencing their assets to limit damages claims etc. There's a fair bit of goodwill to earn back. Doing the right thing for a couple of years is just a start for some institutions. It'll take a while.

 

[Bazal]

Defrock?

I very much think they could. She has taken a vow of chastity, and broken it.

So she could be sacked for rooting, the proof of which is her pregnancy.

It could also be argued that a nun is not technically an employee.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

So she could be sacked for rooting, the proof of which is her pregnancy.

Yeh, well that's how all of this started.

 

[Gronk]

How did I have a dig at you personally? And how does internet confrontation require courage? You're the atheist here. Start talking sense.

Weasel words again. You are a complex chap.

 

[Eelogical]

Nothing like a good de-nunning...

Said no priest, ever.

 

[Gronk]

Nothing like a good de-nunning...

 

[Bandwagon]

The ADA and SDA both contain exemptions for religious bodies. Both Acts contain a general exemption for any acts or practices that conform to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the relevant religion or are necessary to avoid injury to the religious sensitivities of adherents of that religion (section 35 ADA and para 37(d) SDA). This general test is almost identical across the ADA and SDA (except that the SDA refers to ‘religious susceptibilities’). The ADA and SDA provisions both apply to a religious body which is ‘a body established for religious purposes’. The exemptions apply in relation to all of the grounds of discrimination covered by the Acts (ie under the SDA this includes sex, marital status, pregnancy, potential pregnancy and family responsibilities).

https://www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/FOI/Documents/Religious Exemptions.pdf

SDA is the sex discrimination act 1984

 

[Gary Gutful]

Not just victim blaming but the years of support for the monsters who have perpetrated some awful things, ringing fencing their assets to limit damages claims etc. There's a fair bit of goodwill to earn back. Doing the right thing for a couple of years is just a start for some institutions. It'll take a while.

Thats a fair point. Some absolute merkin behaviour that is inexcusable.

But equally there are plenty of good people of faith who shouldn't be punished because of the actions of the religious heirarchy.

 

[hindy111]

Weasel words again. You are a complex chap.

You most likely lack the IQ and open mind to understand different views or how another person may think differently or even why you think a certain way in life.
I understand this and why I am not harsh on yourself. You might be right or wrong. But you certainly lack flexibility and not open to others views. That's fine, you can't help the way your brain works.

 

[hindy111]

Thats a fair point. Some absolute merkin behaviour that is inexcusable.

But equally there are plenty of good people of faith who shouldn't be punished because of the actions of the religious heirarchy.

Most people in the world are decent people.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I've found Gronk to be very flexible.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Most people in the world are decent people.

85%?