Post: #1

I just got the following email, and I was almost cheering in the office when I read it. It is just fanatastic, and a stance I wish that others would have the courage to take. (please note this is copied from the email and is not my own words)

Quote:What A Great P.M.

He's done it again..
He sure isn't backing down on his hard line stance and one has to appreciate his belief in the rights of his native countrymen.

A breath of fresh air to see someone lead.
I wish some leaders would step up in Canada & USA .

Australian Prime Minister does it again!!

This man should be appointed King of the World.. Truer words have never been spoken.

It took a lot of courage for this man to speak what he had to say for the world to hear. The retribution could be phenomenal, but at least he was willing to take a stand on his and Australia 's beliefs.

Whole world needs a leader like this!



Prime Minister Kevin Rudd - Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks..


Separately, Rudd angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote:

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.. Take It Or Leave It.
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. '

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But 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'.'

'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves in Canada & USA , WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

Post: #2

Wow, I've never heard a politician in a position of power who'd actually say something like that. I guess he wants Australia to remain how it is rather than change for others. At first I thought it was gonna be a silly topic considering the ridiculous amount of praise he was getting from that one person.

Post: #3

Never thought I'd be applauding a politician, let alone a Prime Minister, but (using polite words) Hell Yes!!! Go Keving Rudd! This is, actually, similar to France? telling Muslim women to NOT wear their full body 'suits' in public. If they come to Australia, follow Australian customs/rules etc. Firmly support THIS action take be the PM, but not some of his other actions. Stolen Gen. comes to mind, but thats a whole 'nother matter and not for debate on this forum.. Good find DoN.

Post: #4

I salute this man.

Can I steal him for President of the U.S? Pretty please?

Post: #5

Kevin Rudd didn't say that, John Howard did (sorta; this email is completely out of context).

Those are definitely not his exact words... and he took that stance in 2007/2008.

Post: #6

Uh huh. I should hope that's out of context. Seriously, "we're a land founded on freedom, so speak only our language and worship only our god or get out?" Not much freedom there. And wasn't Australia founded as a penal colony? On land stolen from non-christian native peoples? Maybe Australia wasn't founded so much on freedom after all.

Then again, "freedom" frequently seems to mean "freedom only to look, think, and talk as I do". For the colonizing Europeans the new nations meant freedom from the oppression of kings and bishops, but for the native people of those lands the new colonial nations frequently meant death on both a cultural and personal scale.

It's only when respect for personal freedom is expanded beyond tribal circles that it becomes a transcendent human virtue worthy of allegiance, protection, and promotion.

Am I objecting the enforcement of laws against horrific practices like 'honor killing'? Of course not. I don't object to government bodies keeping tabs on political or religious groups that seem to have the potential to become dangerous, either, whether they are radical Muslims, fundamentalist Christians, environmental extremists, organized criminal groups, or political associations of angry, gun-toting conservatives.

But the 'do it my way or get out' mentality hardly seems to fit with the virtue of personal freedom that Western countries are supposed to embrace.

Post: #7

No, Disciple of Nagash, I do not love him.

"Be the same as us" he says. Why would anyone want to be the same as another? I want to be the same as myself, not some didactic, dogmatic ideal. He does not promote individuality, but subservience to one system over another, which is, in essence, the same with a different shaped vector image. "Be the same as us or fuck off" he says. It worries me that the idea may catch on, as it has to catastrophic effect so many, many times in the past.

Post: #8

Well to be honest if they don't like living how Aussies live he's saying they should leave, he was talking about muslims who wanted to live under sharia law, which they can quite capably do in a muslim country rather than moving to Australia and then saying 'we want our laws, yours aren't good enough for us'

I like the policy he's saying which is 'adapt to our customs if you wanna live here, we aren't gonna adapt to yours just 'cus you move here, if you want your customs that badly live in your own country'

Post: #9

If he's saying one then he's saying the other, because no politician would dream of saying that one group of people deserve to be treated differently to another, right?

I don't know precisely how Sharia law would be seen to trump Australian civic law, but under a secular democracy no-one would be expected to answer to a religious law that had punitive powers the civil law did not. That is right and just (or at least as just as the laws of the state are), but I feel that they can co-exist provided the religious law is restricted to religious matters, and anyone who feels they should not be subject to religious laws should have the protection of the state against those laws. I would never advocate, for example, prison for breaking a religious law (the idea makes my stomach turn), but a voluntary penitence may be undertaken. Such has been a Christian tradition since, well, always. Naturally, I would much, much prefer that people give up this ridiculous metaphysical guff for the greater good of the world, but if people can peacefully co-exist then it may be so.

It seems to me that the specific mention of Sharia is a small part of a larger agenda, a narrow focus through a wider lens. Telescopes restrict peripheral vision. 'adapt to our customs if you wanna live here, we aren't gonna adapt to yours just 'cus you move here, if you want your customs that badly live in your own country' is a terribly narrow minded viewpoint, dependant on there only being one system of 'customs' to which everybody conforms, which is simply not the case. It isn't the case in Iran (though there are harsh punishments for deviating from the system), there shouldn't be in a country that's actually figured out that people actually matter, clearly there are some in Australia who haven't got as far as that yet.

Post: #10

This reminds me of what Henry Ford said way back, "You can ask for any color but it must be black." Or something within that context. What I'm trying to say is that while one preaches about freedom and liberty, the minute that they see something different they'll go "Hey, you practice OUR type of freedom and liberty, not yours that is different and I'm ignorant about. And if you don't follow OUR way, get on the HIGHWAY!" It's really hypocritical and very sad to have such a great idea and practice getting lynched just because one fears the unknown.

I think a Canadian guy said this once, "Your right to swing your arms ends when you touch my nose with your fist." It's really saying that one person's right shouldn't impose on another person's right. Yes, I agree that immigrants need to learn English (Australian English if you're that particular) and follow the country's laws. But at the same time, the people and the government shouldn't go "Ho-Ah-Ah-Hoo-Let's-Get-Them-Before-They-Destroy-Us" over an issue that's so trivial and try to compromise with the immigrants within reason. And it's not like the immigrants is gonna suddenly turn Australian overnight. It will take a couple of generations for them to assimilate or adapt to Australian culture assuming that the Australians themselves don't suddenly do something to alienate the immigrants or proved some of bad things about Australians are true e.g. Australians are white-supremest racists.

If people don't like change, too bad; change is always happening whether you like it or not. And think about it; a century ago, African Americans were worse than 2nd class citizens, they were literally slaves. And when some people thought of giving them the basic rights to just vote, other people made a fuss over it claiming some day the "blacks" would take over and dominate the "whites" as well as change their culture and their way of life. Now, they're much more better off (though they are some disparities).
So, I couldn't understand why are people oppose to other race/religion/culture coming into their country as first generation immigrants and still practicing their religion/language/customs because that's what they're familiar and comfortable with and yet expect them to suddenly turn into the ideal citizen of the said country overnight other than you're being an irrational, scared bigot.

Post: #11

(06-23-2010 06:13 PM)Zen Wrote:  If people don't like change, too bad; change is always happening whether you like it or not. And think about it; a century ago, African Americans were worse than 2nd class citizens, they were literally slaves. And when some people thought of giving them the basic rights to just vote, other people made a fuss over it claiming some day the "blacks" would take over and dominate the "whites" as well as change their culture and their way of life. Now, they're much more better off (though they are some disparities).
So, I couldn't understand why are people oppose to other race/religion/culture coming into their country as first generation immigrants and still practicing their religion/language/customs because that's what they're familiar and comfortable with and yet expect them to suddenly turn into the ideal citizen of the said country overnight other than you're being an irrational, scared bigot.

On one side I agree, but on the other I don't. Black slaves were forced to go there, with no choice at all. Forced to enter a different country with different cultures, languages and rules.

Immigrants on the other hand choose to go somewhere and live there, choose to live in a different country with different customs and rules. I personally don't mind a little diversity, but if its the same culture clash there as it is here ( Holland ) then I can understand where the reaction comes from. Going from Holland to Norway for example is not a big culture difference.

Going from Holland to Sudan however is exactly the same effect as the other way around. The cultures are so fundamentally different that people feel threatened by the ''invaders''. Which is understandable since cultures are a shared heritage people of a country have, and brings up patriotic feelings in most. ( My observations from what I see around me ) We are in an age of constant, daily change right now, with generalization creeping into our homes and slowly devouring our cultures. Its something alot of people fail to see though.

Immigrants on the other hand are right in your nose. It gives it a name, a place and face to point at and blame. Any immigrant these days should know that by now on the other hand if you ask me. If you move to a country with a different culture, you should be prepared to start off as a 2nd class citizen. Because thats the age we live in. Trust is something earned after all. If people on the other hand show their willingness to be part of the country they CHOSE to live in, then they are quickly adopted into their neighborhoods, eventhough they go to the Mosque 5 times a day and don't eat pork, or only kosher meat, or have a sabbath, or have big family dinners if thats part of their culture. As long as it does not conflict with the culture in general.

Not shaking hands of women, not standing up for a judge. Unacceptable in alot of countries. So why not try to be part of the culture and blend in at a general level? Makes life so much easier for everyone, and still means you can keep a big part of your own culture at home if it does not conflict with the general rules.

Hope its all coherent.

Post: #12

Personally speaking, I'm not against others celebrating their cultural identities. But what I do disagree with is if people try to force others to change specifically to adapt to their culture, it should be even either way rather than one rule for one and another for someone else. Yes change happens, and is vital for the improvement of humanity, but changes that simply do little to improve humanity sound wrong in my view. If a muslim wants to have a mosque to worship at, and wants to worship at the five times in a day they worship normally then that's perfectly reasonable and I definitely wouldn't want someone trying to prevent that simply because they disagree with their views.

But if a muslim wants Sharia law in a country whose laws oppose this, then it seems unfair, especially considering how much we have moved away from having religion dominate our daily lives, if a religious law says something about praying for amends of mistakes, such as reconciliation, it's fine as it doesn't really contradict our laws (speaking in Britain) but if they then wanted someone burned at the stake for crimes against 'God' (like in the middle ages europe against 'heretics') then it wouldn't be right as our laws say that death is not a suitable punishment unless for plotting to kill the queen (yes our country thinks that plotting to kill the queen is more deserving of a harsh punishment than plotting to kill an ordinary citizen, in my view that's unfair but I suppose she's seen as an important symbol of Britain). As long as implementation of one's culture in one's daily life doesn't strongly affect the laws of the country unless they are just (such as removal of Jim Crow laws in the US) then in my view its completely reasonable to allow these actions/beliefs etc.

Post: #13

I can't find myself cheering for anyone. This is just a knee-jerk reaction brought on by a logical fallacy, namely, guilt by association. I do not support the sharia law, at all. I support the law, equally and for each and every one. No one has a right to challenge it based on believing in any particular religion.

I think stating "we're founded on christian values" and so on is an incredibly unimpressive way of arguing your point. It is just as ignorant and narrow-minded to say "Why? Because this is how we've always done it". It sounds even less impressive to me as I am an atheist.

In short I am not impressed by this, all I see is one religious person making the claim his religion is superior and if you don't like you can go to hell. If he'd have any common sense he'd realise that lumping muslims together like this and telling them to conform or get the F--- out only goes to show what he really is. He should have stated that the people of australia lives under one law and everyone is treated as equals. To my eyes he's just a fearful and ignorant person who projects the will of a few onto many.

"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious", indeed.

Post: #14

Woohoo that makes me vicious, either that or patriotism is a flaw for those who aren't vicious maybe. I agree that saying sharia law would be wrong in AU because its a christian country is stupid and hypocritical, but at least he's standing up for his beliefs rather than submitting to others for their beliefs. You are correct Danceman in saying that it would have been better if he said 'we're not changing because most people agree we don't want it and hence democratically the people of Auustralia don't want this' but then it would be about whether they could have their law separate from others but then it would be unfair and unequal meaning a somewhat segregated society with people being born into one or the other based on their family, and last I heard most people have moved on from segregation so I agree with the guy in terms of not accepting religious law but his reasons for this do seem somewhat harsh and unjustified.

Post: #15

(06-23-2010 06:13 PM)Zen Wrote:  ... or proved some of bad things about Australians are true e.g. Australians are white-supremest racists.

Australians are White-Supremasists? What claim do you have to support this? Aboriginals of Australia are dark-skinned. The baby bonus for them is $1000 more than the Bonus for white people. The stolen generation, in which the government took the young children off the alcoholic, poor, parents who couldn't afford to pay for their education, nor did they really care about it, expecting their children to grow up, and be the same as themselves. On the Unemployment benefit, several kids (you get more $$$), and bottle of grog in hand. The children who were forcibly placed into foster care went on to recieve proper education, went to University and made a career out of it. One man became a multi-millionaire by investing in mining, then he had the gall to oust the Government by saying that he never had a proper upbringing and being away from his parents had scarred him for life, etc. He got an education, for free, university education, for free, all this whilst someone who, by chance happens to be white, has to pay thousands of dollars a year. God forbit if you try studying here and are not a citizen. Then, the government APOLOGISED for the Stolen Gen. stating that they were out of line, it never should have happened, etc. So, Aussies are not racist. Citizens might be, most I know anyway, but the Government is not. They are the same as over here (NZ). If you're black, then you get heaps more benefits. Over here they get more on the dol, more subsidy for University, black only university/schools (if we did that, we'd be labelled as KKK), etc.

(06-23-2010 06:13 PM)Zen Wrote:  expect them to suddenly turn into the ideal citizen of the said country overnight

Thats not it. Hell, even Aussies aren't perfect citizens. What it means is, same as any other county, if you come here, be prepared to adopt our way of life. If you don't speak English, then probably best you don't come. Lol, as long as they are willing to take english lessons. All he's saying is you cannot come here and expect to be treated differently than another citizen. Therefore, anyone wanting to live under Islamic Sharia law should either change, or leave. Thats it. After the terrorist bombings happenings in Bali, Middle East, can you blame them for being on edge? Its also, in a way, for their (immigrants) safety. Australians are VERY patriotic. If a muslim said they were not changing, and going to live under it, then chances are their broken, mangled body will be found the following day floating down a river.

Australia, whilst founded on Christian views, is not a christian nation. Catholic have a pretty big presence, and its pretty well even between most of it. Spiritualism too, is increasing.

So, the our way or the highway approach is completely uderstandable, and most countries embrace this, in part. By that I mean parts of it. Move to another country, and you are expected to live by their own customs, rules/laws, and regulations. Don't want to write any more on this, 'cos my post is rather long-winded as it is.

Cheers,
Chaos

Post: #16

Forgive me for the double post, BUT, Julia Gillard has overthrown Kevin Rudd as the Australian Prime Minister. Thus, making her the first female Australian PM. Same as NZ though, with Jenny Shiply, not the first Elected PM. Elections will be held later this year, so here's hoping that she won't get back in.

LINK for anyone interested in reading about it.

Post: #17

(06-24-2010 12:58 AM)ChaosJedi666 Wrote:  

(06-23-2010 06:13 PM)Zen Wrote:  ... or proved some of bad things about Australians are true e.g. Australians are white-supremest racists.

Australians are White-Supremasists? What claim do you have to support this?

It was an example of an accusation. The "It's our way or the highway" stance and the KKK-reference to the Australian Police in a comic of an Indian newspaper didn't really help paint a better picture. It's probably not true but some Australian are showing that trait thus some immigrants especially the extremists will generalize and be bad against Australians who in turn be bad against immigrants and shit happens.

Quote:So, the our way or the highway approach is completely uderstandable, and most countries embrace this, in part.

Completely understandable? Yeah, if you're on the side that has the higher power and fear the incoming change. Btw, I said higher power, not higher moral or ethical ground. That stance is already imposing on another person's right. And it's not like every immigrant Muslim demands that their cultural/language/legal/social structure to be made as part of the country's constitution. Some are westernized e.g. educated in a very Western-orientated schools and colleges and don't mind being in a setting like Australia or even America. What you have to watch out for is the loonies, crazies and retards that you get in every religion. Those are the ones purposely causing trouble.

Quote:Not shaking hands of women, not standing up for a judge. Unacceptable in alot of countries. So why not try to be part of the culture and blend in at a general level? Makes life so much easier for everyone, and still means you can keep a big part of your own culture at home if it does not conflict with the general rules.

Depends on how stupid and/or stubborn the guy is. I know the Muslims I've met are not so insulting or insensitive to another culture. But then again, we're the Moderates and we don't get as much air time as our more violent stupid and/or stubborn extremist brethren. It's also that they might be a little ignorant about his own religion. I know a few Muslims that don't do something just because they think it's against their religion e.g. using alcohol-base hand sanitizers. So for those truly sincere and willing to learn, you have to forgive him if they offend. For those who think Islam is end-all and be-all religion, please...never mind. That idea is unethical. Just be on the high moral/ethical ground when you deal with them.

Now, onto this whole Sharia thing; it depends on what level you want to introduce it. Like Civil Laws (or Common English Laws for most of the Commonwealth countries), Sharia has different aspects; Family, Property, Marriage, Business, Criminal etc. In the South East Asia especially Malaysia and Indonesia, we practice both Sharia and Common Civic Law (Whatever the British and Dutch gave Malaysia and Indonesia respectively). On a daily basis, Common English Law is practiced and is applied to all situations except when Muslims have to deal with Familial and Martial issues. And that's about it; Sharia Law is limited to Muslims only when dealing with other Muslims. Never ever involving any non-Muslims. We don't go around chopping limbs off or stone people to death. But if you ask me, Sharia is redundant and Common Civil Law should be quite sufficient (if written by an unbiased person). And yes, I do Sharia very discriminative against women and I don't really the idea that we entirely adopt it. But it disturbs me that people oppose something just because it's different and/or they're ignorant about.

Post: #18

Woo hoo, I'm learning politics!

But, I'm just going to issue a general, gentle reminder here. Keep it civil, I'd ask that especially in this context to keep no swearing or inflammatory language. I've seen some really good potential in this conversation, so let's keep it to that.

/end friendly neighborhood mod address.

Alright, my comment still stands.

I agree with Danceman and others about how it's a 'Knee Jerk Reaction' and is totally unpolitically correct....but he's standing for his beliefs, and whether he said it or not the beliefs of the majority. I can speak from my own experience in America, Texas to be specific.

We have a large and always growing larger Spanish population. (They get offended, generally, if you call them Mexican....which I don't understand, but comply with... ) They bring across their own culture, ethics, traditions and lifestyle which is perfectly fine with me. The more the merrier right? This land was built on immigration, so it's only right that it continues. Hopefully legally, but that's another topic.

So, they come over and bring over their cultures; we get all kinds of wonderful things from Latino' cultures. Foods, music, ingenuity and a hard working ethos that many Americans should learn from and do their best to emulate. But, you also get the bad side as well.

You have many trying to segregate themselves from the community. The 'Barrio' (I.E 'Ghetto' for Spanish citizens....That wasn't intended to be offensive!) is where the Spanish populations live primarily. Or where they're most concentrated, rather. That's more correct I'd think. But, they live in certain sections of the city, and through that segregation they keep their own culture in a pocket of El Mexico they seem to bring along with them. This is both good and a bad thing. They keep what they want, how they want it, while enjoying the benefits of being in the United States. But, they also segregate themselves from their fellow citizens, and there are more statistical crimes in and around the Barrio/Ghetto's than in any other section of large cities. Wiki it, I'm not just making it up.

But, the fact remains that they find a way to acceptably keep their culture while amid a culture that's totally different than their own. I know admittedly nothing of Sharia or the Muslim World (Though I would dearly like to learn!) but why would it be so bad as for them, when choosing to immigrate, accept that they must make certain fundamental changes to live there? Learn the language, maybe drop a few of their cultural traditions (Female Bias, brutal punishments) and keep all of the rest? Any set of dual laws is going to cause envy and distrust, especially if one knows how to work both sides of both laws.

So, I applaud the man in the OP for standing on his ideals, and making that statement. It's something I've wanted to hear our wonderful TX governors say for a long, long time. But, also that comes with a bit of understanding that there are always ways for people to coexist, no matter the culture or mindset.

Why is this not possible

Post: #19

Australians are very patriotic of their country, they love their country, and they do not take lightly to anyone saying otherwise.
It's not targeting every Muslim, just stating that this is our way of doing things, so don't come here if you want it to change, or to change it. For the most part, we don't like, nor do we want, anything that alienates certain people from interacting with other people. You said Sharia Law is for Muslims dealing with other Muslims. This is discrimination. Granted, its up to debate, but like most things, not on this forum. Not using alcohol-based sand sanitisers etc as its against someones religion, fine do whatever. Provided it doesn't affect someone else in any which way, its fine, provided it doesn't break any laws. Discrimination against women, or any other persons, is not ethical. We oppose things, simply because we can. Not the best way of putting it. Yeah, I agree with you, we should be making an informed choice about it, but again, its one of those things you need to sit down with someone, who has a different viewpoint, and debate it.

On another note, will Julia Gillard completely screw up Australia?

Post: #20

Some very interesting points of view in this thread – great to see we can have such a good discussion on CN.

However I would like to make some things clear from my own point of view, and maybe then some of you (such as Oph and Dancey) may understand why I liked what that guy said..

I am not racist, nor do I have problems with any other cultures. I would say actually I am quite open minded, and generally think that people should be able to live how they like, providing they follow the law, treat each other decently etc.

However what the above speech (by whoever made it), strikes for me is that for once someone in a high standing has the courage to actually stand up for the “native” (I use in a general sense as I am aware the Aborigines are the actual natives, but I am sure you all know what I mean) people of their country, for his beliefs. It is a bone of contention for many people in the UK that whilst politicians are always willing to stand up for the ethnic minorities, to make sure they are not persecuted, that they have their civil rights (which I entirely agree with), it does not always seem to work in the same way. It is not balanced.

I will be blunt, and some may not like this but better than mince my words. This country has its in inhabitants, many which are proud to be British. They have their customs, they have their laws, they may not be perfect but nothing is. They do allow other people to come in, they give them homes, hell they even give them benefits (money) if necessary, especially if they are refugees.

But what is angering many is that certain ethnic minorities sometimes then start complaining about the country they have chosen to move to. They say they are not allowed to practise certain things, that the laws are unfair, that their children should not see certain things in our schools, and they demand for it to be changed, and in some cases for fear of being branded “racist” certain institutions cave in. I know some schools last year that asked pupils not to say Merry Christmas, but instead Happy Holidays.

We have the right to enjoy and uphold our traditions and beliefs without being branded as racist. We do have the right to get upset when people start telling us that we shouldn’t do things we have done for years, incase we upset a minority who has chosen to move to this country.

I personally do not have a problem with people from different cultures coming here (within reason to be fair, as we do only have a limited amount of housing etc), providing they pay their way, and most importantly they respect and understand they are choosing to come to a country with different customs and laws. They can practise their own religion / beliefs / lifestyle, providing they follow our laws and do not try and force us to change to suit them.

If they honestly feel that they do not like our culture, they do not like our laws etc, then to be blunt they should choose not to move here.