Stifling Free Speech by Stealth?

The following was sent to me by loyal reader, Nemesis. I haven't seen or heard of this in the media, which is a bit worrying. Are the elites hoping to weasel this in under the radar, I don't know, but I think most of you weren't born yesterday and know pretty well that you-know-who are perfectly capable of it. Anyway have a read of this and you decide whether to voice your protest or not. Submissions close on 31 Jan 2009, this is his letter to his local member.

It recently came to my attention, that the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been tasked with canvassing public opinion concerning possible legislation for the ‘Protection of Religion’ within this nation. Please refer to this site

While on the surface it may appear to be a noble endeavour to protect any religion, there are a number of concerns that I believe are very relevant and need to be considered.

1. Under the present Australian Constitution, regarding religion, the first sentence states: ‘The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion….’

Therefore in my humble opinion the very act of ‘protecting’ a religion via legislation, which is not already an established religion such as Christianity or Judaism, within this nation, is unconstitutional. I base my argument on the fact that Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism etc were not officially established religions upon the drafting of the Constitution, and have only been officially recognized since the late twentieth century via legislation under multi-cultural ideology and thus are not constitutionally recognized as legitimate Australian religions.

2. The very act of ‘protecting’ any religion has the tendency to further erode one of our common law principles, the freedom to express one self. I base my concern on the recent Victorian legislation, Racial and Religious Vilification Act, which has already been used to stifle and convict two Christian pastors who had the temerity to raise a legitimate concern in 2007. My point here being that how can any society function as a homogenous society, if there is in place legislation which effectively blocks any common sense debate about religious matters which are of public interest and concern to the nation? All religions should be able to stand up to rigorous public scrutiny in order for that religion to be recognized and accepted as such. In this regard Islam fails, in that it flatly refuses to allow itself to be scrutinized or critiqued.

3.Upon reading the preamble to the (AHRC) it struck me that many religions are mentioned as a possible recipient of ‘protection’ but only two clerics, Christian and Muslim, have been included as advisors. Is this because the other religions are deemed not as important, or is their mention just to placate any scrutiny? And have these two clerics been active recently in Interfaith Discourse, which in my opinion would give them both a platform within this framework of future legislation to push their ideological agendas.

4. I question here the need to even consider this type of legislation. Why is there a concern from those who make our laws, that ANY religion needs to be protected? At what cost to our own personal liberties and that of our nation, should this legislation be permitted to encroach on? We have already seen the heavy handed side of government in over legislating for a particular religions protection, with the above mentioned victimization of two Christian pastors in Victoria. And make no mistake! Victims are what these two became under this legislation, victims of a government bereft of any common sense that has pandered to the worlds most intolerant religion. To have the defence of speaking the truth negated by this legislation, is akin to totalitarianism and would have sat well in any court in Nazi Germany. Are we now to become sheep and follow blindly the dictates of our governments without question, because religion has to be protected? And protected from what exactly, frank and honest debate? And what happens when the protected religion turns out to be totally against everything that we, as Australians hold dear, just as Islam preaches, who is going to protect us?

As one of your constituents, I now implore you as my elected representative to fight the imposition of this legislation, which if implemented, would see more dictatorial power enacted against the public and private interests of Australians.

I haven't had the time to have a good look into this (site but I had a quick read of it and I share the concerns of Nemesis. Why is this being proposed, it's not like Australia is like some middle eastern backwater where Christians are persecuted into converting to Islam or something. And the non-Christian religious groups are not being persecuted in Australia. I mean, it's not like Hindu's are being rounded up and kicked into the nearest church or something. So my gut feeling tells me that these supposed 'good intentions' are merrily paving the way down the same path Eurabia headed down a while ago.

Lastly folks, I'm going to be heading off for a few weeks. I hope you all stay well and I'll check in when I can.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them