Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Sit Back and Relax, Non-Bass Related Chat
User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 18 Nov 2017, 14:03

Dean Smith's SSM bill is being debated.
It's the one with a mere 'tip of the hat' to free speech and religious freedoms, so:
"The Weekend Australian can reveal Senator Brandis is looking at incorporating article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into a bill proposed by West Australian Liberal senator Dean Smith, and backed by Labor and the Greens.
Senator Brandis’s move is considered a circuit breaker that could unite government ranks and win broad parliamentary support for greater religious protections as Malcolm Turnbull faces pressure from conservative MPs to uphold parental rights in same-sex-marriage legislation."
(search on "covenant clause fix the australian" to see article )
"Liberal senator David Fawcett, who led a parliamentary inquiry into legislation for same-sex ­marriage, backed moves to ­enshrine article 18 in law. But he suggested all four of its clauses should be replicated, including the last provision that upholds the “liberty of parents … to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions”."
Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:
1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

It's better than the 'nothing' that is Dean Smith's bill, but nevertheless, Humpty-Dumpty word play can change "order, health and morals" to mean something favourable to LGBetc.
('When I use a word,' said Humpty Dumpty scornfully, 'it means what I want it to mean, neither more nor less.' - Through the Looking Glass, Lewis Carroll)
For example, more specifically, read 'offence to LGB' for 'order', '(mental-)health', and '(LGB)morals'.
Why? Because deconstruction of any moral standard is achieved by denying legitimacy of any historic link, and relying on pure Zeitgeist ('sounds right.....')
I see..............basses!

User avatar
vin-tone
Posts: 4567
Joined: 09 Oct 2009, 21:46
Location: Ballaarat Vic.
Contact:

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by vin-tone » 18 Nov 2017, 20:03

In 6 months time the same people will be wondering why they accidentally enshrined the right to wear a burka in law.

:lol: :popcorn:
Duesenberg MC Starplayer, Fender 63AVRI, Eberhard Meinel Upright > Markbass & AI Coda

User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 18 Nov 2017, 21:17

^ Indeed - everything just gets murkier once the disconnect from traditional meanings are made. The above, of course is only in relation to marriage regulations.
I see..............basses!

User avatar
narcdor
Posts: 3311
Joined: 15 Apr 2011, 16:36
Location: Melbourne

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by narcdor » 19 Nov 2017, 07:11

How is France going with their move away from religious freedoms? They’re pretty heavy on personal liberty which may fill some of the gaps.
B: Fender Mustangs, Narcdor Precision, Lindsey Precision, Nash Jazz, Framus Star Bass, EBMM Stingray
A: O'Neill B15 copy, Mesa Walkabout, Ampeg Repro 15, Fender Neo 15
FX: TC Electronic clip on tuner and lotsa fuzz

User avatar
veebass
Posts: 7770
Joined: 10 Apr 2011, 07:01

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by veebass » 19 Nov 2017, 08:57

vin-tone wrote:
18 Nov 2017, 20:03
In 6 months time the same people will be wondering why they accidentally enshrined the right to wear a burka in law.

:lol: :popcorn:
Exactly.

Or much more dangerously, the protection of the rantings of some murderous Imam hellbent on the destruction of our society and instructing Muslims that it is their solemn religious duty to achieve that by killing us in small groups whenever the opportunity arises. My understanding is that it is relatively easy for such an Imam to base such a direction on literal translations of the Quran.

Here's the problem. If you demand we legislate to protect the message from a priest that you agree with, that can logically be used by someone else to protect some messages that you don't agree with. These "religious" messages are both currently illegal- direction to the faithful to murder from one message and direction to the faithful to exercise discrimination from the other. I don't believe we should legislate to protect either.

Religious freedom also involves the freedom to not be religious or not be beholden to religious views in matters that are not religious, if you so choose.
Happiness is .......a Telebass and 500W.

User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 19 Nov 2017, 14:13

"accidentally enshrined the right to wear a burka"
This statement has missed the point, and is making an illogical jump.
It is true to say that the ICCP clauses are 'available' for jurisdictions that want to use it, and that conventional perception says that it would be used to add rights of religion/conscience, overall. *However* - that is not the case here. It appears to be taking clauses and inserting them into one relevant act, specifically:
"incorporating article 18 ..... into a bill proposed by........senator Dean Smith"
So we end up with an SSM bill that contains clauses that allow limitations *only in the case of SSM* - not all law.
I'm not sure what cultural clothing requirements clash with SSM activities.
I see..............basses!

User avatar
narcdor
Posts: 3311
Joined: 15 Apr 2011, 16:36
Location: Melbourne

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by narcdor » 19 Nov 2017, 15:18

Is it necessary to include section 18 at all? Does the current secular definition of marriage include this? Why now then?
B: Fender Mustangs, Narcdor Precision, Lindsey Precision, Nash Jazz, Framus Star Bass, EBMM Stingray
A: O'Neill B15 copy, Mesa Walkabout, Ampeg Repro 15, Fender Neo 15
FX: TC Electronic clip on tuner and lotsa fuzz

User avatar
veebass
Posts: 7770
Joined: 10 Apr 2011, 07:01

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by veebass » 19 Nov 2017, 15:53

narcdor wrote:
19 Nov 2017, 15:18
Is it necessary to include section 18 at all? Does the current secular definition of marriage include this? Why now then?
Not as far as I understand it.
We should only be talking secular marriage. We did not have a $100 million opinion poll on non secular marriage. Those politicians against Marriage Equality insisted we go through this as a tactic to try and delay the will of the people and to raise the profile and sharpen the networking of the religious right as a political force, which it certainly has, but it did not relate to non secular marriage.

I do find it amusing watching the toughest political warriors against Marriage Equality, who during the "debate" and before were more than happy to throw offence where ever they so chose, are now disingenuously pleading that we not rush this and that the majority show them respect and almost "mercy". They forced this to a point where it was a numbers game and lost, as we knew they would. Politics is governed by the inescapable laws of arithmetic (as a very prominent Marriage Equality opponent once said).
Happiness is .......a Telebass and 500W.

User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 19 Nov 2017, 19:58

"Non-secular marriage"
Sometimes what we call things impedes how they can be viewed. The state of being married is not caused by any secular or religious law (although they both regulate it) - however, it can be viewed from a secular standpoint, or from a religious standpoint, and the regulations applied. To date, for all the world, they have been the same in essence. But now, states around the world are changing what they recognise as marriage, with support of their populations, and of course religious standpoints do not change (in the absolute majority). It is pretty unique in that for the first time in more than 5,000 years (say), states are institutionalising at law something so against the tenets of all religions.
The idea of including wording like article 18, is in short, to allow people to conscientiously decline (in a limited fashion) to be involved in, educated in, or be supporting of (through services rendered) the aspects of SSM itself. So its not just adherents of religion. And it is not the same type of discrimination as that against race, sex, old age, etc.
Our baker of conscience should not fall foul of the law for refusing to commemorate on a cake, for example, abortion, euthanasia, divorce, or SSM. Nor should any of these be taught to children - parents should have the right to opt out. These are the protections an SSM bill needs.
I see..............basses!

User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 19 Nov 2017, 20:25

"How is France going with their move away from religious freedoms?"
I can't find much about this. They do have an overwhelming problem with Islam-inspired terrorism they are trying to tackle.
I see..............basses!

User avatar
narcdor
Posts: 3311
Joined: 15 Apr 2011, 16:36
Location: Melbourne

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by narcdor » 19 Nov 2017, 21:08

noplanb wrote:
19 Nov 2017, 19:58
The idea of including wording like article 18, is in short, to allow people to conscientiously decline (in a limited fashion) to be involved in, educated in, or be supporting of (through services rendered) the aspects of SSM itself. So its not just adherents of religion. And it is not the same type of discrimination as that against race, sex, old age, etc.
Our baker of conscience should not fall foul of the law for refusing to commemorate on a cake, for example, abortion, euthanasia, divorce, or SSM. Nor should any of these be taught to children - parents should have the right to opt out. These are the protections an SSM bill needs.
Then article 18 definitely should NOT be included in my opinion. A baker's job is to bake a cake, and I'm sorry but if someone wants an abortion party message then the baker should do it. It's in very poor taste perhaps but not immoral.

I think it's exactly the same kind of discrimination against sexual orientation that should be protected. It's not the marriage the baker objects to but the people being married and their sexual orientation. Hard to prove though unless you're a complete idiot about denying service.

As for the children they should be taught about SSM and the 'regular' kind in the same breath, and taught about sex of all kinds when appropriate, knowledge is the antidote to ignorance and we should all make informed decisions.
B: Fender Mustangs, Narcdor Precision, Lindsey Precision, Nash Jazz, Framus Star Bass, EBMM Stingray
A: O'Neill B15 copy, Mesa Walkabout, Ampeg Repro 15, Fender Neo 15
FX: TC Electronic clip on tuner and lotsa fuzz

User avatar
veebass
Posts: 7770
Joined: 10 Apr 2011, 07:01

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by veebass » 20 Nov 2017, 06:12

The notion that "secular" and "non secular" are just handles and they don't cause the "state of marriage" is all very interesting. What causes marriage is not what is on the table to be legislated.
We have just spent $100 million on an unpopular, divisive opinion poll about a proposal to change the Marriage Act- ie the act that regulates secular marriage in Australia, following a change by Howard that required no such process. The poll was not about what causes marriage. It was not about increasing allowable discrimination in service provision, despite the best efforts of the NO campaign to make it about things that we were not being asked to express an opinion on. It was actually about reducing discrimination against LGBTI people. This poll was forced on us by the political opponents of marriage equality and widely supported by the NO campaign. It is a little hard to hear now that it wasn't really about secular marriage.
I am sorry but this is all about secular marriage law.
Secular marriage is a legal construct, affecting property, inheritance and a myriad of other secular issues. Secular marriage takes precedence over non secular marriage already in some circumstances where they conflict and the majority do not bat an eye. A couple of examples. Certain age pairings may be allowed by non secular marriage but not by secular law. Secular divorce legally overides a non secular marriage in the eyes of the law. Things as basic as who you can marry and how it is terminated can be very different under secular and non secular marriage. This will just be another difference.
As an example, under non secular marriage according to the rules of my Church I am still married to my first wife, who I have not seen or spoken to in almost thirty years. and my son is illegitimate. Under secular marriage, I have been legally married to my current wife for over twenty five years. In all secular matters we are married. However, as far as my Church goes, my second marriage is not recognised and I am a sinner.
Similarly, same sex marriages will not be acknowledged by most Churches, but they will be by the State. Most people accept this distinction. and have for some considerable time. As I understand Dean Smith's proposal it is line with this distinction and broad community expectation.
A significant majority do not support protections beyond what Dean Smith has proposed.
Attempts by opponents to push to legislate beyond Smith's proposals so they can pretend the law isn't changing and in doing so provide further and ongoing actual offence to people simply going about lawful secular activities will need to be seriously considered by the Government or this will backfire badly.

The politics of this is very dangerous for the Government at present. Their insistence for an opinion poll has drawn the majority into this argument and they now have a stake in it. It has also mobilised a small but dedicated religious right, which is over represented in the conservative parties Morrison appears to be putting himself up as an alternate darling of the far right. We now have a number of right wing figures positioning to be first in line when Turnbull, who is already in a pathetically weak position, ultimately falls. No doubt figures in the centre of the Coalition will arise as well..

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stor ... ith_201117
Last edited by veebass on 20 Nov 2017, 07:39, edited 1 time in total.
Happiness is .......a Telebass and 500W.

User avatar
noplanb
Posts: 1028
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 22:00
Location: Adelaide

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by noplanb » 20 Nov 2017, 07:39

"but not immoral."
Which morality? Should a Muslim butcher be forced to provide pork sausages? An Afro-American baker a KKK celebration cake? A Jewish baker a holocaust cake? Should a steakhouse restaurant be forced to hire a vegan-activist chef? Saying "if they want it, we should do it", says yes to all the above. It is one thing to say whether any of these are poor taste or of dubious morals, but quite another to allow at law a discrimination action for any of these.
The point being that a civil society should allow conscientious objection for certain things. Usually it is not a problem, as the objectors simply don't get involved in what they object to. So why can't SSM adherents just accept that some people don't believe in it?

"objects to .... the people being married and their sexual orientation"
No - even non-Christian judges get this one wrong. Elsewhere, the bakers in question had provided goods to the SSM couple, and were happy to continue doing so - just not the message on the cake. The nature of Christianity is to accept the person, but draw the line at the action in question.

"As for the children"
Easy to say. Sex education has never been a walk in the park. If it was taught at the same time, then that would put it at about year 6 or later, but no, the SSM/LGB activists want it as early as kindergarten - this all leads to early sexualisation of children. The objections to this go on. These programs amount to blatant child-grooming for early sexual practice. We should all be very worried and concerned at the underhand/unethical ways in which these programs have subverted true education.

The law of the land used to be in line with Christian morality (as that is where we came from), and in line with what was commonly accepted. That hasn't been the case for sometime, but where are these latest changes (decline) in morality going? What is it being set by? If we argue the will of the people, then we are at the whim and mercy of the media manipulators. What wasn't acceptable last generation, will be by the next generation. That has already happened going from the 1960s to now - so how would you protect your children (grandchildren) from officially sanctioned paedophilia?
The ability to conscientiously object and to discuss these things, slows and possibly halts the worst of the manipulation. Without it, we are consenting to totalitarian reign.
I see..............basses!

User avatar
veebass
Posts: 7770
Joined: 10 Apr 2011, 07:01

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by veebass » 20 Nov 2017, 07:45

Image
Happiness is .......a Telebass and 500W.

User avatar
veebass
Posts: 7770
Joined: 10 Apr 2011, 07:01

Re: Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

Post by veebass » 20 Nov 2017, 07:58

In case you were wondering where this Government stands in relation to big business.
This is code for make bigger donations and come join us in the fight against workers.

Oh for an accord and a union movement strong enough to carry it..

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stor ... son_201117
Happiness is .......a Telebass and 500W.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brooksi and 7 guests