I’d like to ban them just for religions that call for punishment of apostasy in their texts, or have their teachings secret. Want concessions? Ya gotta let people *leave*. We’d soon find out what’s more important, god or money.
And while we're at it remove government funding to private religious schools. If you want a private religious school. Great. But the public shouldn't have to foot the bill for religious education.
Ban all political donations. No one donates without an agenda of some sort. Just fuck them all off. Politicians making bank for eons can pay their own way to re-election.
I'll say the same thing as any other party pushing Christian sectarianism: get fucked. That includes the Muslim party. Get that bullshit out of politics.
Hard agree - ridiculous sentiment from Albo when it’s a non-Christian given Morrison and Abbott as recent PMs. Fuck off with all religion in parliament
If they ever bothered to read the Census results and understand that "No Religion" is a catch-all category that includes lapsed Christians as well as athiests and agnostics, they'd realise the heat death of the Sun might come sooner than a Muslim majority in Australia - the Indian sub-continent religions make up a greater slice of Australian religion that Islam does, and Hinduism is the fastest growing of them.
They should be more worried about chakras and curries before burkhas and whatever other ignorant piece of bigotry they can think of if that's their angle.
Are there faith based political parties in Australia for religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism? The particular faith behind these parties also don't need to be anywhere near the majority of the overall population - they just need to win enough individual electorates to sway the balance of power, which is made easier due to the fact ethnic and religious groups tend to congregate together.
Ehhhhh they made him the leader of their party didn't they?
As in the person representing their party to the rest of the world.
Here's the speech he made to Hillsong chuch after he lost the election.
https://youtu.be/sCoCdCVBmT8?si=Ty-2ZHHiHt2Z4e0R
Features some great quotes such as "Don't trust in governments" and "Don't trust in the United Nations"
Dude was straight up a extremist in a fringe religion. Believes in faith healing (probably why the vaccines were low priority) and prosperity gospel, which basically says poor people are poor becuase they are sinners, and I'd lay his total lack of care for the Australian people at the religions feet, but that seems to be more generic.
But I don't think I've heard Fatima tell everyone not to trust our government. So I reckon she beats Scotty there.
Ah but why is it different for a woman of Muslim faith to let that influence her decisions compared to someoen of Christian faith?
I’m all for politics to not be governed by religion but lets call out some hypocrisy where we can when it’s a legitimate gripe.
You just repeated the exact same logical error u/turgottherealbro shut down in the comment you’re replying to. No-one said she can’t subscribe to a religion and have that influence her decision, that’s a given.
Scott Morrison made a speech to the Hillsong church after he lost the election
https://youtu.be/sCoCdCVBmT8?si=Ty-2ZHHiHt2Z4e0R
"Don't trust the government" and "Don't trust the United nations".
Sounds like he chose his religion over the country there mate. And yes, he was still an elected memeber of the Liberal party then.
I wonder why he never got this much bullshit in the media? Or any pushback from his party either.
A religion that believes in prosperity gospel by the way, one of the more disgusting belief I've seen in pretty much any religion. Rich people are rich because God loves them and poor people are poor because they are sinners.
No wonder he was anti welfare, he didn't want money going to people god didn't love.
Worst? what about a belief that if you sacrifice a human the gods will provide a good harvest and/or rains or even the practice of burying servants/slaves (even with consent or not) with a pharoah so they can serve them in the afterlife?
Religious beliefs have always been shit.
I mean Family First existed for a long time and I don't remember Albanese having a problem with that. Seems like maybe it's only some faiths that he thinks shouldn't have faith-based parties.
> "I don't think and don't want Australia to go down the road of faith-based political parties because what that will do is undermine social cohesion," Mr Albanese said at a press conference on Friday.
> He used Labor as an example of a party that included members from a range of religions.
> "That's the way you bring cohesion," he said.
> "It seems to me, as well, beyond obvious that it is not in the interest of smaller minority groups to isolate themselves – which is what a faith-based party system would do."
> "I don't have any problem with a party that has a religious view," he told Nine News.
> “But when you say that your task is to, as a first order of priority, to support a Palestinian cause or a cause outside of Australia, that is a very different scenario.
> “So, I think when that is the main cause, we have all sorts of problems."
At least read the shitty article.
>Again, doesn't make the Liberal party Hillsong.
Of course not. Look at the the Liberal former PMs who gave character references for George Pell. They're even more in the pocket of the Catholic Paedo Racket.
I know we're all side-eyeing America right now.
The way that christo-fascist act, they will assume the power reaches here as well.
We know there is a US base in every country in the world. They have a significant cultural and political influence.
There are people who are just itching for *permission* to be the most abhorrent person. I should hope we also recognise that fascism uses any symbol it wants. It's a mindset.
Edit additional: and I don't want to pretend it's not possible. We have a blokey bloke tradie nation. It happens in the companies. Anyone who spells out 'politically incorrect' like it's a bad thing to have a empathetic concious. It IS those who don't think that there's anything wrong with murdoch media. It lives in the rural towns, because they love nothing more than worrying about immigration, lgbt, and who think welfare and of those most disadvantaged like drug addicts and aboriginal people.
We have this idea banning the swastika actually stops people from thinking like a swastika. And that is our greatest fallacy.
More: I am also vitality aware that growing up, I have lived in a relatively polite society. I haven't needed to punch anyone, more, I am timid. So what do we do when we have to start punching, who do we even recognise of someone worthy of that?
"Know the tools in your toolbox; protect what is dear to your heart, speak your mind freely against all injustices you believe in regardless of cost, and lastly, don't forget you brought your bloody toolbox."
Indeed. And the Christian religion supports welcoming immigrants, blocking religious leaders who take money from worshippers, taking care of the sick and poor, abhorring violence.
Just a pity that the churches do not follow the actual religion.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle...
I do find it funny that a peasant & slave religion that manifested as resistance against entrenched kings and oligarchs has been perverted into what it is now. The Abrahamic religions were incredibly transgressive for their time, and now they're part of the conservative malaise.
I suppose it's not much different from the way that the USSR twisted Marx's writings into a police state.
It kinda makes sense when you realise that religion is a really convenient excuse for holding objectionable views. Religion is a protected status, people can't be legally discriminated against because of it, and unlike other protected statuses (age, gender, race, disability), religion is something people can choose.
So if someone has an objectionable view (e.g. that they should be allowed to drive an enormous truck and park it across 3 parking spots because fuck everyone else), they can choose to join a religion which gives them permission to hold that view, where they can find others who share and reinforce that view, and where they're free to claim that that view is part of their religion. And they can't face any consequences for having, spreading, and practicing that view because any consequences imposed would be discrimination on the basis of religion.
We shouldn't forget the biggest one being the liberal party.
Their Victorian branch was caught branch staking for a religious take over by Christian extremists who are very much against policies that support the rights of women, LGBTIQA+ members, and other minorities. [Source - ABC](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-07/religious-right-roadmap-infiltrate-liberal-party/101611840#), [Source 2 - Michael West](https://michaelwest.com.au/city-builders-the-pentecostal-cult-driving-the-liberal-party-to-the-far-right-and-beyond/).
You also have right-wing Christians plan to infiltrate and take over Australian politics, with the help of political parties such as the liberals, nationals, one nation, etc.. It becomes extreme concerning when they have individuals who support neo-nazis. [Source - SMH](https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/long-march-the-right-wing-christian-plan-to-infiltrate-politics-20230306-p5cpod.html)
And then you have scott morrison, a religious extremist who was literally the leader of not only the liberal party, but also the prime minister, talk about his "faith". [Source - Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/apr/26/scott-morrison-tells-christian-conference-he-was-called-to-do-gods-work-as-prime-minister). He even wrote a book about it.
albanese is bringing up faith-based politics now just to attack Payman, and ironically in the process, undermining social cohesion within Australia. It's a fucking slimy move that is expected from individuals like morrison and dutton, but I have no doubt albanese's fanatical base would eat it up like religious zealots.
"It seems to me, as well, beyond obvious that it is not in the interest of smaller minority groups to isolate themselves" - he comes across as threatening a portion of his base in Western Sydney. It seems like such a bizarre move.
I'm so conflicted about the Labor party, these days. On one hand, I like having a government that actually governs, but there are a lot of things, like this, that offend my sensibilities.
God I wish Shorten had got ahead of Albo.
I cant help but feel like the religion and race is a factor here, like in america where christian extremism isnt called terrorism while islamic terrorism is called terrorism
It's fucking slimy mudslinging as you say
Yep this is a total low blow by ablo and I'm actually still in shock that he said it. I'm scared for the future of the Labor party if this is the hill they choose to die on.
Muslims are strongly disapproving of Albanese's government because of their defacto support for genocide and for bullying and punishing a Muslim representative.
This is the cover they're running.
Sure, but they're not a faith based party. As far as they're concerned, as long as you're right wing, hate the concept of government, and white, you can be a Liberal.
The overlap between those people and extremist Christians is large, but it's by no means a Christian party.
Yeah. Very telling that people get worried when it's Muslims when Christianity has never not been all up in politics. Not that I think any of it's good, but it's no different.
My first thought was "rival religious parties would be especially bad".
Then I asked myself if Christian parties preventing any rival parties from threatening their hegemony is really "good".
Welp.
Albo is really badly bumbling this entire Fatima Payman affair. I don't understand why he doesn't just leave her the hell alone? Going after her is just the WORST idea ever!
> Going after her is just the WORST idea ever!
Look at how much he has aged in the last two years. He’s just following orders.
I agree with his sentiment if it applied to all religion. Keep religion out of politics, tax the religious institutions and put the money into social services and fucking ban lobbying.
An equal and fair society should tax everyone equally and fairly (including religions and corporations)
No no no. We mean faith based parties that aren’t our main faith undermine social cohesion. Nothing has ever gone wrong with Christianity being in politics.
Let's be very clear: right now both major parties and most of the MSM are being scripted by a religious group whose allegiance is first and foremost to a theocratic foreign power that may be genocidal and is certainly colonial.
Albo made this crisis.
I am disgusted that anyone trying to defend Palestinians is getting kicked in this country.
The UK election is an interesting comparison point; Labour have won an absolute majority, but have lost four seats to independents who support Gaza.
I suspect the ALP isn’t winning an absolute majority on the back of a historically unpopular government being thrown out, so they should be mindful of how much this could impact on them.
Yeah, exactly. If the UK with FPTP was still able to swap out 4 seats from the winning party towards independents then us having preferential voting is most likely to create a larger swing to minors and independents if the same trends follow here.
I think the Labor policy on Gaza is poor, and the fuss over Payman an own goal.
But there aren't any seats with a high Muslim vote base like there are in the UK, and we don't have FPTP. Labor might be able to get away with it.
Still Gaza might be just one of the issues where Labor lose support in traditional strongholds, we'll have to wait and see.
There are several electorates that have 20% + Muslim voters. And that doesn't include the non-Muslim Arab population, and then add the anti war voters. Yeah I think Labor will lose a couple of seats to this.
Labor party is also quite socially conservative.
Gay Marriage was implemented under LNP, and the Labor party hasn't done anything else since then.
Labor make pleasing noises, but never actually do anything.
Hate to say it, but it’s true. Labour’s biggest strength is that they’re less conservative than Liberal, so they can pretend that they’re the progressive party when they’re really just a bunch of status-quo defending centrists.
To be clear, the LNP didn’t legalise gay marriage out of the good of their hearts, if anything, they put queer people in the firing line of the public news cycle in the hopes that people would vote “no” and put the debate to rest.
I doubt anyone other than Muslims would vote for a Muslim voices party. I'm about as supportive of Gaza as anyone but I'd never vote for a Muslim party. They would really need a majority to actually get elected.
It depends on who runs, an independent(s) that happens to be pro-Palestine amongst other policies could easily win on a backlash to Labor's policy on Palestine amongst other complaints against Labor.
But any outright Muslim or Islamic party is not going to appeal to non-Muslims, and while non-Muslim Arabs tend to be pro-Palestine, they more than anyone will not vote for a Muslim party.
Depends on how long it goes on for. Labor will be hoping it resolves itself so they can stay relatively quiet about this.
If the Gaza movement still has momentum coming into an election, the UK’s has shown that they’ll need to be stronger if they want to hold their vote share.
In saying that our preferential system will likely reduce the damage as I doubt a Gaza voter would put the libs ahead of labor
Leaking votes to the new party is the problem for Labor; if the Muslim party gets enough to be in position 2 or 3 in the count, they could get enough on preferences to stay in the race and win. If the new party only cannibalises the conservative vote, they've got no problem
Can't see a change in position on Gaza being a net vote winner because there is no clear consensus in society, you'd alienate as many voters as you gained.
I doubt the war will still be going next year.
I also don't think the most people would think less of Albo around this recent issue with senator payman. While I am sure her beliefs are sincerely held, I suspect most "battlers" are going to be on Albo's side. Aside from the issue itself, most people seem to dislike it when someone quits a party. Especially over an issue or stance that most people see as fringe
It's influence is significant. It's noticeable most in US politics, but it's absolutely in ours.
There's no logical reason that we should give Israel all this diplomatic cover in the UN (for example). We don't do it for other random countries we have little to do with. Why should we do this when it provides us no benefit? We don't for example go out of our way to help Malta, and there are far more people of Maltese descent in Australia than there are Israelis. Same goes for Italians, Greeks, Indians, Chinese, and Vietnamese.
>Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said Australia did not need sectarianism.
>"I don't have any problem with a party that has a religious view," he told Nine News.
>"But when you say that your task is to, as a first order of priority, to support a Palestinian cause or a cause outside of Australia, that is a very different scenario.
The Liberal Party is chock full of Christian eschatological nutters who support Israel's actions in Palestine. They even made one of them PM, and Jerusalem was recognised as the capital as a result. Is Dutton going to purge those nutters from the party? Pigs might fly.
On the subject of explicitly religious parties and their associated issues, the problem is not so much that they exist, but that they try to enforce religious norms on people who don't subscribe to their beliefs. We saw this come up with SSM. However, if we are to have freedom of belief, then in a democracy, people with those beliefs should be free to organise politically. What needs to be ensured is that differences in opinion are tolerated, and freedoms not unduly restricted provided they don't restrict the freedoms of others.
It might be added that:
- the existence of a Muslim political party does not mean that all people of Muslim faith will vote for it. It doesn't work for Christian political parties
- if we want social cohesion, get rid of private schools and make sure multiculturalism and tolerance are promoted in all areas of society
Who was it again that didn't support same sex marriage, and railed hard to get special religious "freedom" laws brought in to ensure religion was exempt from discrimination laws?
Remind me...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-08/same-sex-marriage-who-didnt-vote/9240584 Same-sex marriage: This is everyone who didn't vote to support the bill.
The proposed bill allowing only government supported religions to discriminate? That was set to place the opinion of favoured religious leaders(no pastafarians etc) above the law of the land.-- I hope the constitution would have blocked that.
There is a secret "coalition agreement" with the Nats. The Nats are pushing this nuclear issue, but 3 years ago they were pushing a coal fired power station in northern Qld.
The Nats also pushing billion dollar fines for supermarket. Because supermarkets negotiate with farmers for the lowest price. The nonsense is that this will bring down prices; its agrarian socialism, and the only effect of fines is to increase prices.
Nats are the nutters running the Liberal agenda.
Wasn't it the Libs that introduced religious chaplains into public high schools?
Or am I crazy?
Not that I disagree with the sentiment Albo is espousing.
Whatever the Muslim Vote turns out to be (a political party or lobby group), the media and political coverage is making out faith based political groups are new when they are not and some are or at least have been quite powerful. I’m atheist, but religion is an important part of some people’s sense of identity so it’s not shocking it would link with politics.
Yeah, atheist here as well. Some religious people derive their morality from their faith, and while I don’t agree with that, I don’t see any world where we can cut religion-based voting out of society.
On top of that, from what I know the Muslim Vote isn’t campaigning to implement Sharia or anything like that, they mostly just want Australia to stop supporting Israel, which many communities support, both Muslim and non-Muslim.
100% every faith. I am an immigrant and one of the best things about Australia is how secular it is. It could be better but it's already pretty good compared to most other countries (including most western countries).
Any religion based political parties should not exist. I came from Malaysia where it’s a norm. They used their ustaz (priest) to ask the voters to vote for the Islamic party because that’s what God wanted them to. And their political policy is basically just revert back to old Islamic way with Sharia law and ban this ban that because it’s doesn’t conform to the religion.
People need to know supporting Gaza is one thing, but supporting an Islamic religious party is another.
And we should totally ban those Christians/Catholic parties too. I don’t think I have met a non hypocritical overtly religious people
There are political parties like Family First and the Christian Democrats that base their policies on religion, so why would a Muslim party be a bad thing? I can think of three reasons.
1. If religious political parties are bad, then more of a bad thing is worse. Pretty simple
2. Those Christian parties never ran up against opposing religious parties, they ran up against opposing *secular* parties. Sectarian disagreements are always more intractable, because neither side can reason the other out of their religions convictions. See: every country in the Middle East except maybe Oman
3. For better or worse (or for better *and* worse), Christians have been the majority of Australians for the majority of the country's history since Federation. No political movement has ever been discriminated against because it was Christian. But I can see on the horizon how nasty politics will become if ethnic minorities, whose loyalty to the country is already questioned by some, tie their political voice to a minority religion
This thread is probably getting locked, so I thought I'd add this now: we should avoid the trap of treating political party affiliation as identity. You can broadly agree with one major party over the other, while not wanting to directly vote for them. Our preferential voting system encourages that. But if parties start to represent ethnicities or religions, then voting for them becomes part of who you are, a part that you have no power to change. We would become more polarised, isolated, and ultimately powerless to change things. Don't let it happen. Be suspicious of every party and movement, especially if they claim to represent *your* interests
I wholeheartedly agree that there is no place for religion in politics at all, but Christian political parties don't get a pass on those same grounds because they were here earlier.
All parties are secular by default - how can any party that prefers a particular religion claim to be impartial for an electorate that isn't entirely of one religious persuasion?
>No political movement has ever been discriminated against because it was Christian.
You've got to be joking with this line though.
I should have been more specific. No political party or political organisation (e.g., Australian Christian Lobby) has been discriminated against in the context of Australian politics. Obviously there's been sectarian discrimination throughout history
ah understood - yeah i think that makes the decision to selectively apply any rules now a little more transparently in 'bad faith' (pun intended)
It's difficult to think of how faith-based parties could be discouraged with our constitutional interpretation precedence of political free speech - but if Albanese wants to criticise them, he should at least do it consistently and include any other existing religious parties too.
It's very funny how there are nutbag Christian parties (or people of faith) actually IN parliament, but a non-Christian faith party is suddenly such a major drama.
I agree, but I also appreciate that Christianity is... more (or less) compatible with western values and democracy(again more or less), whilst islam is incompatible with free and fair societies, and is let's be honest, authoritarian, patriarchal and violent.
Fuck off. Christianity wants LGBTQ people eradicated, denies science, is riddled with kiddy fuckers and doesn't want to contribute back to society through taxes. None of that is compatible with being a functional part of a modern western democracy.
The fact you can't see that what you wrote is so wrong is alarming. Christianity is not 'riddled with kiddy fuckers' what the absolute fuck is that sentence? They have no more predators than the rest of the population.
And I'm not Christian but it seems I somehow have to point out that 'modern western democracies' all used to be far more Christian than they currently are.
It's funny you see someone daring to point out that Islam is the more oppressive religion and then respond with hatred of Christians to defend Muslims. Shows how little about the world you know. After all it is a literal crime to leave the Muslim faith, any ex-Muslim would absolutely despise the sentiment that the religions are in any way comparable in their depravity.
I was raised JW, believe me those fundamentalist cults would be as violent and stone age if they thought they could get away with it.
When I escaped, I was told that according to the Bible ( which is never wrong ) I should have been atoned to death
That was my mother
Make no mistake they would do it if they could.
Christianity is not remotely compatible with western values, all the conservative attitudes directly stem from it. It's just that the extreme elements lost influence over the general populous and the mainstream part of the religion needed to adapt.
Islam religion is similar in many ways. But constant wars and instability and their progressive movements failing for different reasons is why on a mainstream level it is still more archaic. The extreme elements still have control.
Any good western values is inspite of Christianity and because of progressive victories spanning the past couple of centuries and the religion had to adapt to survive and maintain its influence in the mainstream.
I've been criticised on Reddit before for saying that we need a referendum to enforce absolute and permanent seperation of church and state along the lines of the French Lacitie. There is no room for Canon law, Talmudic law or Sharia law in a pluralist society.
Does he realise it's entirely Labor's fault is it does happen? It's their position on Palestinian recognition and their continued support for Israel that is driving the divide with the Arab community. Their position is at odds with public opinion and their own manifesto.
It's entirely their choice whether the future sees them lose seats and foster a disillusioned Arab voter base because they won't stop supporting Israeli genocide or not. The ball is 100% in their court. If they want to stop it all they have to do is stop facilitating the Israel's occupation.
2024 and we still need to argue that church and state must be separated
We have more than a thousand years of evidence that religion has hindered our technological and social development yet we still need to bicker about it?
Yeah she sends money to Abu Bakr zoud who openly broadcasts that STD originate from homosexuals.
You wanna represent an entire state when you look down on your constituents with devine hatred?
Don't label it as faith based since it's just Muslims! BTW, I'm sure there're many in Labor who don't agree with party direction just as many in Libs don't agree etc. You've so many people forming a party, but it's impossible for a party to go for 10 directions.
It's just a matter of whether each party member can compromise. I bet Payman surely didn't want/foresee the consequence of the Muslim community due to her action.
Sometimes or most of the times? We just aren't in action of everything that happens.
**For anyone who doesn't want to click through:**
* Albanese emphasized that faith-based political parties could isolate minority groups and harm social cohesion.
* The Muslim Vote denied being a political party or religious campaign, describing itself as a political campaign aimed at educating and mobilizing the Muslim community at a grassroots level.
* Opposition Leader Peter Dutton stated that Australia does not need sectarianism, expressing concerns about parties prioritizing causes outside of Australia.
* Australian cricketer Usman Khawaja criticized Dutton's comments as "bigotry at its finest" and accused him of fueling Islamophobia.
* The discussion arose in the context of Senator Fatima Payman's recent departure from the Labor Party.
**Regarding Senator Payman's defection:**
- Payman announced her resignation from the Labor Party on July 4, 2024, becoming an independent senator.
- Her decision followed her indefinite suspension from the Labor caucus after crossing the floor to support a Greens motion calling for Palestinian statehood recognition.
- Payman, who was the first hijab-wearing Muslim woman in the Australian Parliament, cited her commitment to speaking out against injustices as a key factor in her decision.
The timing and circumstances of Payman's departure have been subject to debate, with Albanese suggesting she had been considering the move for a month, while Payman maintains she made the decision on the morning of her announcement.
- Her defection has implications for the government's ability to pass legislation in the Senate, as they now require an additional vote to secure majority support.
The situation highlights the complex interplay between faith, politics, and representation in Australia's multicultural society. It also underscores the challenges political parties face in balancing diverse perspectives within their ranks while maintaining party unity.
I don’t understand what is so hard for people to understand. I am atheist.
Yes there are white Christian psychos who are religious fanatics but if there were a primary religion, most of Australia’s would relate to that the most. I don’t agree with this and Australia as a country is becoming less religious over time.
It doesn’t make sense to allow religious fanatics with a completely different value system to the western world to dominate our politics from within. The reason for this is Australians have very different values from deeply religious people.
Have a think about it, if the roles were reversed do you think Muslim based countries would allow Christian’s to develop political parties to turn policies in their favour? No they would not.
It really is not that complicated. A lot people believe religion should be entirely removed from politics, year by year Australia becomes less religious and we are moving in the correct direction. Why would we encourage people to group together with a completely different value system to vote politically against our own value system? Insanity
When I was young I used to vote for the Fred Nile group because I was a chistian and figured they would represent my values well. Then I heard they were wanting to ban the Burka and that was the last straw for me. The bible says nothing about burkas and what other peoples religions do is their business. I just found they had adopted this weird American style "evangelical conservative" thing. It's better just to vote for people who represent your views not based on the religious claims of the party.
Am I missing something? A lot of people are talking in terms of a Muslim political party running on religious ideology, but all I'm seeing is an organized effort to back pro-palestinian independents called the 'Muslim Vote' as a response to the governments handling on Gaza. Even if those independents are Muslim, there's nothing to suggest that their motivations are religious.
I think there's a big difference between the former and the latter, and I wonder if people are trying to blurr the lines because they're afraid the latter will become the former, which kinda falls into the definition of islamophobia.
I'm not trying to defend religious parties or ideologies - not the slightest. I'm a Christian from a middle eastern country and I've seen sectarianism and religious politics destroy my country. But in an Australian context, the word Muslim, within ethnic communities that are Muslim majority, is often just used as an umbrella term to reference all those ethnic communities.
For a long time now there's been an underlying frustration within the community I belong to, as well as those I regularly interact with, Muslim or otherwise, that Labor just uses us as a secure base for safe seats, parachute candidates who have nothing to do with our communities, and then proceed to neglect these regions and our concerns. Melbourne's (where I'm from) West and North have terrible infrastructure and access to key services compared to the east, and some parts of the west still run on vline. We've had a Labor government for a decade...
In this context it makes sense to me that a 'Muslim vote' movement has emerged. Whether candidates are religious zealots seems to be just an insecurity. The likelihood of those types of candidates getting put up by this movement, in my opinion, is as likely as the Teal movement putting up a tree hugger in kooyong, which they didn't
Let's put a little bit more faith in our marginalized communities, and let's not assume they want the worst for us. Yes, fundamentalism exists within these communities, like it does in all communities, but it doesn't define them, nor should we let ourselves define such a large and diverse group of Australians with such a broad and unforgiving brush
Ohh my! Finally something I can agree with Albanese on!
Religion has no place in politics.
We should absolutely block these groups forming parties and preventing them making political donations.
This is one giant can of worms he wished he never opened
Well I agree with him but at the same time, he's not taking the same robustly critical approach to the likes of Scummo and the other evangelical goons infesting the Liberal party.
Anyone that prioritises religious law over Australian law has values fundamentally contradictory to our own.
The same applies to other religions but only Muslims move to countries and demand special treatment even when it conflicts western values like freedom of expression and freedom to criticise
>only Muslims move to countries and demand special treatment
Far out mate, the last lot wanted to bring in the religious freedom bill, so that you could be discriminated against for anything that contradicted their held belief. Oh and if you discriminated you were safe from been fired.
So you could be refused services based on arbitrary rules the other person followed.
You could cop verbal abuse from anyone based on their held beliefs.
Sounds like bloody special treatment.
We definitely do have our homegrown domestic variety of religious crackpots. My comment was with respect to immigrants wanting to simultaneously use the privileges of the West to advocate against it.
You're totally right, though. That is equally as bad
This might be a perfect time to secure a bill of rights and freedoms (including freedom *of* religion in personal life, and freedom *from* religion in government), if there's one thing that can unite the liberal and labor bases, it's being afraid of muslims.
He's right you know, although biased on being selective on flavour of religious politics.
Fuck the lot of 'em and boot them all out of the political stage once and for all, keep your magic sky daddy away from the influence of people who don't follow your particular path in life.
It's like one website and a few social media pages that's got Labor worried in some of their seats.
All of this could have been avoided if Labor held some sincere talks with their voters and heard the concerns but no had to make an example of paiman.
They shouldn't be elected at all. Meta seems to agree
*Sharia jurisprudence does indeed encompass political and social aspects, and its implementation can be seen as inherently connected to Islamism as a supremacist ideology. By supporting Sharia, one may be implicitly supporting a system that prioritizes Islamic law and governance over other legal and political frameworks, which can be problematic.*
Religion and politics should be completely separate (unlike the USA where they are most definitely not separate regardless of claims suggesting otherwise).
If you want to live in a country run by a religious group move elsewhere. This is aimed at any religious believers - Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Confucianists, Zoroastrians, Sikhs, Shintoists and any other religion.
Don't know if this is true but a union colleague told me many years ago that to get anywhere in the labour part you had to be Catholic. They are all a little bit religious nut jobs
Scomo was literally a part of Hillsong & let that effect the way he behaved as the leader of our country but *okay.*
Seems like they have a problem with Muslim parties specifically and that Christian parties don't count.
Australia is a multicultural country. Anyone trying to abuse its people, doesn't deserve to represent us. I don't have an issue with anyone as a politician... As long as they aren't preventing any us from having human rights. This muslim politician intends on doing exactly that. Get fcucked lady.
Okay three points here folks.
1. We have Christian faith-based parties. Those are *bad*, and until you can get rid of those, refusing to have Muslim ones is just discrimination; this is in fact how this kind of discrimination *works*, that an existing group with power is left alone because 'we can't fix that', while new groups seeking their own power so they can't be stomped on by the first group are booted out because 'it's against our principles'. News flash; countries *don't have principles*. They have systems, and the current system is *inarguably* one that gives political power to fringe pack of Christian nutjobs and does not provide anything similar for any other religious group no matter if they're 'nuts' or not.
2. This is not about religious values, but about the fact that as a *demographic* Muslim people in Australia are ignored at best and derided at worst. The existing political parties don't listen to them or court their votes, so of *course* they're going to make their own; *that's how democracies work*.
3. Enough of that shit about 'incompatible value systems'. It was Western countries (first lead by the UK then the USA) who *deliberately* toppled liberal Muslim governments and propped up insane fringe fundies to keep them destabilised and easy to exploit. Iran was a *liberal democracy* until they said 'no more foreign companies owning our oil, we will have our own companies selling our oil' and the UK toppled them, which ended with the current nutters in charge. Also the USA has been financially propping up the fucking Saudis for decades and that cash has been directly used to fund schools that indoctrinate Muslim kids into fundie fringe shit *all over the world*. Frankly, the West has done more to promote fundie Islam than any Muslim has, so glass houses and stones. Also our current 'value systems' has more in common with Islamic jurisprudence and interfaith tolerance (wasn't until the fringe nutters got pushed to the top that that changed) than it does with the insanity of Western history; the only thing that we have truly inherited from our Christian forebears is the tendency to screech and scream at people who believe slightly different things to us and try to boot them out of the group. The history of Christian heresies is fucking wild.
He would say that. Labor need to make her out to be the boogeyman now.
I'm an atheist and I'd vote for her if she was a candidate in my seat.
She's shown conviction and independent thought, which is something I thought was a good thing in a democracy.
There are estimates that \~100,000 Gazans have fled to Egypt. One quarter of Jordan's population is Palestinian, Lebanon also has a high percentage of Palestinian (and Syrian) refugees - together they make up over a quarter of the population. In many cases they literally *cannot* take any more people. By the way this is the *exact* same rhetoric the literal Nazis used when USA/Western Europe would not accept Jewish refugees. You might want to think about that.
The republicans ended slavery. Parties change over time. Malcom Frasier would not be let into the current LNP and Whitlam would never join the current Labor party.
In case people are wondering, regarding jobs not in politics, Payman held a position of Pharmacy Assistant for two years.
>Pharmacy Assistant and TerryWhite Chemist from 18.2.2018 to 17.2.2020. [Source](https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=300707)
Compare this to someone like albanese.
>Bank officer from 1980 to 1981. [Source](https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=R36)
>Wait, has Labor (100 years+) not earned your respect, or has Fatima (28 year old that has never had a real job) not earned your respect?
You guys realise that this sort of blind-party-allegiance and ad-hominem attack of anybody who doesn't step in line, seriously, seriously damages Labors image right?
For context I've voted Labor in the recent federal elections - but responses like this both completely miss the actual issues at hand, and make the party look like crybaby despots instead of a legitimate political institution.
As the comment before you said, 'respect is earned', and labor being 100+ years old doesn't automatically make them moral, and it doesn't mean they keep my respect for life if they pull dumb shit. Everybody is entitled to fall in and out of favour with political parties as much as they damn please.
Albo, (and those on the opposite bench) are just s…t scared their two party duopoly is threatened.
They’d rather lose to the LNP than face a future of negotiating minority government
Blatant dog-whistling, Albo. You know very well that we've had faith based political parties present day and historic, but you never say anything about that until now.
Our last PM denied manmade climate change and thought the world was made for us to use.
He was literally incapable of enacting sustainable evidence driven policy.
Thanks religious thinking!
I am an atheist and hate the idea of voting for a religious party but i really believe it's this we moved away from the two party system and force a compromise. At the moment its all done behind closed doors and we don't know what is going on.
Yes we should ban all political donations from religions, as well as public funds spent on religious organisations or businesses.
And tax concessions.
Agree. No religion should have tax exemption, and no corporation should be paying little or no tax either
It's time to give that money back to the people...
I’d like to ban them just for religions that call for punishment of apostasy in their texts, or have their teachings secret. Want concessions? Ya gotta let people *leave*. We’d soon find out what’s more important, god or money.
And while we're at it remove government funding to private religious schools. If you want a private religious school. Great. But the public shouldn't have to foot the bill for religious education.
~~Amen~~ I concur
Ban all political donations. No one donates without an agenda of some sort. Just fuck them all off. Politicians making bank for eons can pay their own way to re-election.
I'll say the same thing as any other party pushing Christian sectarianism: get fucked. That includes the Muslim party. Get that bullshit out of politics.
Something something separation of church and state?
Hard agree - ridiculous sentiment from Albo when it’s a non-Christian given Morrison and Abbott as recent PMs. Fuck off with all religion in parliament
Watch all the RWNJs go nuts now with the “told you so” about Muslim migrants wanting shariah for all.
If they ever bothered to read the Census results and understand that "No Religion" is a catch-all category that includes lapsed Christians as well as athiests and agnostics, they'd realise the heat death of the Sun might come sooner than a Muslim majority in Australia - the Indian sub-continent religions make up a greater slice of Australian religion that Islam does, and Hinduism is the fastest growing of them. They should be more worried about chakras and curries before burkhas and whatever other ignorant piece of bigotry they can think of if that's their angle.
Are there faith based political parties in Australia for religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism? The particular faith behind these parties also don't need to be anywhere near the majority of the overall population - they just need to win enough individual electorates to sway the balance of power, which is made easier due to the fact ethnic and religious groups tend to congregate together.
Chakras and curries don't explicitly reject basic Western values like democracy and freedom of speech.
Faith based parties just like Family First.
Or the Christian Democrats.
or the Liberal Party
I mean pretty much all our parliaments start the sitting with the lord's prayer. Christian religion is still baked into our government system.
True, Scomo is literally in Hillsong.
[удалено]
Ehhhhh they made him the leader of their party didn't they? As in the person representing their party to the rest of the world. Here's the speech he made to Hillsong chuch after he lost the election. https://youtu.be/sCoCdCVBmT8?si=Ty-2ZHHiHt2Z4e0R Features some great quotes such as "Don't trust in governments" and "Don't trust in the United Nations" Dude was straight up a extremist in a fringe religion. Believes in faith healing (probably why the vaccines were low priority) and prosperity gospel, which basically says poor people are poor becuase they are sinners, and I'd lay his total lack of care for the Australian people at the religions feet, but that seems to be more generic. But I don't think I've heard Fatima tell everyone not to trust our government. So I reckon she beats Scotty there.
Ah but why is it different for a woman of Muslim faith to let that influence her decisions compared to someoen of Christian faith? I’m all for politics to not be governed by religion but lets call out some hypocrisy where we can when it’s a legitimate gripe.
You just repeated the exact same logical error u/turgottherealbro shut down in the comment you’re replying to. No-one said she can’t subscribe to a religion and have that influence her decision, that’s a given.
Scott Morrison made a speech to the Hillsong church after he lost the election https://youtu.be/sCoCdCVBmT8?si=Ty-2ZHHiHt2Z4e0R "Don't trust the government" and "Don't trust the United nations". Sounds like he chose his religion over the country there mate. And yes, he was still an elected memeber of the Liberal party then. I wonder why he never got this much bullshit in the media? Or any pushback from his party either. A religion that believes in prosperity gospel by the way, one of the more disgusting belief I've seen in pretty much any religion. Rich people are rich because God loves them and poor people are poor because they are sinners. No wonder he was anti welfare, he didn't want money going to people god didn't love.
Worst? what about a belief that if you sacrifice a human the gods will provide a good harvest and/or rains or even the practice of burying servants/slaves (even with consent or not) with a pharoah so they can serve them in the afterlife? Religious beliefs have always been shit.
I mean Family First existed for a long time and I don't remember Albanese having a problem with that. Seems like maybe it's only some faiths that he thinks shouldn't have faith-based parties.
> "I don't think and don't want Australia to go down the road of faith-based political parties because what that will do is undermine social cohesion," Mr Albanese said at a press conference on Friday. > He used Labor as an example of a party that included members from a range of religions. > "That's the way you bring cohesion," he said. > "It seems to me, as well, beyond obvious that it is not in the interest of smaller minority groups to isolate themselves – which is what a faith-based party system would do." > "I don't have any problem with a party that has a religious view," he told Nine News. > “But when you say that your task is to, as a first order of priority, to support a Palestinian cause or a cause outside of Australia, that is a very different scenario. > “So, I think when that is the main cause, we have all sorts of problems." At least read the shitty article.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/revealed-how-exclusive-brethren-members-secretly-donate-to-the-liberal-party-20160615-gpk0nd.html https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/worldtoday/involvement-of-exclusive-brethren-in-politics/1268036 https://anthonyalbanese.com.au/transcript-of-doorstop-liberal-party-and-the-exclusive-brethren-turnbull
[удалено]
>Again, doesn't make the Liberal party Hillsong. Of course not. Look at the the Liberal former PMs who gave character references for George Pell. They're even more in the pocket of the Catholic Paedo Racket.
And Frequently said he was chosen by his God to be Prime Minister
They’ve certainly been infiltrated. It started around twenty years ago by Christian fundamentalists.
I know we're all side-eyeing America right now. The way that christo-fascist act, they will assume the power reaches here as well. We know there is a US base in every country in the world. They have a significant cultural and political influence. There are people who are just itching for *permission* to be the most abhorrent person. I should hope we also recognise that fascism uses any symbol it wants. It's a mindset. Edit additional: and I don't want to pretend it's not possible. We have a blokey bloke tradie nation. It happens in the companies. Anyone who spells out 'politically incorrect' like it's a bad thing to have a empathetic concious. It IS those who don't think that there's anything wrong with murdoch media. It lives in the rural towns, because they love nothing more than worrying about immigration, lgbt, and who think welfare and of those most disadvantaged like drug addicts and aboriginal people. We have this idea banning the swastika actually stops people from thinking like a swastika. And that is our greatest fallacy. More: I am also vitality aware that growing up, I have lived in a relatively polite society. I haven't needed to punch anyone, more, I am timid. So what do we do when we have to start punching, who do we even recognise of someone worthy of that?
"Know the tools in your toolbox; protect what is dear to your heart, speak your mind freely against all injustices you believe in regardless of cost, and lastly, don't forget you brought your bloody toolbox."
Even the liberals put religion first: freedom for religious discrimination against secular society, anti gay marriage etc.
Makes sense. Religion is one of those most conservative social groups on Earth considering the stuff they follow was written hundreds of years ago.
Indeed. And the Christian religion supports welcoming immigrants, blocking religious leaders who take money from worshippers, taking care of the sick and poor, abhorring violence. Just a pity that the churches do not follow the actual religion.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle... I do find it funny that a peasant & slave religion that manifested as resistance against entrenched kings and oligarchs has been perverted into what it is now. The Abrahamic religions were incredibly transgressive for their time, and now they're part of the conservative malaise. I suppose it's not much different from the way that the USSR twisted Marx's writings into a police state.
It kinda makes sense when you realise that religion is a really convenient excuse for holding objectionable views. Religion is a protected status, people can't be legally discriminated against because of it, and unlike other protected statuses (age, gender, race, disability), religion is something people can choose. So if someone has an objectionable view (e.g. that they should be allowed to drive an enormous truck and park it across 3 parking spots because fuck everyone else), they can choose to join a religion which gives them permission to hold that view, where they can find others who share and reinforce that view, and where they're free to claim that that view is part of their religion. And they can't face any consequences for having, spreading, and practicing that view because any consequences imposed would be discrimination on the basis of religion.
Fred Nile wants a word.
We shouldn't forget the biggest one being the liberal party. Their Victorian branch was caught branch staking for a religious take over by Christian extremists who are very much against policies that support the rights of women, LGBTIQA+ members, and other minorities. [Source - ABC](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-07/religious-right-roadmap-infiltrate-liberal-party/101611840#), [Source 2 - Michael West](https://michaelwest.com.au/city-builders-the-pentecostal-cult-driving-the-liberal-party-to-the-far-right-and-beyond/). You also have right-wing Christians plan to infiltrate and take over Australian politics, with the help of political parties such as the liberals, nationals, one nation, etc.. It becomes extreme concerning when they have individuals who support neo-nazis. [Source - SMH](https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/long-march-the-right-wing-christian-plan-to-infiltrate-politics-20230306-p5cpod.html) And then you have scott morrison, a religious extremist who was literally the leader of not only the liberal party, but also the prime minister, talk about his "faith". [Source - Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/apr/26/scott-morrison-tells-christian-conference-he-was-called-to-do-gods-work-as-prime-minister). He even wrote a book about it. albanese is bringing up faith-based politics now just to attack Payman, and ironically in the process, undermining social cohesion within Australia. It's a fucking slimy move that is expected from individuals like morrison and dutton, but I have no doubt albanese's fanatical base would eat it up like religious zealots.
I'm a 60 yo rusted on Labor supporter & I agree with you mate, it's a calculated low shot.
"It seems to me, as well, beyond obvious that it is not in the interest of smaller minority groups to isolate themselves" - he comes across as threatening a portion of his base in Western Sydney. It seems like such a bizarre move.
I'm so conflicted about the Labor party, these days. On one hand, I like having a government that actually governs, but there are a lot of things, like this, that offend my sensibilities. God I wish Shorten had got ahead of Albo.
>God I wish Shorten had got ahead of Albo. 100%
Shorten is busy deliberately sinking the NDIS while pretending older people don't deserve that support. Because he'll never need it.
I cant help but feel like the religion and race is a factor here, like in america where christian extremism isnt called terrorism while islamic terrorism is called terrorism It's fucking slimy mudslinging as you say
Yep this is a total low blow by ablo and I'm actually still in shock that he said it. I'm scared for the future of the Labor party if this is the hill they choose to die on.
Muslims are strongly disapproving of Albanese's government because of their defacto support for genocide and for bullying and punishing a Muslim representative. This is the cover they're running.
We try not to mention the fact Christian parties are condoned.
they aren't are they? I think they are pretty much seen as the lunatic fringe
The LNP have a lot of extremists . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-08/same-sex-marriage-who-didnt-vote/9240584 .
Sure, but they're not a faith based party. As far as they're concerned, as long as you're right wing, hate the concept of government, and white, you can be a Liberal. The overlap between those people and extremist Christians is large, but it's by no means a Christian party.
Somehow I think that's a thing they'll have in common with Islamic tradition
Verbally they get slugged but they still rort shittons of money through the private school system
Yeah. Very telling that people get worried when it's Muslims when Christianity has never not been all up in politics. Not that I think any of it's good, but it's no different.
My first thought was "rival religious parties would be especially bad". Then I asked myself if Christian parties preventing any rival parties from threatening their hegemony is really "good". Welp.
The Christians are basically ignored.
Except two recent prime ministers- Morrison and Abbott - both made a huge thing of their supposed Christian credentials.
Except when the Lord's Prayer is opening parliament.
LNP, they just don’t advertise it.
Albo is really badly bumbling this entire Fatima Payman affair. I don't understand why he doesn't just leave her the hell alone? Going after her is just the WORST idea ever!
> Going after her is just the WORST idea ever! Look at how much he has aged in the last two years. He’s just following orders. I agree with his sentiment if it applied to all religion. Keep religion out of politics, tax the religious institutions and put the money into social services and fucking ban lobbying. An equal and fair society should tax everyone equally and fairly (including religions and corporations)
No no no. We mean faith based parties that aren’t our main faith undermine social cohesion. Nothing has ever gone wrong with Christianity being in politics.
Let's be very clear: right now both major parties and most of the MSM are being scripted by a religious group whose allegiance is first and foremost to a theocratic foreign power that may be genocidal and is certainly colonial. Albo made this crisis. I am disgusted that anyone trying to defend Palestinians is getting kicked in this country.
So let’s get rid of parliamentary prayer time at the start of each sitting year.
Amen to that
Praise be.
Blessed be the fruit
Please
No kidding! Look what Scott Morrison did using his faith while being PM.
The UK election is an interesting comparison point; Labour have won an absolute majority, but have lost four seats to independents who support Gaza. I suspect the ALP isn’t winning an absolute majority on the back of a historically unpopular government being thrown out, so they should be mindful of how much this could impact on them.
The UK is first past the post though which is quite different, knowing your vote will go somewhere may help people vote for smaller parties.
Yeah, exactly. If the UK with FPTP was still able to swap out 4 seats from the winning party towards independents then us having preferential voting is most likely to create a larger swing to minors and independents if the same trends follow here.
Not necessarily. Right wing voters in those seats will presumably preference Labor over an extremist Muslim vote candidate.
I think the Labor policy on Gaza is poor, and the fuss over Payman an own goal. But there aren't any seats with a high Muslim vote base like there are in the UK, and we don't have FPTP. Labor might be able to get away with it. Still Gaza might be just one of the issues where Labor lose support in traditional strongholds, we'll have to wait and see.
There are several electorates that have 20% + Muslim voters. And that doesn't include the non-Muslim Arab population, and then add the anti war voters. Yeah I think Labor will lose a couple of seats to this.
They won’t lose them to the coalition though…
No, but they could plausibly lose them to candidates who caucus with the LNP, considering how socially conservative Muslims are statistically.
Labor party is also quite socially conservative. Gay Marriage was implemented under LNP, and the Labor party hasn't done anything else since then. Labor make pleasing noises, but never actually do anything.
Labor talk the talk, but also claim that the walk would get them wedged by the LNP, which is telling.
Hate to say it, but it’s true. Labour’s biggest strength is that they’re less conservative than Liberal, so they can pretend that they’re the progressive party when they’re really just a bunch of status-quo defending centrists. To be clear, the LNP didn’t legalise gay marriage out of the good of their hearts, if anything, they put queer people in the firing line of the public news cycle in the hopes that people would vote “no” and put the debate to rest.
I doubt anyone other than Muslims would vote for a Muslim voices party. I'm about as supportive of Gaza as anyone but I'd never vote for a Muslim party. They would really need a majority to actually get elected.
It depends on who runs, an independent(s) that happens to be pro-Palestine amongst other policies could easily win on a backlash to Labor's policy on Palestine amongst other complaints against Labor. But any outright Muslim or Islamic party is not going to appeal to non-Muslims, and while non-Muslim Arabs tend to be pro-Palestine, they more than anyone will not vote for a Muslim party.
Depends on how long it goes on for. Labor will be hoping it resolves itself so they can stay relatively quiet about this. If the Gaza movement still has momentum coming into an election, the UK’s has shown that they’ll need to be stronger if they want to hold their vote share. In saying that our preferential system will likely reduce the damage as I doubt a Gaza voter would put the libs ahead of labor
Leaking votes to the new party is the problem for Labor; if the Muslim party gets enough to be in position 2 or 3 in the count, they could get enough on preferences to stay in the race and win. If the new party only cannibalises the conservative vote, they've got no problem
Can't see a change in position on Gaza being a net vote winner because there is no clear consensus in society, you'd alienate as many voters as you gained. I doubt the war will still be going next year.
I also don't think the most people would think less of Albo around this recent issue with senator payman. While I am sure her beliefs are sincerely held, I suspect most "battlers" are going to be on Albo's side. Aside from the issue itself, most people seem to dislike it when someone quits a party. Especially over an issue or stance that most people see as fringe
I’m baffled they all seem to be so out of touch with the Gaza issue. I hope liberals and labour get a rude wake up call at the election.
They are more scared of lobbies snd donors than they are of voters.
And we live in a “democracy” apparently
We live in a guided democracy - corporations are half of our government, effectively.
They aren't out of touch there's serious money behind pro-israel policies
It's influence is significant. It's noticeable most in US politics, but it's absolutely in ours. There's no logical reason that we should give Israel all this diplomatic cover in the UN (for example). We don't do it for other random countries we have little to do with. Why should we do this when it provides us no benefit? We don't for example go out of our way to help Malta, and there are far more people of Maltese descent in Australia than there are Israelis. Same goes for Italians, Greeks, Indians, Chinese, and Vietnamese.
Presumably it's because Malta isn't under diplomatic pressure?
Yes, this is the problem
Wouldn't call it out of touch, majority don't give a toss about the latest mess in the middle east. I doubt it would swing an election.
I would say they are very much well in touch. They just mostly treating it as acceptable loss.
Yeah, while I'm sure these views are sincerely held most people want absolutely nothing to do with anything in the middle east
The last PM was in the pocket of fuckin Hillsong ffs
Half the reason he got the axe.
>Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said Australia did not need sectarianism. >"I don't have any problem with a party that has a religious view," he told Nine News. >"But when you say that your task is to, as a first order of priority, to support a Palestinian cause or a cause outside of Australia, that is a very different scenario. The Liberal Party is chock full of Christian eschatological nutters who support Israel's actions in Palestine. They even made one of them PM, and Jerusalem was recognised as the capital as a result. Is Dutton going to purge those nutters from the party? Pigs might fly. On the subject of explicitly religious parties and their associated issues, the problem is not so much that they exist, but that they try to enforce religious norms on people who don't subscribe to their beliefs. We saw this come up with SSM. However, if we are to have freedom of belief, then in a democracy, people with those beliefs should be free to organise politically. What needs to be ensured is that differences in opinion are tolerated, and freedoms not unduly restricted provided they don't restrict the freedoms of others. It might be added that: - the existence of a Muslim political party does not mean that all people of Muslim faith will vote for it. It doesn't work for Christian political parties - if we want social cohesion, get rid of private schools and make sure multiculturalism and tolerance are promoted in all areas of society
Who was it again that didn't support same sex marriage, and railed hard to get special religious "freedom" laws brought in to ensure religion was exempt from discrimination laws? Remind me...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-08/same-sex-marriage-who-didnt-vote/9240584 Same-sex marriage: This is everyone who didn't vote to support the bill. The proposed bill allowing only government supported religions to discriminate? That was set to place the opinion of favoured religious leaders(no pastafarians etc) above the law of the land.-- I hope the constitution would have blocked that.
There is a secret "coalition agreement" with the Nats. The Nats are pushing this nuclear issue, but 3 years ago they were pushing a coal fired power station in northern Qld. The Nats also pushing billion dollar fines for supermarket. Because supermarkets negotiate with farmers for the lowest price. The nonsense is that this will bring down prices; its agrarian socialism, and the only effect of fines is to increase prices. Nats are the nutters running the Liberal agenda.
Wasn't it the Libs that introduced religious chaplains into public high schools? Or am I crazy? Not that I disagree with the sentiment Albo is espousing.
Whatever the Muslim Vote turns out to be (a political party or lobby group), the media and political coverage is making out faith based political groups are new when they are not and some are or at least have been quite powerful. I’m atheist, but religion is an important part of some people’s sense of identity so it’s not shocking it would link with politics.
Yeah, atheist here as well. Some religious people derive their morality from their faith, and while I don’t agree with that, I don’t see any world where we can cut religion-based voting out of society. On top of that, from what I know the Muslim Vote isn’t campaigning to implement Sharia or anything like that, they mostly just want Australia to stop supporting Israel, which many communities support, both Muslim and non-Muslim.
What does he think the Coalition are? Half of their policies are based on religion.
so is Albo (TM) going to scrap the reciting of the Lord's prayer before each Parliamentary day's work
social cohesion lol. this country is crawling with selfish toddlers
100% every faith. I am an immigrant and one of the best things about Australia is how secular it is. It could be better but it's already pretty good compared to most other countries (including most western countries).
Any religion based political parties should not exist. I came from Malaysia where it’s a norm. They used their ustaz (priest) to ask the voters to vote for the Islamic party because that’s what God wanted them to. And their political policy is basically just revert back to old Islamic way with Sharia law and ban this ban that because it’s doesn’t conform to the religion. People need to know supporting Gaza is one thing, but supporting an Islamic religious party is another. And we should totally ban those Christians/Catholic parties too. I don’t think I have met a non hypocritical overtly religious people
Religion (any) does not belong in politics
There are political parties like Family First and the Christian Democrats that base their policies on religion, so why would a Muslim party be a bad thing? I can think of three reasons. 1. If religious political parties are bad, then more of a bad thing is worse. Pretty simple 2. Those Christian parties never ran up against opposing religious parties, they ran up against opposing *secular* parties. Sectarian disagreements are always more intractable, because neither side can reason the other out of their religions convictions. See: every country in the Middle East except maybe Oman 3. For better or worse (or for better *and* worse), Christians have been the majority of Australians for the majority of the country's history since Federation. No political movement has ever been discriminated against because it was Christian. But I can see on the horizon how nasty politics will become if ethnic minorities, whose loyalty to the country is already questioned by some, tie their political voice to a minority religion This thread is probably getting locked, so I thought I'd add this now: we should avoid the trap of treating political party affiliation as identity. You can broadly agree with one major party over the other, while not wanting to directly vote for them. Our preferential voting system encourages that. But if parties start to represent ethnicities or religions, then voting for them becomes part of who you are, a part that you have no power to change. We would become more polarised, isolated, and ultimately powerless to change things. Don't let it happen. Be suspicious of every party and movement, especially if they claim to represent *your* interests
I wholeheartedly agree that there is no place for religion in politics at all, but Christian political parties don't get a pass on those same grounds because they were here earlier. All parties are secular by default - how can any party that prefers a particular religion claim to be impartial for an electorate that isn't entirely of one religious persuasion? >No political movement has ever been discriminated against because it was Christian. You've got to be joking with this line though.
I should have been more specific. No political party or political organisation (e.g., Australian Christian Lobby) has been discriminated against in the context of Australian politics. Obviously there's been sectarian discrimination throughout history
ah understood - yeah i think that makes the decision to selectively apply any rules now a little more transparently in 'bad faith' (pun intended) It's difficult to think of how faith-based parties could be discouraged with our constitutional interpretation precedence of political free speech - but if Albanese wants to criticise them, he should at least do it consistently and include any other existing religious parties too.
Great post
It's very funny how there are nutbag Christian parties (or people of faith) actually IN parliament, but a non-Christian faith party is suddenly such a major drama.
I agree, but I also appreciate that Christianity is... more (or less) compatible with western values and democracy(again more or less), whilst islam is incompatible with free and fair societies, and is let's be honest, authoritarian, patriarchal and violent.
You don't think Christianity is patriarchal? Which bible do you read?
Oh I do, absolutely believe Christianity is patriarchal as heck
I mean, that entirely depends on who you are. A conservative Christian government is no better for me than an Islamic one.
Pretty much every instance of negativity under conservative Christian governments is exponentially worse under an islamic one.
Fuck off. Christianity wants LGBTQ people eradicated, denies science, is riddled with kiddy fuckers and doesn't want to contribute back to society through taxes. None of that is compatible with being a functional part of a modern western democracy.
The fact you can't see that what you wrote is so wrong is alarming. Christianity is not 'riddled with kiddy fuckers' what the absolute fuck is that sentence? They have no more predators than the rest of the population. And I'm not Christian but it seems I somehow have to point out that 'modern western democracies' all used to be far more Christian than they currently are. It's funny you see someone daring to point out that Islam is the more oppressive religion and then respond with hatred of Christians to defend Muslims. Shows how little about the world you know. After all it is a literal crime to leave the Muslim faith, any ex-Muslim would absolutely despise the sentiment that the religions are in any way comparable in their depravity.
Look I agree, I'm not even religious, but holy fuck we are comparing it to islam. You can't get more violent and stone age
You are being so racist in this thread.
I was raised JW, believe me those fundamentalist cults would be as violent and stone age if they thought they could get away with it. When I escaped, I was told that according to the Bible ( which is never wrong ) I should have been atoned to death That was my mother Make no mistake they would do it if they could.
Christianity is not remotely compatible with western values, all the conservative attitudes directly stem from it. It's just that the extreme elements lost influence over the general populous and the mainstream part of the religion needed to adapt. Islam religion is similar in many ways. But constant wars and instability and their progressive movements failing for different reasons is why on a mainstream level it is still more archaic. The extreme elements still have control. Any good western values is inspite of Christianity and because of progressive victories spanning the past couple of centuries and the religion had to adapt to survive and maintain its influence in the mainstream.
I've been criticised on Reddit before for saying that we need a referendum to enforce absolute and permanent seperation of church and state along the lines of the French Lacitie. There is no room for Canon law, Talmudic law or Sharia law in a pluralist society.
Does he realise it's entirely Labor's fault is it does happen? It's their position on Palestinian recognition and their continued support for Israel that is driving the divide with the Arab community. Their position is at odds with public opinion and their own manifesto. It's entirely their choice whether the future sees them lose seats and foster a disillusioned Arab voter base because they won't stop supporting Israeli genocide or not. The ball is 100% in their court. If they want to stop it all they have to do is stop facilitating the Israel's occupation.
2024 and we still need to argue that church and state must be separated We have more than a thousand years of evidence that religion has hindered our technological and social development yet we still need to bicker about it?
The Prime minister literally prayed during lockdown and Labor commended him. What an absolute bunch of hypocrites
Yeah she sends money to Abu Bakr zoud who openly broadcasts that STD originate from homosexuals. You wanna represent an entire state when you look down on your constituents with devine hatred?
Religion has no place in politics, not ever!
i didn't know titles that long were even LEGAL in this social-media age. Wow
Don't label it as faith based since it's just Muslims! BTW, I'm sure there're many in Labor who don't agree with party direction just as many in Libs don't agree etc. You've so many people forming a party, but it's impossible for a party to go for 10 directions. It's just a matter of whether each party member can compromise. I bet Payman surely didn't want/foresee the consequence of the Muslim community due to her action. Sometimes or most of the times? We just aren't in action of everything that happens.
**For anyone who doesn't want to click through:** * Albanese emphasized that faith-based political parties could isolate minority groups and harm social cohesion. * The Muslim Vote denied being a political party or religious campaign, describing itself as a political campaign aimed at educating and mobilizing the Muslim community at a grassroots level. * Opposition Leader Peter Dutton stated that Australia does not need sectarianism, expressing concerns about parties prioritizing causes outside of Australia. * Australian cricketer Usman Khawaja criticized Dutton's comments as "bigotry at its finest" and accused him of fueling Islamophobia. * The discussion arose in the context of Senator Fatima Payman's recent departure from the Labor Party. **Regarding Senator Payman's defection:** - Payman announced her resignation from the Labor Party on July 4, 2024, becoming an independent senator. - Her decision followed her indefinite suspension from the Labor caucus after crossing the floor to support a Greens motion calling for Palestinian statehood recognition. - Payman, who was the first hijab-wearing Muslim woman in the Australian Parliament, cited her commitment to speaking out against injustices as a key factor in her decision. The timing and circumstances of Payman's departure have been subject to debate, with Albanese suggesting she had been considering the move for a month, while Payman maintains she made the decision on the morning of her announcement. - Her defection has implications for the government's ability to pass legislation in the Senate, as they now require an additional vote to secure majority support. The situation highlights the complex interplay between faith, politics, and representation in Australia's multicultural society. It also underscores the challenges political parties face in balancing diverse perspectives within their ranks while maintaining party unity.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don’t understand what is so hard for people to understand. I am atheist. Yes there are white Christian psychos who are religious fanatics but if there were a primary religion, most of Australia’s would relate to that the most. I don’t agree with this and Australia as a country is becoming less religious over time. It doesn’t make sense to allow religious fanatics with a completely different value system to the western world to dominate our politics from within. The reason for this is Australians have very different values from deeply religious people. Have a think about it, if the roles were reversed do you think Muslim based countries would allow Christian’s to develop political parties to turn policies in their favour? No they would not. It really is not that complicated. A lot people believe religion should be entirely removed from politics, year by year Australia becomes less religious and we are moving in the correct direction. Why would we encourage people to group together with a completely different value system to vote politically against our own value system? Insanity
When I was young I used to vote for the Fred Nile group because I was a chistian and figured they would represent my values well. Then I heard they were wanting to ban the Burka and that was the last straw for me. The bible says nothing about burkas and what other peoples religions do is their business. I just found they had adopted this weird American style "evangelical conservative" thing. It's better just to vote for people who represent your views not based on the religious claims of the party.
You're completely right Albo. Glad to hear you're kicking the Catholic Church out of the ALP and the union movement!
Am I missing something? A lot of people are talking in terms of a Muslim political party running on religious ideology, but all I'm seeing is an organized effort to back pro-palestinian independents called the 'Muslim Vote' as a response to the governments handling on Gaza. Even if those independents are Muslim, there's nothing to suggest that their motivations are religious. I think there's a big difference between the former and the latter, and I wonder if people are trying to blurr the lines because they're afraid the latter will become the former, which kinda falls into the definition of islamophobia. I'm not trying to defend religious parties or ideologies - not the slightest. I'm a Christian from a middle eastern country and I've seen sectarianism and religious politics destroy my country. But in an Australian context, the word Muslim, within ethnic communities that are Muslim majority, is often just used as an umbrella term to reference all those ethnic communities. For a long time now there's been an underlying frustration within the community I belong to, as well as those I regularly interact with, Muslim or otherwise, that Labor just uses us as a secure base for safe seats, parachute candidates who have nothing to do with our communities, and then proceed to neglect these regions and our concerns. Melbourne's (where I'm from) West and North have terrible infrastructure and access to key services compared to the east, and some parts of the west still run on vline. We've had a Labor government for a decade... In this context it makes sense to me that a 'Muslim vote' movement has emerged. Whether candidates are religious zealots seems to be just an insecurity. The likelihood of those types of candidates getting put up by this movement, in my opinion, is as likely as the Teal movement putting up a tree hugger in kooyong, which they didn't Let's put a little bit more faith in our marginalized communities, and let's not assume they want the worst for us. Yes, fundamentalism exists within these communities, like it does in all communities, but it doesn't define them, nor should we let ourselves define such a large and diverse group of Australians with such a broad and unforgiving brush
Ohh my! Finally something I can agree with Albanese on! Religion has no place in politics. We should absolutely block these groups forming parties and preventing them making political donations. This is one giant can of worms he wished he never opened
Well I agree with him but at the same time, he's not taking the same robustly critical approach to the likes of Scummo and the other evangelical goons infesting the Liberal party.
Anyone that prioritises religious law over Australian law has values fundamentally contradictory to our own. The same applies to other religions but only Muslims move to countries and demand special treatment even when it conflicts western values like freedom of expression and freedom to criticise
>only Muslims move to countries and demand special treatment Far out mate, the last lot wanted to bring in the religious freedom bill, so that you could be discriminated against for anything that contradicted their held belief. Oh and if you discriminated you were safe from been fired. So you could be refused services based on arbitrary rules the other person followed. You could cop verbal abuse from anyone based on their held beliefs. Sounds like bloody special treatment.
We definitely do have our homegrown domestic variety of religious crackpots. My comment was with respect to immigrants wanting to simultaneously use the privileges of the West to advocate against it. You're totally right, though. That is equally as bad
The current lot want to bring in exactly the same thing.
This might be a perfect time to secure a bill of rights and freedoms (including freedom *of* religion in personal life, and freedom *from* religion in government), if there's one thing that can unite the liberal and labor bases, it's being afraid of muslims.
So, when does Albo go after Family First?
Well, well, well… if it ain’t the consequences of our own actions.
He's right you know, although biased on being selective on flavour of religious politics. Fuck the lot of 'em and boot them all out of the political stage once and for all, keep your magic sky daddy away from the influence of people who don't follow your particular path in life.
It's like one website and a few social media pages that's got Labor worried in some of their seats. All of this could have been avoided if Labor held some sincere talks with their voters and heard the concerns but no had to make an example of paiman.
They shouldn't be elected at all. Meta seems to agree *Sharia jurisprudence does indeed encompass political and social aspects, and its implementation can be seen as inherently connected to Islamism as a supremacist ideology. By supporting Sharia, one may be implicitly supporting a system that prioritizes Islamic law and governance over other legal and political frameworks, which can be problematic.*
We already have family first, so damage is done.
Let's not go about banning parties now. Let people bote and let democracy do it's job
Religion and politics should be completely separate (unlike the USA where they are most definitely not separate regardless of claims suggesting otherwise). If you want to live in a country run by a religious group move elsewhere. This is aimed at any religious believers - Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Confucianists, Zoroastrians, Sikhs, Shintoists and any other religion.
WAIT- Is the undertone “unless it’s Christian or catholic”?
Say it with me everybody... 👏 Separation 👏 Of 👏 Church 👏 And 👏 State 👏
Sounds like Albo is worried all the Hindus and Muslims he’s imported might vote for someone else
Don't know if this is true but a union colleague told me many years ago that to get anywhere in the labour part you had to be Catholic. They are all a little bit religious nut jobs
Don’t they pray to god before every session of Parliament? ALP are revealing themselves to be very similar to the LNP.
Scomo was literally a part of Hillsong & let that effect the way he behaved as the leader of our country but *okay.* Seems like they have a problem with Muslim parties specifically and that Christian parties don't count.
Australia is a multicultural country. Anyone trying to abuse its people, doesn't deserve to represent us. I don't have an issue with anyone as a politician... As long as they aren't preventing any us from having human rights. This muslim politician intends on doing exactly that. Get fcucked lady.
Try digging up, Albo.
[удалено]
Okay three points here folks. 1. We have Christian faith-based parties. Those are *bad*, and until you can get rid of those, refusing to have Muslim ones is just discrimination; this is in fact how this kind of discrimination *works*, that an existing group with power is left alone because 'we can't fix that', while new groups seeking their own power so they can't be stomped on by the first group are booted out because 'it's against our principles'. News flash; countries *don't have principles*. They have systems, and the current system is *inarguably* one that gives political power to fringe pack of Christian nutjobs and does not provide anything similar for any other religious group no matter if they're 'nuts' or not. 2. This is not about religious values, but about the fact that as a *demographic* Muslim people in Australia are ignored at best and derided at worst. The existing political parties don't listen to them or court their votes, so of *course* they're going to make their own; *that's how democracies work*. 3. Enough of that shit about 'incompatible value systems'. It was Western countries (first lead by the UK then the USA) who *deliberately* toppled liberal Muslim governments and propped up insane fringe fundies to keep them destabilised and easy to exploit. Iran was a *liberal democracy* until they said 'no more foreign companies owning our oil, we will have our own companies selling our oil' and the UK toppled them, which ended with the current nutters in charge. Also the USA has been financially propping up the fucking Saudis for decades and that cash has been directly used to fund schools that indoctrinate Muslim kids into fundie fringe shit *all over the world*. Frankly, the West has done more to promote fundie Islam than any Muslim has, so glass houses and stones. Also our current 'value systems' has more in common with Islamic jurisprudence and interfaith tolerance (wasn't until the fringe nutters got pushed to the top that that changed) than it does with the insanity of Western history; the only thing that we have truly inherited from our Christian forebears is the tendency to screech and scream at people who believe slightly different things to us and try to boot them out of the group. The history of Christian heresies is fucking wild.
He would say that. Labor need to make her out to be the boogeyman now. I'm an atheist and I'd vote for her if she was a candidate in my seat. She's shown conviction and independent thought, which is something I thought was a good thing in a democracy.
Yes... imagine someone from the ALP actually acting on principle instead of talking about it.
I'm an atheist and I wouldn't. Conviction and independent thought are common in the anti vax crew too.
Is it independent thought when pro-Palestine is a cornerstone of modern Arab/Muslim convictions ?
Maybe someone should ask her why the neighbouring Arab/Muslim countries wont take in Palestinians
There are estimates that \~100,000 Gazans have fled to Egypt. One quarter of Jordan's population is Palestinian, Lebanon also has a high percentage of Palestinian (and Syrian) refugees - together they make up over a quarter of the population. In many cases they literally *cannot* take any more people. By the way this is the *exact* same rhetoric the literal Nazis used when USA/Western Europe would not accept Jewish refugees. You might want to think about that.
Maybe someone should ask why Israel is forcing Palestinians out and making it illegal for them to return.
Because if they do, Israel will just export the entire arab population of the region to surrounding territories and call the land theirs.
Isn’t that what happened in 1948?
Eh, no she hasn't. She's just demonstrated a lack of respect for the Labor party.
those two aren't mutually exclusive
Respect is earned.
Wait, has Labor (100 years+) not earned your respect, or has Fatima (28 year old that has never had a real job) not earned your respect?
The republicans ended slavery. Parties change over time. Malcom Frasier would not be let into the current LNP and Whitlam would never join the current Labor party.
In case people are wondering, regarding jobs not in politics, Payman held a position of Pharmacy Assistant for two years. >Pharmacy Assistant and TerryWhite Chemist from 18.2.2018 to 17.2.2020. [Source](https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=300707) Compare this to someone like albanese. >Bank officer from 1980 to 1981. [Source](https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=R36)
>Wait, has Labor (100 years+) not earned your respect, or has Fatima (28 year old that has never had a real job) not earned your respect? You guys realise that this sort of blind-party-allegiance and ad-hominem attack of anybody who doesn't step in line, seriously, seriously damages Labors image right? For context I've voted Labor in the recent federal elections - but responses like this both completely miss the actual issues at hand, and make the party look like crybaby despots instead of a legitimate political institution. As the comment before you said, 'respect is earned', and labor being 100+ years old doesn't automatically make them moral, and it doesn't mean they keep my respect for life if they pull dumb shit. Everybody is entitled to fall in and out of favour with political parties as much as they damn please.
Albo, (and those on the opposite bench) are just s…t scared their two party duopoly is threatened. They’d rather lose to the LNP than face a future of negotiating minority government
They've been scared for awhile, this isn't even new. It's why they backed the LNP when trying to undermine third party funding and influence.
Blatant dog-whistling, Albo. You know very well that we've had faith based political parties present day and historic, but you never say anything about that until now.
Our last PM denied manmade climate change and thought the world was made for us to use. He was literally incapable of enacting sustainable evidence driven policy. Thanks religious thinking!
Religion has no place in politics in Australia.
Social cohesion read - maintain the status quo- an effective noe real change. Fuck the labor party and fuck social cohesion that serves the eltie.
Agreed. Any catholic/Christian parties can go get fucked too.
You can have multiculturalism, or you can have social cohesion. Pick one.
I am an atheist and hate the idea of voting for a religious party but i really believe it's this we moved away from the two party system and force a compromise. At the moment its all done behind closed doors and we don't know what is going on.