Politics Abbott government/tax payers to fund Priest training

[smokingjacket]

I was defending the family unit that is getting attacked in here, not that clown

A conservative argument FOR gay marriage is that it brings the gay community in to the same family unit structure as heterosexual people.

Not everyone agrees with this position btw. Julia Gillard's opposition to the gay marriage bill was born of the fact that she considers marriage an outdated institution beholden and legitimized to the church.

 

[louismaxwell]

We helping out Imams to be trained, Rabbis, Hindu Holy Men? Or is this going to be a strictly C of E or Mick assistance scheme?

Your post shows you up your bias and disrespect, every religion leader was described correctly but , for catholism, (just a Mick in your words). Do you have the guts to sling off at Imams, Rabbis , etc, i bet you dont. If i mocked homosexuals like you do the church , you would be straight to the moderator. What disgusting double standards you have.

 

[CotchNCo]

Your post shows you up your bias and disrespect, every religion leader was described correctly but , for catholism, (just a Mick in your words). Do you have the guts to sling off at Imams, Rabbis , etc, i bet you dont. If i mocked homosexuals like you do the church , you would be straight to the moderator. What disgusting double standards you have.

No way this guy is genuine.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Maybe the church can start paying tax now.

 

[skilts]

Priest Training - the only form of pubic transport Abbott is prepared to fund. The priest class, the only other leech feasting on the carbuncle that is the arse of humanity which can rightly be compared with this odious government.

 

[CotchNCo]

Priest Training - the only form of pubic transport Abbott is prepared to fund.

Sounds painful.

 

[skilts]

Sounds painful.

It can be a hairy experience.

 

[louismaxwell]

No way this guy is genuine.

who are you, bugger off

 

[Geelong_Bisons_#36]

anti catholicism is rearing their ugly head

And with good reason too.
The Catholic Church is evil.

 

[louismaxwell]

And with good reason too.
The Catholic Church is evil.

Thats your opinion, but many others dont

 

[TheMase]

Thats your opinion, but many others dont

And many others do...

Governments job is to govern for all people, the majority would be against this policy, even a lot of coalition supporters I bet, other than those that are religious or like yourself who would never make a negative comment about the coalition yet are the first one to accuse others of bias. Hilarious.

The point of the poster you criticised earlier wasn't disrespect nor bias like you claimed, but choosing winners of minority groups based on your own biased intentions rather than then best use of that money for the community at large.

Why not put the money towards youth support workers, councilor's or the like...

This policy is especially poor given where they have cut spending and their ad nausiam budget emergency nonsense.

 

[Power Raid]

A conservative argument FOR gay marriage is that it brings the gay community in to the same family unit structure as heterosexual people.

Not everyone agrees with this position btw. Julia Gillard's opposition to the gay marriage bill was born of the fact that she considers marriage an outdated institution beholden and legitimized to the church.

Rubbish her position was born from faction power base positions

 

[smokingjacket]

Rubbish her position was born from faction power base positions

I'm talking about her personal opinion, not the position of the party.

 

[Power Raid]

I'm talking about her personal opinion, not the position of the party.

if true that is even more concerning. surely if she had any moral fibre she would repeal the marriage act and treat everyone equally or repeal the anti-discrimination laws.

it is f'n disgraceful of Julia and every other politician who holds the same view.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/s...s49zg.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=homosexual

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZG
What constitutes discrimination on the ground of homosexuality
49ZG What constitutes discrimination on the ground of homosexuality
(1) A person (
"the perpetrator" ) discriminates against another person ( homosexuality if the perpetrator: (a) on the ground of the aggrieved person’s homosexuality or the homosexuality of a relative or associate of the aggrieved person, treats the aggrieved person less favourably than in the same circumstances, or in circumstances which are not materially different, the perpetrator treats or would treat a person who he or she did not think was a homosexual person or who does not have such a relative or associate who he or she thinks was a homosexual person, or (b) requires the aggrieved person to comply with a requirement or condition with which a substantially higher proportion of persons who are not homosexual persons, or who do not have a relative or associate who is a homosexual person, comply or are able to comply, being a requirement which is not reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case and with which the aggrieved person does not or is not able to comply. (2) For the purposes of subsection (1) (a), something is done on the ground of a person’s homosexuality if it is done on the ground of the person’s homosexuality, a characteristic that appertains generally to homosexual persons or a characteristic that is generally imputed to homosexual persons.

 

[smokingjacket]

if true that is even more concerning. surely if she had any moral fibre she would repeal the marriage act and treat everyone equally or repeal the anti-discrimination laws.

That was the criticism of her at the time but with some of the shock jocks already implying she was a lesbian it was politically sensitive. Her response was that it wasn't her top priority. Considering the amount of legislation they were putting through and the rabid attacks of the opposition you can kind of understand that position.

If gay marriage goes through it has to be with largely bipartisan support. It shouldn't be kicked from side to side. Without the support of her own caucus there's not much more she could have done apart from what they already did in removing discriminatory pieces of the de facto arrangements act for government services.

 

[JeffDunne]

The Labor Party are as beholden to the growing influence of the Christian Right as much as the Coalition is.

That's why we don't have gay marriage and it's why the country is stagnating.

 

[Northalives]

The Labor Party are as beholden to the growing influence of the Christian Right as much as the Coalition is.

That's why we don't have gay marriage and it's why the country is stagnating.

 

[Pie eyed]

Government subsidises most education in this country, so I'm not seeing a problem with such studies been treated in a similar manner.

What are we training them in?
If it is science, evolution, sexual non-discrimination act, equal rights women in the church I'm all for it.
If they intend to have us to pay to teach their fiction then..
Deport Abbott now.

 

[telsor]

What are we training them in?
If it is science, evolution, sexual non-discrimination act, equal rights women in the church I'm all for it.
If they intend to have us to pay to teach their fiction then..
Deport Abbott now.

Social work, counselling and related areas?

 

[Northalives]

Will they pay HECS?

 

[Power Raid]

That was the criticism of her at the time but with some of the shock jocks already implying she was a lesbian it was politically sensitive. Her response was that it wasn't her top priority. Considering the amount of legislation they were putting through and the rabid attacks of the opposition you can kind of understand that position.

If gay marriage goes through it has to be with largely bipartisan support. It shouldn't be kicked from side to side. Without the support of her own caucus there's not much more she could have done apart from what they already did in removing discriminatory pieces of the de facto arrangements act for government services.

I would like to see two things happen

1) stop the discrimination of homosexuals and allow same sex marriage
2) change out racial discrimination act to have the same thresholds as other anti-discrimination codes. It is kind of absurd we discriminate by types of discrimination.


oh and if we educate our priests not to discriminate and root kids, then that could be a $ well spent. other than that, it probably shouldn't be treated different to any other comparable education or training despite my negative feelings toward to catholic church.

 

[Gough]

Social work, counselling and related areas?

Agreed, I watched Compass tonight, damn you leftie ABC, and they were showing the Exodus Foundation Christmas dinner and it seemed to be the best of Christianity on show. But these are organisations that are enormously wealthy, they pay no tax in the first place and yet somehow the government is prioritising funding to them over public universities, it makes no sense.

 

[telsor]

Agreed, I watched Compass tonight, damn you leftie ABC, and they were showing the Exodus Foundation Christmas dinner and it seemed to be the best of Christianity on show. But these are organisations that are enormously wealthy, they pay no tax in the first place and yet somehow the government is prioritising funding to them over public universities, it makes no sense.

Yeah, if only Gillard hadn't ripped Billions out of Higher education...

 

[B4Bear]

Yeah, if only Gillard hadn't ripped Billions out of Higher education...

And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

Exactly nothing.

If funding for public institutions (or the commons if you prefer) is scarce and has to be allocated on a needs basis, on what rational basis can you allow public funding for ANY religious training organisation that does not add to the public good?

This issue once again shows that the current government has zero political nous. At the end of the day, these proposed arrangements will affect a few hundred people every year; and yet it brings down a tonne of public scorn and criticism.

Do they actually have anyone to advise them: 'A nice idea minister, however, do you think that publically funding an organisation that has been front and centre at the current Royal Commission will play well with the public and in the media?' I mean seriously, how dumb can they be.

There should be zero funding to any religious organisation, period.

If they want generic training in counselling for example, send them to a public provider, they can be assisted by the Government of the day, just like any other student; and then do their own religious training with their own coin.

 

[telsor]

And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

Exactly nothing.

If funding for public institutions (or the commons if you prefer) is scarce and has to be allocated on a needs basis, on what rational basis can you allow public funding for ANY religious training organisation that does not add to the public good?

Who said they don't add to the public good?

While I'm not religious, I do recognise that a great number of religious groups do a lot of good work in the community in fields such as social work, counselling and education.

As for the relevance, why are resources so scarce?

This issue once again shows that the current government has zero political nous. At the end of the day, these proposed arrangements will affect a few hundred people every year; and yet it brings down a tonne of public scorn and criticism.

Do they actually have anyone to advise them: 'A nice idea minister, however, do you think that publically funding an organisation that has been front and centre at the current Royal Commission will play well with the public and in the media?' I mean seriously, how dumb can they be.

I didn't realise the Catholic church was the only religious organisation in the country....

There should be zero funding to any religious organisation, period.

If they want generic training in counselling for example, send them to a public provider, they can be assisted by the Government of the day, just like any other student; and then do their own religious training with their own coin.

So religious organisations who organise their own training should be penalised and instead take places from others?