Religion Bondi shooting - 16 confirmed dead at Jewish event

[Crankyhawk]

They’re all different. How would/do you fight this particular one?

why does this particular one matter more than any of the other ones
i'd start by deemphasising their religion, as religious belief is of no special value, similar to what footy team you support - perhaps take the risk of offending every religion out there by doing this (actively promote that there is no special value to ones' religious belief). This will also have the happy effect of killing any future "special status" for religion/ religious freedom to express opinions that otherwise infringe on other people

then I'd communicate it is really stupid behaviour to persecute someone just for their opinion (around their religion), its as dumb as if you were to egg/ deface property of/ physically assault someone just for being a collingwood/ carlton/ penrith/ broncos supporter (targeted ads based on location)

• and given religious is personal opinion, there would not be "footy related opinions based on selective facts" which are used to stereotype footy supporter groups
• the idea being to make the behaviour of bagging out someone for their religion indicative of someone who is a social idiot

 

[Crankyhawk]

If you don’t know, you don’t know. Dude.

its not don't know. Its don't care (I don't understand why you think this issue matters more than other bigotry)

 

[Gavin Excell]

Brandis (who I is find less hysterical than some other columnists) notes in a recent article that Albanese is a smart political operator where calling a RC would be obvious as it takes heat out of the debate. However he argues the reason he isn't keen is because it will shine a light on anti semitism that exists within the party's branches. I wouldn't pretend to have enough knowledge to comment on the strength or otherwise of his argument, bit its an interesting angle all the same

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

why does this particular one matter more than any of the other ones
i'd start by deemphasising their religion, as religious belief is of no special value, similar to what footy team you support - perhaps take the risk of offending every religion out there by doing this (actively promote that there is no special value to ones' religious belief). This will also have the happy effect of killing any future "special status" for religion/ religious freedom to express opinions that otherwise infringe on other people

then I'd communicate it is really stupid behaviour to persecute someone just for their opinion (around their religion), its as dumb as if you were to egg/ deface property of/ physically assault someone just for being a collingwood/ carlton/ penrith/ broncos supporter (targeted ads based on location)

• and given religious is personal opinion, there would not be "footy related opinions based on selective facts" which are used to stereotype footy supporter groups
• the idea being to make the behaviour of bagging out someone for their religion indicative of someone who is a social idiot

Because 15 people have just been shot dead because of it?

So, don’t display any Jewishness, hide your Star of David, don’t wear a kippah. In case you offend someone…. Why would anyone be offended by a Jewish- looking person?

 

[The Punter]

why does this particular one matter more than any of the other ones
i'd start by deemphasising their religion, as religious belief is of no special value, similar to what footy team you support - perhaps take the risk of offending every religion out there by doing this (actively promote that there is no special value to ones' religious belief). This will also have the happy effect of killing any future "special status" for religion/ religious freedom to express opinions that otherwise infringe on other people

then I'd communicate it is really stupid behaviour to persecute someone just for their opinion (around their religion), its as dumb as if you were to egg/ deface property of/ physically assault someone just for being a collingwood/ carlton/ penrith/ broncos supporter (targeted ads based on location)

• and given religious is personal opinion, there would not be "footy related opinions based on selective facts" which are used to stereotype footy supporter groups
• the idea being to make the behaviour of bagging out someone for their religion indicative of someone who is a social idiot

This would all be fine except for these two facts:

• no one is slaughtering people at a football club event because of who they support
• who you support in the footy isn't actually that important (while you might not think religious belief is important, those who hold them certainly think they're important

 

[big_e]

Brandis (who I is find less hysterical than some other columnists) notes in a recent article that Albanese is a smart political operator where calling a RC would be obvious as it takes heat out of the debate. However he argues the reason he isn't keen is because it will shine a light on anti semitism that exists within the party's branches. I wouldn't pretend to have enough knowledge to comment on the strength or otherwise of his argument, bit its an interesting angle all the same

I wonder if George Brandis has ever reflected on whether a senior government minister standing up in the Senate and declaring that people have a right to be bigots would increase the likelihood of people being openly bigoted.

 

[RCAB]

Brandis (who I is find less hysterical than some other columnists) notes in a recent article that Albanese is a smart political operator where calling a RC would be obvious as it takes heat out of the debate.

I could argue it's doing the opposite.

 

[RCAB]

Because 15 people have just been shot dead because of it?

70,000 Palestinians have been slaughtered by Netanyahu since October 7th. While 15 is tragic it pales in comparison to what's happening in Gaza everyday.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Because 15 people have just been shot dead because of it?

So, don’t display any Jewishness, hide your Star of David, don’t wear a kippah. In case you offend someone…. Why would anyone be offended by a Jewish- looking person?

again, the wearing of the star of david is like wearing a footy scarf. And it is a really stupid behaviour to harrass someone for wearing a footy scarf

 

[Crankyhawk]

This would all be fine except for these two facts:

• no one is slaughtering people at a football club event because of who they support
• who you support in the footy isn't actually that important (while you might not think religious belief is important, those who hold them certainly think they're important

then the belief that religion is important needs to be deemphasised and broken, as this is the root cause of the problem as I see it
"my religion is right and I get to do x/y/z even if you don't like it because my religion and your religion is wrong so **** you" type of attitudes. These are things i want to kill and strangle as belief systems.

And again killing people is the behaviour choice which needs to be punished. If there is a failure of exercise of existing powers, that is what should be directed. There is no practical way to fight "antisemitism" without deemphasis of religion. Anything which protects Jews/ gives them special powers over those of other religions will cause and foster resentment and increase risk. Anything which gives those of any religion special protection over the non religious will similarly foster resentment among the strongly atheist group (which I consider myself a member)

 

[The Punter]

then the belief that religion is important needs to be deemphasised and broken

Good luck. You'll need it.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Good luck. You'll need it.

they can all get upset at me, happy to be the lightning rod.

 

[The Punter]

they can all get upset at me, happy to be the lightning rod.

Most of them will be upset because this thing that is:

• very, very important to them
• provides meaning
• (as far as the ones I am talking about) manifests itself in ways that offer no detrimental effect to others

is being attacked. Most religious people in this country practice in a mainly private way, without proselytising, and without effecting others. It's part of who they are, in a much more meaningful way that a sporting club could ever be.

So good luck with that. I'm not worried about you being the lightning rod, I'm sure you'll get nowhere.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

I wonder if George Brandis has ever reflected on whether a senior government minister standing up in the Senate and declaring that people have a right to be bigots would increase the likelihood of people being openly bigoted.

Brandis was and remains correct though. Bigotry is an attitude, a state of mind. Government should never seek to regulate people’s thoughts. What people don’t have is the right is to translate those thoughts into discriminatory and hateful actions and behaviour.

This is why Brandis was correct when he said people have the right to be bigots but tore strips off Pauline Hanson when she applied her bigotry to her shameful behaviour in the Senate.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Crankyhawk]

Most of them will be upset because this thing that is:

• very, very important to them
• provides meaning
• (as far as the ones I am talking about) manifests itself in ways that offer no detrimental effect to others

is being attacked. Most religious people in this country practice in a mainly private way, without proselytising, and without effecting others. It's part of who they are, in a much more meaningful way that a sporting club could ever be.

So good luck with that. I'm not worried about you being the lightning rod, I'm sure you'll get nowhere.

And those who practice privately will not be affected. It’s highlighting that their opinion is their opinion and should not be of influence on wider community and wider community should not impact on them for the belief they hold.
And it’s an interesting thing to say on bigfooty that religion is more impactful than a sporting club (we aren’t posting on big religion after all); there was a saying in Melbourne when I was younger that footy isn’t a religion it’s much more important than that..

 

[Stumpy Pete]

And those who practice privately will not be affected. It’s highlighting that their opinion is their opinion and should not be of influence on wider community and wider community should not impact on them for the belief they hold.
And it’s an interesting thing to say on bigfooty that religion is more impactful than a sporting club (we aren’t posting on big religion after all); there was a saying in Melbourne when I was younger that footy isn’t a religion it’s much more important than that..

What other aspects of people’s lives should be practiced privately and not be of influence on the wider community?

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Crankyhawk]

What other aspects of people’s lives should be practiced privately and not be of influence on the wider community?

Regards

S. Pete

Sexual preferences (as in telling people who they can and cannot **** as long as consenting adults)

In this the sports analogy still holds. You wouldn’t try to convert a Carlton supporter to be a pies supporter

 

[Gavin Excell]

And those who practice privately will not be affected. It’s highlighting that their opinion is their opinion and should not be of influence on wider community and wider community should not impact on them for the belief they hold.
And it’s an interesting thing to say on bigfooty that religion is more impactful than a sporting club (we aren’t posting on big religion after all); there was a saying in Melbourne when I was younger that footy isn’t a religion it’s much more important than that..

I guess that's because it's true

 

[Stumpy Pete]

Sexual preferences (as in telling people who they can and cannot **** as long as consenting adults)

In this the sports analogy still holds. You wouldn’t try to convert a Carlton supporter to be a pies supporter

I think I've misinterpreted your position on this.

I’ll frame it another way - Are you okay with people publicly celebrating their religion simply for the purpose of celebrating their beliefs (without trying to impose it on others)?

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Seeds]

How does one practise a religion without imposing it on others? Religion is literally a belief in external objective moral values that apply to all. Religion is not a personal belief system. Its a universal one.

If one believes in a religion then they are imposing those religous beliefs on how they interact with the world, how they vote and how they judge the actions of others. As an example, if your religion tells you some action is murder you arent suddenly going to say its ok for others to commit this action you deem murder because they dont follow the same religion as you.

Religious morality isnt relativist. The notion of non impositional religion appears absurd. It can only be logically practised by religious sceptics.

 

[Gough]

Surprise surprise. per the Graund

The New South Wales police commissioner, Mal Layton, is giving an update on protest restrictions in Sydney after they were unauthorised for 14 days following the Bondi terrorist attack.

He says this afternoon, the declaration was reviewed and he has decided the holding of public assemblies for the next 14 days has the “potential to cause fear and public safety issues”. It has been extended for a further fortnight.

During that time, “all public assemblies will be unauthorised”.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I think I've misinterpreted your position on this.

I’ll frame it another way - Are you okay with people publicly celebrating their religion simply for the purpose of celebrating their beliefs (without trying to impose it on others)?

Regards

S. Pete

Yes I am. That’s like people wearing their footy scarf/ singing the song

 

[Crankyhawk]

How does one practise a religion without imposing it on others? Religion is literally a belief in external objective moral values that apply to all. Religion is not a personal belief system. Its a universal one.

If one believes in a religion then they are imposing those religous beliefs on how they interact with the world, how they vote and how they judge the actions of others. As an example, if your religion tells you some action is murder you arent suddenly going to say its ok for others to commit this action you deem murder because they dont follow the same religion as you.

Religious morality isnt relativist. The notion of non impositional religion appears absurd. It can only be logically practised by religious sceptics.

There are some which are more around your own moral code and how you treat others; I think Quaker or Buddhist; or the very simple Christianity that is practiced by many who don’t make a big deal of it. One where they operate under do unto others as you want them to do unto you; even as an atheist I see the value in this.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

How does one practise a religion without imposing it on others? Religion is literally a belief in external objective moral values that apply to all. Religion is not a personal belief system. Its a universal one.

If one believes in a religion then they are imposing those religous beliefs on how they interact with the world, how they vote and how they judge the actions of others. As an example, if your religion tells you some action is murder you arent suddenly going to say its ok for others to commit this action you deem murder because they dont follow the same religion as you.

Religious morality isnt relativist. The notion of non impositional religion appears absurd. It can only be logically practised by religious sceptics.

I think some religions, or perhaps sections of religions, are adapting on this and being more celebratory and less judgemental and imposing. Parts of the Anglican Church are embracing homosexuality and perhaps even transgenderism (I’m not all that familiar with the appropriate language language here so apologies is that offends). Of course these institutions are steep(l)ed in tradition with older, likely more conservative and politically (ie church politics) minded, people holding senior positions.

I genuinely hold hope that in 20-30 years time religions will be thriving but will have continued on their celebratory and embracing journeys.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Gavin Excell]