GOLLEEE, SARGE: Calls Mount for Australian State to Rescind Religious Hatred Law

Well, well, well. It seems that what is good for the goose is not good for the gander, and what goes around, comes around. Gomer Pyle would have said to this blinding flash of the obvious, "Golleee, Sarge." The socialist country of Australia enacted what they considered to be moral legislation. And it was moral, by the standard of altruism. The free speech of all was sacrificed to the harmony of the favored group, in this case, Muslims. Two preachers got prosecuted and lost.

What should have been blazingly evident in advance has begun to dawn on some Australians. Sadly, the same process is going on in Britain for the same reasons. Countries are bending over backwards to kiss their own behinds to accommodate a group of people who advocate the destruction of the very countries doing all the accommodating. It boggles the mind.

Secondly, this is the mixing of state and religion. Take note, Rightists. This is always a disastrous mix, as the Aussies are starting to discover. Typically, this 2002 law hurt all Australians by establishing the principle that the right to free speech of citizens is up to the whim of the government, not theirs by right. Secondly, it pitted religions against each other, not in a friendly competition. The only winners were, of course, the Muslims.

Here is a condensation of what is coming from Australia on this matter:

Calls Mount for Australian State to Rescind Religious Hatred Law -- 03/31/2005,By Patrick Goodenough, CNSNews.com International Editor, March 31, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - A campaign to dump a religious hatred law in Australia is winning growing support from churches -- including some whose opinion on the law has shifted since two Christians were found guilty of vilifying Muslims.

Mainstream church leaders are adding their voices to other Christians asking the State of Victoria's Labor government to rescind the legislation, saying it poses a danger to freedom of speech.

Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act made headlines around the world after Muslims took two pastors before a tribunal, complaining about a post-9/11 seminar designed to explain Islam to a Christian audience.

The case made waves in Britain, where the government has been trying to enact a similar proposal (see related story).

"It was a great mistake for the government to lump religious vilification in with racial vilification," Harman said. "Apart from a very few small groupings such as Jews and Sikhs, race and religion in the modern world are not the same thing. Race for any person is a given, not so religion."

During the Catch the Fire hearings, two other denominations, the Catholic and Uniting Churches, supported the Muslim complainants, although the tribunal rejected submissions made by the two. An Anglican priest also appeared as an expert witness on behalf of the Muslims.

Among numerous complaints about the law - both at its drafting and since - critics said a listener could be offended whether or not the person giving the offense intended to do so. Yet claiming that one did not intend to insult or vilify was not a defense under the legislation.

"By its very nature, a religious truth claim will always seem offensive to one who does not accept it," Bill Muehlenberg of the AFA wrote in a recent article on the subject.

"No matter how hard I may try not to offend, an atheist will take offence at my claims that he is wrong and that God exists," he said. "A Muslim will take offence when I claim that Christ died on the cross and rose again."

We are running into the same disaster over here in America. Muslim pressure groups are doing all they can to reshape America to favor them at the expense of Americans, and the damned law makers are bending over to kiss their own behinds and that of the pressure groups.

Fair warning given.