Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: muawiyah

From what I have read of this law, the facts of this case do seem to match its provisions reasonably closely. If they didn't it might not be as moronic a law as it in fact is.

In my view, the Judge was on a hiding to nothing in referring to 'the God Allah'. If he hadn't made the distinction, he'd probably be being attacked by Christians at the moment for making a legal ruling that suggested that Allah and the God Christians believe in are the same God (which some Moslems and some Christians do say is the case, but which is certainly not something that is proper for a Judge to rule on.) His distinction in my view was simply an attempt to avoid that issue. Basically he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't in that situation.

As for your suggestion that Australia should be put on the US State Department's restricted travel list, that would be a great way to antagonise one of the few countries that has stood with America in recent years. Now maybe if this was an act of the Federal government I could understand wanting to do that - but this law is a product of one of the most left wing governments in the country in what is probably the most left wing state in the country. This is not an Australia wide issue - it's an issue created by a state government that would love to embarass the Federal government overseas.

Frankly, I don't think Steve Bracks is all that important even in Australian terms - and his misguided policies certainly don't seem to me to be anything for Americans to be getting their knickers in a twist about.

Advocate whatever you like - but frankly, I think some Americans are seriously overestimating how important this issue is. It's one minor court in one left wing state - and it is almost certain to be overturned when it reaches a higher court.

As I understand it, the Judge in this case hasn't even mentioned the Free Speech issue and that strongly suggests that he knows it's the real issue - and he's leaving it to the higher courts (which can set far wider precedents) to deal with.


32 posted on 12/17/2004 5:43:21 AM PST by naturalman1975 (Sure, give peace a chance - but si vis pacem, para bellum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: All

I am curious about something. I wondering how all of these people who are defending Islam will feel when Islam is THE majority religion of their regions and the Muslims show them no respect and give them no favor. IOW, the Muslims are using them to further their cause. When they reach their goal these people will be useless to them.


33 posted on 12/17/2004 5:47:36 AM PST by PleaseNoMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: naturalman1975
Sounds like I can "advocate" whatever I like, but only around here.

Still, as you note, free speech is the issue, as well as a little knowledge of history. This particular judge, if he and his gumbahs running Victoria state keep it up will be bowing to Mecca 5 times a day, and feasting on stew made up out of those wild camels you fellows keep.

36 posted on 12/17/2004 5:56:47 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson