The Religious Discrimination Bill

Non-fashion, non-skirt, non-gender discussions. If your post is related to fashion, skirts or gender, please choose one of the forums above for it.
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by denimini »

Following up on Stu's Clinching Argument thread and not wishing to hijack the original quest:

The Australian Federal Government is trying to pass legislation to allow people to discriminate and criticise others based on their own religious beliefs. Our PM is a member of the pentecostal church and after the same sex marriage bill passed and repercussions of Israel Falou's outburst, he promised he would introduce a Religious Discrimination Bill to placate his religious constituency.
It would also allow gay teachers to be sacked from some private schools.
Hopefully it will not get the numbers but if it did we might have Deuteronomy 22:5 quoted to us male skirt wearers.
I have been thinking of responses to:
"A man shall not put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God."

1. "Aren't we lucky living in a country where you are free to think what you like and I am free to wear what I like."
(follow up if the person persists) "I don't know why you are telling me this, no offence but why would I care what you thought".
(further follow up if needed) "I am not interested in your (optional #@$%*) bigoted, religious (cow manure).

2. "It is OK as I don't believe in god".

3. "It is not woman's clothing; I purchased it and own it and I am a man."

4. "There are many women wearing pants so there will be a lot of us".

5. "#@$% OFF!"
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
User avatar
Bodycon
Distinguished Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:25 pm
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by Bodycon »

Does it not also say that women should not dress as men? So every woman wearing trousers (pants) is also committing the same abomination.

Interestingly tattoos are also banned (from Google (the great font of knowledge)):

What does the Bible say about tattoos?
The verse in the Bible that most Christians make reference to is Leviticus 19:28, which says, "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord."

I find the whole organised religion thing with rules of do and don't mystifying and have never understood it, other than as a form of population control. Especially they way these religions pick and choose which parts of these writings to enforce and which to ignore.

This is distinct from believing you were created, which I disagree with, but as a concept is understandable.

I am more likely to use an expletive coupled with off as a reply than anything else to be fair.....
pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by pelmut »

I love the argument that intersex people do not exist because the Bible doesn't mention them.  It doesn't mention giraffes or kangaroos, so perhaps they don't exist either.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6150
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Contact:

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by moonshadow »

I know nothing of Australian law, but I assume your constitution would protect skirt wearing guys from the actual government saying you can't wear a skirt in public. So I'm going to assume this bill refers to private businesses. (e.g. the local grocery store can turn you away if you show up in a skirt)

The U.S. toys with these things all the time, and many states actually have religious discrimination bills on their books. Thankfully most actual citizens and business owners don't actually invoke them. I think most of them are on the books to protect churches and other establishments that are clearly religious. For example, a church pastor would be allowed to refuse to marry a gay couple. And frankly, I don't have a problem with that.

Most businesses that I'm aware of are not going to turn a paying customer away for something as simple as wearing a skirt. Also, I don't know if there are actually any laws in the U.S. that say a business owner can legally tell me to "get lost" just for showing up in a skirt, but I have to say, in my six years of doing this I have ALWAYS been treated with the utmost respect and dignity everywhere I go, ESPECIALLY "mom and pop" establishments (they are usually VERY happy to serve me as mom and pops usually struggle for customers anyway), and I've explored some pretty religious towns skirted.

A Christ like Christian will know that it goes against the teachings of Christ to turn anyone away under most circumstances. If yous show up at a restaurant to be seated and the owners says "we don't serve your kind here", you may wish to remind him or her:

Matthew 25:41-46

41 “Then the King will turn to those on the left and say, ‘Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons.[d] 42 For I was hungry, and you didn’t feed me. I was thirsty, and you didn’t give me a drink. 43 I was a stranger, and you didn’t invite me into your home. I was naked, and you didn’t give me clothing. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’

44 “Then they will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and not help you?’

45 “And he will answer, ‘I tell you the truth, when you refused to help the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were refusing to help me.’

46 “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.”


So yeah, that's just one passage of many. Most Christians know they are supposed "love everyone as Christ loved them".

As for your PM.... Isn't it fun your government thinks it's a good idea to form a Taliban? Take comfort, we here in the U.S. know EXACTLY how you feel. We actually have an active Christian Taliban here, and they have A LOT of power in the government, especially in certain states..

But we can still wear skirts pretty much everywhere...
-MS
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by denimini »

It is sad because it emboldens some people to be divisive rather that encouraging co-operation and inclusivness.
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 12702
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by crfriend »

My answer to blather about Deuteronomy is usually confined to a cold glare, but if the idiot persists I've been known to rip them apart with their own dogma -- frequently to the delight of onlookers/listeners.

One, Deuteronomy is obsolete doctrine left over from the Old testament which was replaced by the New Testament several hundred years ago.

Two, it only applies to Christians, and a subset of Christians at that -- mainly those that cling to the Old Testament. Do you also support death by stoning for adultery? (I'm not Christian, but have occasionally posited the other point having been on the receiving end of cheating by significant others.)

Three, it's based on a BS translation from the original language into English. The translator blew it, and thus blew the meaning of the passage.

Four, it's not about fashion, it's about deception -- i.e. lying to get out of something expected of you. My attire is a fashion statement.

However, I agree that option five can be a useful one if you can't be bothered with the boneheads.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6150
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Contact:

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by moonshadow »

denimini wrote:
Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:35 pm
It is sad because it emboldens some people to be divisive rather that encouraging co-operation and inclusivness.
Well that's basically the essence of organized religion.

Seriously, the original Hebrew religion was formed by Moses to distinguish the Israelites from the pagan gentiles. That's basically the meaning behind all those old Testament "thou shall nots".

Then Jesus comes along with that crazy idea that all you have to do is accept his sacrifice and you're home free in heaven...


Don't get me wrong, it's all nonsense. I'd be willing to bet that like Trump, your PM probably doesn't really give a damn about Christ or what it means to be Christian....he's just pandering to the base that elected him.

Tell your PM if he really wants to be a true deciple of Christ, to sell everything he owns, give it to the poor, take up his cross and follow Christ.

Until then just tell him to STFU with his religious hypocrisy!
-MS
User avatar
Bodycon
Distinguished Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:25 pm
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by Bodycon »

crfriend wrote:
Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:46 pm
Do you also support death by stoning for adultery?
sTONED.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5303
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by Sinned »

Over here we are nominally a Christian country but not really a religious one. The Church of England is a shadow of its former self. With the increase of non-Christian population there has been an increase in the number of mosques around the country. The chances of such a religious discrimination bill looks unlikely.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
Freedomforall
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 998
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:00 pm

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by Freedomforall »

Along the same lines is this case that made the news in Finland last week. The article states the outcome could have worldwide implications.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/23/in ... eir-faith/
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6150
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Contact:

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by moonshadow »

Freedomforall wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 3:25 am
Along the same lines is this case that made the news in Finland last week. The article states the outcome could have worldwide implications.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/23/in ... eir-faith/
Searching for an unbiased report on this for fact checking....

Initial results weren't even worth a click... using duck duck go's search, "Finland Christianity"

Basically all right wing religious websites....

This one was by far my favorite:
welovetrumpwebsite.jpg

... really..? :roll: Hard pass.

"WeLoveTrump.com"... the site threw three popups at me and just looked like a malware attack waiting to happen... I didn't stick around to explore.

Sounds like good old fashioned "yellow journalism"....
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-MS
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2574
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by STEVIE »

In my bit of the world it is not the advent of other faiths which has led to the downturn in the established ones.
Sure we have more mosques and other alternatives these days but it is the "Church" itself which is to blame I'm afraid to say.
Hugely conservative in most areas of thought and practice, the younger people just don't tolerate and vote with their feet.
As far as the UK is concerned, I'd agree with Sinned but for slightly different reasons.
It is very unlikely that such a bill would even be considered over here.
Unfortunately, I wouldn't say that with absolute certainty, some would find it highly desirable.
The danger being that we write them off as "mostly harmless" at our own peril.
Steve.
PS The King James Bible or the Authorised Version was commissioned by an allegedly condemned man.
James himself was reputedly gay and the rules don't allow much leniency there either.
There is also a school of thought that the whole clothing thing is simply a mis-translation anyway.
I will stop there before I earn a bolt from the blue.
Steve.
Freedomforall
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 998
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:00 pm

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by Freedomforall »

moonshadow wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 4:48 am
Freedomforall wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 3:25 am
Along the same lines is this case that made the news in Finland last week. The article states the outcome could have worldwide implications.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/23/in ... eir-faith/
Searching for an unbiased report on this for fact checking....

Initial results weren't even worth a click... using duck duck go's search, "Finland Christianity"

Basically all right wing religious websites....

This one was by far my favorite:

welovetrumpwebsite.jpg


... really..? :roll: Hard pass.

"WeLoveTrump.com"... the site threw three popups at me and just looked like a malware attack waiting to happen... I didn't stick around to explore.

Sounds like good old fashioned "yellow journalism"....
I couldn't find much either. Who knows! If you search his name a few more articles surface that seem to overide the stupid Trumpkin crap. I am so tired of not being able to get the truth!!!. Every site has a bias. https://ilc-online.org/2021/04/30/finni ... sexuality/
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by denimini »

moonshadow wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 4:48 am
... I didn't stick around to explore.

A pity as it looked like you were in for a chance to win a 100% free trump hat :)
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
rode_kater
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 313
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:46 pm

Re: The Religious Discrimination Bill

Post by rode_kater »

There was interesting article in a newspaper today about the future of the Catholic Church in NL. Basically, it's going down because they were always a church that people built their life around and relied on people going to church to fund it. But as the numbers of people going to church fell, the funding got less, churches closed which meant the nearest church was further away so more people didn't bother. Rinse and repeat. The church did not evolve it's model and so is threatening to die out in places.

The protestant churches don't have this problem as there a many variants and new ones popping up all the time. Especially by people who have recently move to NL. Evolution in action.

NL historically was a three way split between Catholic (south), Protestant (north) and Liberals (the cities) (I'm eliding a lot of detail here). So the Catholic church never had the overriding influence it had in some other countries.

But do they despair about the future of churches in general? No. Ironically in the cities there are enough people close together to support all sorts of churches. The countryside is the one losing out here. The Liberal stream never cared much about religion, as long as they didn't go around telling others what to do.

That said, the churches do have a constitutional protection which allows them to hold services despite a lockdown (they get the same protection as private homes). This has lead to a lot of debate because some churches decided to hold full services packed with people in the middle a lockdown (yay Bible Belt). In theory the parliament could curtail the protections, but they don't really want to open that box. Liberals prefer not to have to tell others what to do either but if a large enough chunk of the population gets wound up about it, they might not have a choice. I doubt it will happen though, the religious groups don't want to upset the balance either.

About that case in Finland, if you google the names you find an odd group of people writing about it, but no detail. There's no prosecution here. It's the wrong word I think (different legal systems), I think the closest might be something like a Grand Jury determining if there is probable cause.

As for the Religious Discrimination bill in Australia, the way I understand it is that the current discrimination laws already have religious exemptions, but apparently they're not clear enough or something?
Post Reply