Anti marriage group wants to legalise discrimination.

 Anti-Marriage Alliance submission 

to marriage inquiry.

 Australia recently had an inquiry into marriage equality. This inquiry specifically deals with exemptions for homophobic people and organizations.  Presumably this all came about because it was revealed that the coalitions idea of marriage equality would create a new, different and lesser version of marriage for LGBTI people, and would not be equality at all. 
 Personalty the whole idea is a bit sickening it seems to me to be like allowing rapists to be exempt from rape charges or giving racists exemptions from racial discrimination laws. And some of the groups that gave submissions to this inquiry are known LGBT hate groups, so its like inviting the hate groups to discuss how much they should be immune from prosecution or consequence for their hate crimes.
 So much for Malcolm Turnbulls promise that Australia had no place for Hate speech and no tolerance for homophobia.

 I am not going to go through all the nonsense "alt-facts", and lies of these submissions. They usually read from the same hate-book so addressing one should be enough...but which one. Thee is one that was in the news recently for distributing hate-speech pro-LGBT bullying to innocent children not long after a child died from homophobic bullying at school. You will remember that the (anti)Marriage Alliance distributed this filth on a school bus!

 Now I'm not going to go over every little detail in their submission as its unnecessary, many of the points can be refuted at once and unlike the far-radical-right i don't want to repeat myself.

 The submission makes a big deal about freedom of religion and freedom to practice that religion. Their own submission states that such freedoms are limited by their effect on the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 

 I agree with all this completely. Indeed our own constitution has very similar amendments.  The problem with anti-marriage groups using this argument is of course that the argument is pro-marriage equality.  
 These rights don't just apply to radical fundamentalist Christians, no they apply to all religions. There are many religions and many more deity's that actualy recognize the natural diversity in sexuality. Indeed many christian churches want to marry their LGBT members.
 The current marriage laws which were changed only a while ago in Australia to exclude LGBT couples are actually in violation of the rights to religious freedoms. Because these people are being prevented from practicing their religion, they are unable to marry. It should also be noted that the current laws are unconstitutional as they force others to adhere to a (far-right) religious belief as if it is law. 
 And no, changing the law to allow marriage equality wont impede another persons religion as it will not be mandatory to marry a person of the same sex.

 The submission goes on to say that exemptions for religious ministers are not enough. They seem to want the legal ability to discriminate against LGBT married couples in all areas of life. 

 While i actually don't mind a minister not wanting to perform a marriage on basically any grounds. I do feel that the building itself should be accessible to anyone for free as these religious organizations don't pay tax or rates, because they are expected to provide a service to the community. Now if the church does not want to allow its grounds to be used by the community i also have no problems with it surrendering its tax-free status. (the submission directly addresses this but falsely claims this choice would amount to coercion).
 But as for the hairdresser, doctor, judge, or policeman being able to refuse service based on sexuality or marital status, no way. This is exactly akin to making racists immune from racial discrimination laws. I am sure if "Christians" were refused service because they were in a opposite sex marriage they would be in uproar, just look at the fake "war on Christmas" nonsense just because some stores chose to be inclusive with "happy holidays".

 They use the quote; Governments should respect the moral or religious teachings of parents / guardians. 

 They use this to attack the safe schools program. They claim that parents cant have their children opt out of the program, but i believe this to be untrue. However i think the program is even more important for children of bigots and homophobes, as they are probably more likely to bully other children. So while i think they are wrong saying they cant opt out, i do believe they shouldn't have that option, if your confident in your bigotry you should be able to have your beliefs questioned by your children when they are provided with the real facts.
 They complain that safe schools teaches that normal variance in sexuality is normal, because it differs with the beliefs of their particular interpretation of their chosen religion. Wow, how would they feel if a religion not their own was taught as fact in schools? I am sure they would not be happy at all. No (anti) marriage alliance school should be a neutral ground where real facts are taught, if you want to indoctrinate your children do it at home and on the weekends.
 They go on to bemoan that the time may come when religious schools are not permitted to be homophobic to their students, given the rates of youth bullying and suicide i personally think that day cant come soon enough. 
 And what about the rights of the child? A child should have the right to grow up knowing the reality of gender diversity (puberty is difficult enough without being surprised that your sexuality doesn't fit what you have been taught). A child should have the right to not be bullied at school? A child should have the right to not be shamed or beaten based on their sexuality, And a child should be able to grow up knowing they can marry the person they love. But the (anti) marriage alliance doesn't seem to care about the rights of the child.

 They go on and on about how horrible it is for them to see that normal sexuality is being accepted as normal,
 I fail to see how that's a bad thing. 

  
  They seem to admit that their bigotry is increasingly recognized as extremism.

  I tend to agree, but it is happening too slowly and there is still a reluctance to call a spade a spade. They seem alarmed at this but i can only say if you don't want to be labeled extremist, radical, alt-right, racist, sexist, homophobic just stop fitting that label, its really quite simple. 
 Now if you really feel it is your chosen deity or religion that forces you to discriminate, i have awesome news for you! You are actually free to choose your religion and which deity's you worship in this country. It may surprise you to know that many religions and most deity's actually recognize the diversity of human sexuality. Damn, you could even not follow any religion or powers, many people don't and they live moral, happy lives without feeling the need to discriminate. You don't even need to go that far, many Christians support the fair and equal treatment of other humans. It really is your choice. 

 In conclusion:

 It amazes me that they try to use freedom of religion to argue against freedom of religion for others. That they try to claim anti-discrimination laws should protect them but not their victims. They do this seemingly without irony or self awareness.  Could they really lack such empathy for others that they don't see the hypocrisy of their behavior?
 I think this kind of disingenuous argument comes from the fact that the legislation was changed recently to exclude same sex couples, and that the legislation does not in any way effect the various religious definitions of what marriage is. And their simply came a point where the majority of the public saw through "arguments' relating to this things too easily. You just cant say marriage cant be redefined anymore, because it has, it can and its not.

 If this is the standard of the anti-marriage submissions, it really does seem like the time of homophobic, unconstitutional marriage discrimination in Australia is drawing to a close, as the submission basically boiled down to;

 'We want to continue to discriminate against gay people without consequence and we think our interpretation of our chosen religion should give us cover to continue to do so.'

If you want me to examine more of these submissions, let me know.

Australia's Shame: Child Abuse

Australia's Shame

 By now everyone should have heard about the abuse of children uncovered by the ABC Four Corners program. 
 The short of it is that children held in detention centers in the Northern Territory of Australia are being abused and tortured for years with knowledge of the minister in charge.
 The government responded to public pressure by announcing a royal commission into the matter, but many are not happy with the terms of reference that this RC has been given. As an example the fact that many of the children being tortured are Aboriginal was not mentioned as needing addressing, in addition to the commission being limited to only the Northern Territory institutions.

 It should also be noted that the victims are suing the state institution and the Northern Territory has shamefully decided to counter sue, this is not how we should handle abuse victims.

 We are disgusted in this abuse and have to wonder what is wrong with people to be able to do this kind of thing. Lets have a look at some of the possible influences that may have led us to this.

 We know of the old saying that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and of the scientific studies showing that this old adage is indeed true. So more oversight, regular and independent review of footage, regular mental health checks for both inmates and staff, both might help in reducing instances like this in the future. 

 These particular instances of abuse obviously have a racial element, and with the rise of racist groups in Australia we really do need to clip this in the bud. People need to know it is not OK to abuse others due to their race. There may not be much we can do about the rise of racism in Australia, but we can educate our children, and continue to point out the racism of white supremacist groups. We can perhaps employ Aboriginal staff in centers where there are a large number of Aboriginal inmates.

 We need to stand up for the rights of children, when we have politicians attacking an anti-bulling program in out schools. When we have our Prime Minister bowing down to pressure from these politicians we cant be surprised when bullying of children is seen as acceptable in our society. You might think its just dandy for these people to fight for the bullying of LGBT children but what happens when its not just differences in sexuality, what happens when they turn their attention to race, gender, or class?

 Both major political parties in Australia favor offshore imprisonment of refugees. Refugees have been falsely imprisoned, abused, and killed in these camps. The refugees in these prisons are men, women and children. Can we be so shocked that our treatment of non Australian children influences our treatment of Australian children?

 This expose comes at the same time as George Pell, who has long been believed to have covered up pedophile priests within the church, faced more allegations of child abuse. We have chaplains in schools replacing skilled school counselors. We seriously need to keep church and government as separate as possible, when once respected institutions, that some still see as having the moral high ground, are complacent in abuse of children.

 We have hate groups and government ministers arguing that all Australians shouldn't have equal rights. When it seems acceptable to vilify and discriminate against innocent Australians, is it any wonder that basic human rights are being violated?

 Australia has a lot of work to do, we have a lot of damage to repair. This shame belongs to all of us, and you have an important role to play. Please stand up against racism, homophobia, sexism and the abuse of children, if we lose our humanity who knows where this could lead, it has already gone too far.

 Choose empathy and respect, instead of ignorance and hate.

 Why Power Corrupts
Cookie power trip 
torture device

Do Something Good:

Contact your Government representative:

Demand that every case of juvenile detention be investigated. Demand any accusation of abuse is investigated and the perpetrator charged. Demand the victims receive counseling, legal representation and proper compensation. 

Dismiss and charge the minister and all who knew of this abuse.

Fight for Marriage
Stop Abuse Business
Implement Anti-Bullying Program
Save Aboriginal Community's



 


 

Should circumcision be voluntary?

Genital mutilation

With the recent case in America of a woman forced, under duress to sign a 'consent' form for her child to be circumcised, the issue of male genital mutilation has again risen. 
The story is shocking and i would imagine no doctor would perform the surgery under those circumstances. I hope she gets further legal advice and fights this decision, and sues those responsible if the surgery occurs. No matter if your for or against infant genital modification, you should agree that this is a horrific story.

The thing that bothers me is that the only reason the issue has been going on for so many years was that, the husband thinks that circumcision is; 'just the normal thing to do.'  
He is lucky i am not the Judge there as i would have given full custody of the child to the mother as soon as i heard that nonsense. I mean really, that is no reason to modify the sexual organ of a young child! And especially not to prolong the argument for years and to drag the mother into court, into jail...

I have trouble believing a father would put the child through unnecessary surgery, pain and permanent disfigurement, because its what most people do?
If there were a medical problem with the child than of course he should have the surgery as it would be required, but to force it out of, well i don't know, it almost seems like it is only being done to cause distress to the mother and or child. 
If you have a better explanation, please comment below.
I don't know the people involved and i don't know the intricacies of the case, so its all conjecture.

Lets speak more generally about circumcision. Most circumcisions begun with religious practices which we will briefly examine below;

African beliefs:
In Africa it was traditional for ritual circumcision to occur as a transition into manhood. The practice certainly varied from tribe to tribe.

Bahá'í

Have no circumcision tradition, and view female gentile mutilation as well mutilation.

Buddhism:
There is nothing in this religions relating to circumcision.

 

Christianity:

Now based on the Christian Bible it seems that circumcision is not necessary and indeed was frowned upon as to differentiate Christians from Jews. Upon a lot of research into this i am going to conclude that for Christians it is a practice meant to be a personal choice, by a well informed adult. It appears to me that child penile mutilation is frowned upon by the Bible versus, unless the child is Jewish.

 

Egyptian/Kemetic Re-constructionist Paganism: 

Performed voluntarily on a boy mark of passage from childhood to adulthood. The ritual was performed by priests on mass, and was more popular with the well off. It was also performed at any adult age in order to learn ancient secret mysteries, that may be lost today. 

 Hinduism

There is nothing in this religions relating to circumcision.

Islam:
Another confusing one as there seems to be no consensus. It is seems as ether recommended or required. Performed at birth or as a right into manhood. 
 

Jewish religion: 
When a boy is eight days old, in the morning, at the parents home. They get this from Genesis 17:10-14 in the Torah , and Jews who are not circumcised are 'disconnected' spiritually from their god YHWH ( Yahweh). The mutilation is performed as a sign that the child will father more Jews. 

Mormon:
The Latter Day Saint movement urges parents not to circumcise their children.

Roman Catholic:
The Roman Catholic Church does not require or endorse circumcision on males or females. It goes so far as to voice moral objection to the genital mutilation of infants.

 Wicca:
The Wiccan Rede is very clear on the issue. Wiccans do not circumcise unless there is a valid medial reason.

As always i am trying to remain respectful of other religions, but as an outsider i may miss subtle nuances and meaning. If i have please do inform me and include a link or source.  
Did i miss your religion? Comment below and let me know.

Where i live we have laws which say you can not do particular things before a particular age. 
You need to be 18 (or have your parents permission) to get a tattoo. You need to be 16 (or have your parents permission) to get a piercing. 
You need to be 18 to get a nipple or gentile piercing. Other body modification (brands, scars, beads, circumcision, etc) can be done at 18 (earlier if you have permission from your parents). 
You can not have sex until you are 16 (18 in some instances). 
You have to be 18 to vote, drink alcohol, or smoke cigarettes in Australia. 
We do have laws against child abuse but police, and doctors seem to turn a blind eye to the mutilation of a baby's genitals for some reason...

My personal opinion is that it should be the individuals choice if their body is modified or not. Unless there is a real medical reason, it should be law that he or she should have to wait until they are 18 before permanently modifying their genitals.
What is your opinion and why do you hold that opinion?

Should circumcision be voluntary?