Quote:

Schools under fire for 'Christian' national anthem The head of a Christian schools group has defended the practice of having students sing an additional religious verse to the national anthem. Instead of the official second verse of Advance Australia Fair, the alternative verse reads: With Christ our head and cornerstone, we'll build our nation's might; Whose way and truth and light alone, can guide our path aright; Our lives a sacrifice of love, reflect our master's care; With faces turned to heav'n above, Advance Australia Fair; In joyful strains then let us sing, Advance Australia Fair. It has been reported that students at at least two private schools in Perth sing the extra verse. Christian Schools Australia chief executive Stephen O'Doherty told the ABC there is nothing wrong with singing an additional verse. "What sort of nation is it if somebody wants to stop young kids from singing that they want to be servants of their nation; they want to build community on the strong foundations of their belief in God?" But Warren Pearson, chief executive of the National Australia Day Council, says changing the words should not be encouraged because students are no longer singing the national anthem. "I think it's wonderful that young people in Christian schools, in all different schools, sing the national anthem," he said. "And in some schools they might go and sing the Christian verse, that's fine, but at that point they are singing the verse from Advance Australia Fair; technically they're no longer singing the national anthem." http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-23/christian-schools-changing-the-national-anthem/2939594

This is well up there with the most offensive desecration's of our nationalism symbols imaginable - what next - Muhammad and Buddha verses?  Why not if its ok to change it for sectarians like fundamentalist Christians?  Why cant we have Marx verses?   Its unlikely the Government will let these haters get away with this and thats a good thing.

it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse???

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:18pm:

it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse???

I've read reports where that is a load of christian propaganda.
It WASNT in the original (so some sources claim).
It would be interesting to see what the truth is about this matter


BUT...

The australian anthem does NOT include the verse anyway.


Making it WRONG WRONG WRONG for any school to sing it.


Take away their funding until they revert to the only accepted version of the anthem.

This post does not belong on the politics sucks board..it is about religion..it should be removed.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:18pm:

it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse???

It's NOT the anthem.



How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope.


How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia?



How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah?








See the problem?

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem?

not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas?

this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL.

wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:35pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone.

What schools banned christmas?

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:35pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone.

A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.

The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:35pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone.

Bullshit.


There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair


"A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20]
The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]"

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:35pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone.

Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap.
It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit.
Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private.
In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:38pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. What schools banned christmas?

quite a number of public schools did. and isnt that a bit lame and pathetic?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:43pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian.

how many public schools do you attend at christmas time?

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:46pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time?

No questions link or proof of banning.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:42pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]"

Interesting since it was the 1980s when I first heard this other verse...

oh an BTW we dont sing the original words now either. they have been modified as well.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:42pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]"

you dont get credibility points for the highlighted coment.

They are not singing the national anthem that we the people voted on and they are turning it into an exclusive sectarian war song for the supremacy of the sky god.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning.

I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly).

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:49pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" Interesting since it was the 1980s when I first heard this other verse... oh an BTW we dont sing the original words now either. they have been modified as well.

Irrelevant when this bastardised version was invented by christian nutters and when you heard it.

It WASNT in the original.

It is NOT part of the anthem.

You are WRONG.


Have the guts to admit it.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:50pm:

They are not singing the national anthem that we the people voted on and they are turning it into an exclusive sectarian war song for the supremacy of the sky god.

well at least you remain the idiot we have gotten so used to!

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:50pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" you dont get credibility points for the highlighted coment.

I've highlighted where the highlights should go in the post.

YOUR fictional christ .
As opposed to the HISTORICAL christ.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:51pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" Interesting since it was the 1980s when I first heard this other verse... oh an BTW we dont sing the original words now either. they have been modified as well. Irrelevant when this bastardised version was invented by christian nutters and when you heard it. It WASNT in the original. It is NOT part of the anthem. You are WRONG. Have the guts to admit it.

i dont quite get your anger. it was christians singing in a christian school a version that HAS been sung publically in front of the PM and GG on at least one occasion. where exactly is the source of this angst?

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:55pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:50pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" you dont get credibility points for the highlighted coment. I've highlighted where the highlights should go in the post. YOUR fictional christ . As opposed to the HISTORICAL christ.

nice comeback although it is a tad convenient to redefine your grammar AFTERWARDS. although for the record, MY Christ is the historical one. I dont know who yours is.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:57pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:55pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:50pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" you dont get credibility points for the highlighted coment. I've highlighted where the highlights should go in the post. YOUR fictional christ . As opposed to the HISTORICAL christ. nice comeback although it is a tad convenient to redefine your grammar AFTERWARDS. although for the record, MY Christ is the historical one. I dont know who yours is.

I wasnt the one who highlighted my original post the way you wanted to read it.

I clarified because of your obvious misunderstanding.



And BTW YOUR christ is NOT the historical one , by ANY measure .

Quote:

And BTW YOUR christ is NOT the historical one , by ANY measure .

in what way? because I call Him God?? Keep in mind that that is waht He called Himself!

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:56pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" Interesting since it was the 1980s when I first heard this other verse... oh an BTW we dont sing the original words now either. they have been modified as well. Irrelevant when this bastardised version was invented by christian nutters and when you heard it. It WASNT in the original. It is NOT part of the anthem. You are WRONG. Have the guts to admit it. i dont quite get your anger. it was christians singing in a christian school a version that HAS been sung publically in front of the PM and GG on at least one occasion. where exactly is the source of this angst?

I'm not angry at all.

i just want these religious nutters to be chastised for bastardising the national anthem , the same way that a muslim school , hindu school , calathupian school would be chastised for doing so.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:02pm:

Quote: And BTW YOUR christ is NOT the historical one , by ANY measure . in what way? because I call Him God?? Keep in mind that that is waht He called Himself!

You do know what the term "historical" means dont you?

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:03pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:56pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Bullshit. There was no mention of your fictional christ in the original. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Australia_Fair "A Christian movement, Awakening, in the 1990s substituted an alternative second verse naming Christ and promoting Christian values[19] This was sung during the Global March for Jesus in 1998[19] and again at World Youth Day 2008 with the qualification 'This is not the official verse, but a Catholic adaptation of the Australian National Anthem'.[20] The version was later controversially adopted by some Christian private schools for singing as a hymn at internal assemblies.[21] The substituted verse did not appear in the 1879 publication of Peter Dodds McCormick’s original work. The office of Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that, under national protocols, the anthem should not be modified and alternative words should not be used.[21]" Interesting since it was the 1980s when I first heard this other verse... oh an BTW we dont sing the original words now either. they have been modified as well. Irrelevant when this bastardised version was invented by christian nutters and when you heard it. It WASNT in the original. It is NOT part of the anthem. You are WRONG. Have the guts to admit it. i dont quite get your anger. it was christians singing in a christian school a version that HAS been sung publically in front of the PM and GG on at least one occasion. where exactly is the source of this angst? I'm not angry at all. i just want these religious nutters to be chastised for bastardising the national anthem , the same way that a muslim school , hindu school , calathupian school would be chastised for doing so.

seems a rather harsh over-reaction to me. given that australia was founded as a christian nation it is hardly out of character but I still dont see what the fuss is about a CHRISTIAN school singing this at their own private assembly? not exactly the stuff of revolution is it?

They're religious schools, I guess they can sing what they want as long as there's no weird law against modifying the national anthem.

As for the schools banning christmas thing: it's a myth that gets trotted out year after year - along with councils not having public christmas decorations or trees, schools banning easter etc etc.....

The vast majority of schools still celebrate christmas..... nothing has been banned.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:51pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly).

Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners.

As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse?
Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word.
I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school.

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:08pm:

They're religious schools, I guess they can sing what they want as long as there's no weird law against modifying the national anthem. As for the schools banning christmas thing: it's a myth that gets trotted out year after year - along with councils not having public christmas decorations or trees, schools banning easter etc etc..... The vast majority of schools still celebrate christmas..... nothing has been banned.

http://www.news.com.au/features/christmasgiftguide/saint-nick-sacked-from-victorian-pre-school-so-not-to-offend-religious-groups/story-fn77atzo-1225967321414

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=16323

http://www.aussiemuslims.com/forums/showthread.php?42372-Christmas-bans-are-off-says-Ted-Baillieu

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:02pm: Quote: And BTW YOUR christ is NOT the historical one , by ANY measure . in what way? because I call Him God?? Keep in mind that that is waht He called Himself! You do know what the term "historical" means dont you?

feel free to explicitly explain your self.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:13pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly). Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners. As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse? Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word. I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school.

you seem to have an awful amount of angst for someone who dosnt care

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:18pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly). Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners. As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse? Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word. I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school. you seem to have an awful amount of angst for someone who dosnt care

Oh stop this diversionary tactic.


There has been no banning of christmas.


The original anthem did NOT contain the christian verse (as you claimed)

And if ANY other religion (or political movement or social movement) had written their own verse to be sung YOU would be the first one up in arms about it.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:18pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly). Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners. As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse? Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word. I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school. you seem to have an awful amount of angst for someone who dosnt care Oh stop this diversionary tactic. There has been no banning of christmas. The original anthem did NOT contain the christian verse (as you claimed) And if ANY other religion (or political movement or social movement) had written their own verse to be sung YOU would be the first one up in arms about it.

I beg to differ:

http://www.news.com.au/features/christmasgiftguide/saint-nick-sacked-from-victorian-pre-school-so-not-to-offend-religious-groups/story-fn77atzo-1225967321414

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=16323

http://www.aussiemuslims.com/forums/showthread.php?42372-Christmas-bans-are-off-says-Ted-Baillieu

the Premier of VIc also apparently disagrees with you. it HAS happened.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:23pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:21pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:18pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly). Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners. As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse? Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word. I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school. you seem to have an awful amount of angst for someone who dosnt care Oh stop this diversionary tactic. There has been no banning of christmas. The original anthem did NOT contain the christian verse (as you claimed) And if ANY other religion (or political movement or social movement) had written their own verse to be sung YOU would be the first one up in arms about it. I beg to differ: http://www.news.com.au/features/christmasgiftguide/saint-nick-sacked-from-victorian-pre-school-so-not-to-offend-religious-groups/story-fn77atzo-1225967321414 http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=16323 http://www.aussiemuslims.com/forums/showthread.php?42372-Christmas-bans-are-off-says-Ted-Baillieu the Premier of VIc also apparently disagrees with you. it HAS happened.

One of those links is to an american incident , nothing to do with asutralia.

Another is about a NEW YEAR party at a motessori school . An isolated incident.


The last has ballieou warning not to be too politically correct with xmas and has muslim groups agreeing with him.





No banning of christmas has happened.

Hyperbolic , panic mongering.



But ALL irrelevant to the topic in hand.






A religious group has CHANGED the national anthem and is teaching kids their new version.




Wrong wrong wrong

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 7:18pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:51pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:35pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:18pm: it is part of the ORIGINAL song. the national anthem version of it took that verse out. Singing the original second verse is optional. PLUS what possible offence could it cause in a a christian school to seing a christian verse??? It's NOT the anthem. How about catholic schools adding a verse extyolling the virtues (?) of the pope. How about left wing , greenie schools adding verses about gaia? How about muslim schools adding a verse about allah? See the problem? not really. it is AT WORST trivial. where were you when public schools banned christmas? this is a CHRISTIAN school singing a CHRISTIAN verse to a song that was in the ORIGINAL. wherther you like it or not, it is BEYOND trivial and significantly better than banning christmas entirely in public schools coz it might offend someone. Oh please, link an article, provide concrete proof or drop the "Banning Xmas" crap. It's around every year about now & I'm yet to see one shopping centre without carols or a tree and a fat bloke in a suit. Christams cards are written and brought home every year from my kids school, as with every other school public or private. In fact the only people banning things are those freaks the "Exculsive Breatheran" & their supposedly Christian. how many public schools do you attend at christmas time? No questions link or proof of banning. I will take a look for it but it is disappointing that you seem to be clinging to this rather than the topic at hand. the school ban or christmas was all over the news (not unexpectedly). Not clinging, just sick of these chain letter facts being used year after year, next month it will be the refo's get more benefits and money than pensioners. As to the topic I don't really worry about it, 2nd verse? Lucky if 2% of the population know it, I cant tell you any, let alone the 1st word. I'll get on my soapbox when a major party starts advocating for this particular version every morning in every school. you seem to have an awful amount of angst for someone who dosnt care

Ambivalent, would be a better word.
Believe if you want, just don't try to make me or infringe on my enjoyment of life(outside of the normal western values).
That applies to all religions.

Not wanting to celebrate Christmas does not mean banning Christmas - I prefer to celebrate the season in more culturally relevant manner - Yule and Solstice.  How we choose to celebrate our festivals should be up to us - Christianity should have no special place above any other.  The Christians were the ones who banned our festivals and introduced the Stake and the fire.

The so called "missing" verse is:






With Christ our head and cornerstone,
We'll build our Nation's might.
Whose way and truth and light alone
Can guide our path aright.
Our lives, a sacrifice of love, reflect our Master's care.
With faces turned to heaven above, Advance Australia fair.
In joyful strains then let us sing, Advance Australia fair.



So what's the big deal if some want to sing it and others don't. ?

Griff wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 8:14pm:

The so called "missing" verse is: With Christ our head and cornerstone, We'll build our Nation's might. Whose way and truth and light alone Can guide our path aright. Our lives, a sacrifice of love, reflect our Master's care. With faces turned to heaven above, Advance Australia fair. In joyful strains then let us sing, Advance Australia fair. So what's the big deal if some want to sing it and others don't. ?

Because it's NOT the anthem.


It's been written to promote an agenda and being passed off as the national anthem.







What if muslims did it?



What if hindus did it?



What id buddhists did it?





What if atheists did it?



What if homosexuals did it?i

It's a SCHOOL.







It's got to be stopped.

It's been written to promote an agenda and being passed off as the national anthem.





In ONE Christian school.  Big Threat !!!!!!

Griff wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:25pm:

It's been written to promote an agenda and being passed off as the national anthem. In ONE Christian school.  Big Threat !!!!!!

Not a threat.

Just WRONG.





And in an australian school it has to be stopped.

What a disgrace; borderline treason.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 6:09pm:

This is well up there with the most offensive desecration's of our nationalism symbols imaginable - what next - Muhammad and Buddha verses?  Why not if its ok to change it for sectarians like fundamentalist Christians?  Why cant we have Marx verses?   Its unlikely the Government will let these haters get away with this and thats a good thing.

It won't be long before all schools, public gatherings and such will be made to sing the anthem with some new verses added by New Age Muslims (like me). It will have something about how uplifting it is to behead people and stone women who can't keep their legs together. We will dominate Australia one day.

They are usurping the national anthem ansd trying to impose the supremacy of "Christ" over the entire nation - this is fundamentalism at its extreme. Yes they will try to force everyone to accept the amended verses and force the kids to sing it whether their parents agree or not.  Stop religious intolerance.

salad in wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 7:59am:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 6:09pm: This is well up there with the most offensive desecration's of our nationalism symbols imaginable - what next - Muhammad and Buddha verses?  Why not if its ok to change it for sectarians like fundamentalist Christians?  Why cant we have Marx verses?   Its unlikely the Government will let these haters get away with this and thats a good thing. It won't be long before all schools, public gatherings and such will be made to sing the anthem with some new verses added by New Age Muslims (like me). It will have something about how uplifting it is to behead people and stone women who can't keep their legs together. We will dominate Australia one day.

We should stone women that KEEP their legs together ;)

You guys have it back to front.

Free Love man, that's where Nivarna is located :)

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 1:55pm:

They are usurping the national anthem ansd trying to impose the supremacy of "Christ" over the entire nation - this is fundamentalism at its extreme. Yes they will try to force everyone to accept the amended verses and force the kids to sing it whether their parents agree or not.  Stop religious intolerance.

They are trying to impose the supremacy of "Christ" (great scare quotes there, bozo)?


"An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of
Australia
[9th July 1900]
WHEREAS the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia,
Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God,
have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the
Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the
Constitution hereby established:

And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the
Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen:
Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with
the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in
this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:"





Notice anything, numpty?

I am fed up to the back teeth with people (mostly Lefties) trying to undermine our Christian values.

matty wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:25pm:

I am fed up to the back teeth with people (mostly Lefties) trying to undermine our Christian values.

Oh piss off.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:27pm:

matty wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:25pm: I am fed up to the back teeth with people (mostly Lefties) trying to undermine our Christian values. Oh piss off.

Why don't you? Australia was founded on Christian values.

matty wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:30pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:27pm: matty wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:25pm: I am fed up to the back teeth with people (mostly Lefties) trying to undermine our Christian values. Oh piss off. Why don't you? Australia was founded on Christian values.

matty has a point. this country WAS built on christan values. I stil dont see what the complaint is about ONE school singing ONE verse  with ONE line that referres to Christ whom the constitution itself refers to.

if you exclude the 'i dont like religion' argument from the opposing points of view nothing remains.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 5:31pm:

matty wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:30pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:27pm: matty wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 4:25pm: I am fed up to the back teeth with people (mostly Lefties) trying to undermine our Christian values. Oh piss off. Why don't you? Australia was founded on Christian values. matty has a point. this country WAS built on christan values. I stil dont see what the complaint is about ONE school singing ONE verse  with ONE line that referres to Christ whom the constitution itself refers to. if you exclude the 'i dont like religion' argument from the opposing points of view nothing remains.

It's a private school. They can sing what they want. Unless there's some law forbidding f-cking around with the national anthem they can include praises to a goat if they want.

Christians are responsible for most wars and wiping out the Tasmanian Aborgines, promoting inequality, injustice - heck the Christian church even runs boxing and MMA blood sports to keep us all entertained.  Is it too much to ask of them that we not be forced to praise Christ with our national anthem? Why should  be forced to praise Christ?  Why should children be forced to praise Christ?   People get along a lot better if they keep thier religion to themselves.  Australia is not a Christian nation, its a secular democracy, get over it, the future of this country is mult-faith and multicultral.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 7:29pm:

Christians are responsible for most wars and wiping out the Tasmanian Aborgines, promoting inequality, injustice - heck the Christian church even runs boxing and MMA blood sports to keep us all entertained.  Is it too much to ask of them that we not be forced to praise Christ with our national anthem? Why should  be forced to praise Christ?  Why should children be forced to praise Christ?   People get along a lot better if they keep thier religion to themselves.  Australia is not a Christian nation, its a secular democracy, get over it, the future of this country is mult-faith and multicultral.

You are a caricature of the mindless modern sneering, preening front bottom who has no creative or original thought and can manage only to b!tch and kvetch.

1. You are not forced to praise anything you compleat smacking moron.

2. Australia could not be a secular democracy if it hadn't been a christian democracy first.

3. Now bugger off, drongo (may I call you drongo? Not too strong?)

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 7:29pm:

Christians are responsible for most wars and wiping out the Tasmanian Aborgines, promoting inequality, injustice - heck the Christian church even runs boxing and MMA blood sports to keep us all entertained.  Is it too much to ask of them that we not be forced to praise Christ with our national anthem? Why should  be forced to praise Christ?  Why should children be forced to praise Christ?   People get along a lot better if they keep thier religion to themselves.  Australia is not a Christian nation, its a secular democracy, get over it, the future of this country is mult-faith and multicultral.

Who's FORCING anyone to do anything ?   The kids singing this verse are at a CHRISTIAN SCHOOL for goodness sake.  

Keep your gods hands off our Government, off our money, out of ourt welfare system, out of our schools and leave our national anthem alone.  Australia is a pluralistic society that embraces all faiths and beliefs and it is OFFENSIVE, exclusive and intolerant in the extreme for the fundamentalist sects to add Christ supremacy to our national song.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:13pm:

Keep your gods hands off our Government, off our money, out of ourt welfare system, out of our schools and leave our national anthem alone.  Australia is a pluralistic society that embraces all faiths and beliefs and it is OFFENSIVE, exclusive and intolerant in the extreme for the fundamentalist sects to add Christ supremacy to our national song.

I am glad you are offended, sorry, OFFENDED.

AUstralia is pluralistic only because it is of  Christian heritage -although I am beginning to qustion the idea of equality when I see your kind of uppity crap.

Soren wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:21pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:13pm: Keep your gods hands off our Government, off our money, out of ourt welfare system, out of our schools and leave our national anthem alone.  Australia is a pluralistic society that embraces all faiths and beliefs and it is OFFENSIVE, exclusive and intolerant in the extreme for the fundamentalist sects to add Christ supremacy to our national song. I am glad you are offended, sorry, OFFENDED. AUstralia is pluralistic only because it is of  Christian heritage -although I am beginning to qustion the idea of equality when I see your kind of uppity crap.

Bullshit - Australia is pluralistic because of its secular enlightenment values and the steady push away from superstition and religious fundamentalism.  We are not a Christian nation, we are a nation of many faiths and beliefs - Our pluralistic values conceptually have more in common with Bahia than Christianity, Bahia embraces fully the many paths story.  Of the Christian Churches - the Liberal left wing ecumenical movement embraces Pluralism, but no right wing bible thumping fundamentalist church embraces religious tolerance or diversity, they are all exclusive and separatist.

You are a know all and a browbeater.

Religious fundamental;ists of all ilks have a deep seeded intolerance and hatred of humanity.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:42pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:21pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:13pm: Keep your gods hands off our Government, off our money, out of ourt welfare system, out of our schools and leave our national anthem alone.  Australia is a pluralistic society that embraces all faiths and beliefs and it is OFFENSIVE, exclusive and intolerant in the extreme for the fundamentalist sects to add Christ supremacy to our national song. I am glad you are offended, sorry, OFFENDED. AUstralia is pluralistic only because it is of  Christian heritage -although I am beginning to qustion the idea of equality when I see your kind of uppity crap. Bullshit - Australia is pluralistic because of its secular enlightenment values and the steady push away from superstition and religious fundamentalism.  We are not a Christian nation, we are a nation of many faiths and beliefs - Our pluralistic values conceptually have more in common with Bahia than Christianity, Bahia embraces fully the many paths story.  Of the Christian Churches - the Liberal left wing ecumenical movement embraces Pluralism, but no right wing bible thumping fundamentalist church embraces religious tolerance or diversity, they are all exclusive and separatist. You are a know all and a browbeater.

Compared to you even a 12 year old is a know-all.

Show me any other society that is pluralistic and has come out of a non-Christian tradition.

Soren wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:47pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:42pm: Soren wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:21pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:13pm: Keep your gods hands off our Government, off our money, out of ourt welfare system, out of our schools and leave our national anthem alone.  Australia is a pluralistic society that embraces all faiths and beliefs and it is OFFENSIVE, exclusive and intolerant in the extreme for the fundamentalist sects to add Christ supremacy to our national song. I am glad you are offended, sorry, OFFENDED. AUstralia is pluralistic only because it is of  Christian heritage -although I am beginning to qustion the idea of equality when I see your kind of uppity crap. Bullshit - Australia is pluralistic because of its secular enlightenment values and the steady push away from superstition and religious fundamentalism.  We are not a Christian nation, we are a nation of many faiths and beliefs - Our pluralistic values conceptually have more in common with Bahia than Christianity, Bahia embraces fully the many paths story.  Of the Christian Churches - the Liberal left wing ecumenical movement embraces Pluralism, but no right wing bible thumping fundamentalist church embraces religious tolerance or diversity, they are all exclusive and separatist. You are a know all and a browbeater. Compared to you even a 12 year old is a know-all. Show me any other society that is pluralistic and has come out of a non-Christian tradition.

Nothing Pluralistic ever came out of a right wing fundamentalist bible thumping ignorant mind.  They are incapable of thinking or conceptualizing diversity - aren't you so why are you babbling on claiming credit for something you do not believe in?

Why?
Why?
Why?

Show me any other society that is pluralistic and has come out of a non-Christian tradition.

Soren wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:59pm:

Show me any other society that is pluralistic and has come out of a non-Christian tradition.

Show me a rightwing fundamentalist bible thumper who is pluralistic?

Here are a couple of pluralistic societies

India
all native cultures
pre christian Europe and Rome

ect ect - no religion has fought harder against enlightened Pluralism than fundamentalist Christianity - the Sufi's in thge Islamic world are light years more advanced than right wing fundamentalist Christianity.  To the extent Christianity has been liberalized it is through the workings of more advanced enlightened thinking.

You are an intellectual snob, but not nearly as smart as you think.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 10:16pm:

You are an intellectual snob, but not nearly as smart as you think.

You all say that - and that's all you can say. You are too stupid to say anything more beyond bombastic sh!t like that.

Soren wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 8:51pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 7:29pm: Christians are responsible for most wars and wiping out the Tasmanian Aborgines, promoting inequality, injustice - heck the Christian church even runs boxing and MMA blood sports to keep us all entertained.  Is it too much to ask of them that we not be forced to praise Christ with our national anthem? Why should  be forced to praise Christ?  Why should children be forced to praise Christ?   People get along a lot better if they keep thier religion to themselves.  Australia is not a Christian nation, its a secular democracy, get over it, the future of this country is mult-faith and multicultral. You are a caricature of the mindless modern sneering, preening front bottom who has no creative or original thought and can manage only to b!tch and kvetch. 1. You are not forced to praise anything you complete smacking moron. 2. Australia could not be a secular democracy if it hadn't been a christian democracy first. 3. Now bugger off, drongo (may I call you drongo? Not too strong?)

Far out lmao :)

Good on you Soren!

Soren wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 10:26pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 10:16pm: You are an intellectual snob, but not nearly as smart as you think. You all say that - and that's all you can say. You are too stupid to say anything more beyond bombastic sh!t like that.

And now having lost the argument you are reduced to personal abuse and sock puppets - thanks for the ultimate compliment.  You are not educated on religion and you should not enter debate with a religious scholar with your level of ignorance.  Now you know religious pluralism comes from older more enlightened religions than Christianity - consider your self schooled free of change and move on loony tunes.