islam is not a book.

But i would certainly burn that too.

islam is a political system.
islam is a police enforcement.
islam is a society laws.
islam is a straight jacket and a set of blinkers.
islam is a road back 1400 years
islam is sexist

freediver wrote on May 2^nd, 2009 at 8:30pm:

No response? Bit strange. Did you write a letter requiring a Ministerial response?

I can only back it up from what an officer within Immigration has privately told me and more directly what a Chinese couple told me, who are friends and one time work colleagues of mine.

She was mainland Chinese born whose family had migrated to Singapore. He was Singapore born with close family connections to mainland China. They applied to immigrate as Singaporean citizens.

They told me the application process was long and arduous and their first application endured for nearly two years. At separate interviews with him and her, they asked the bog standard stuff first, then the ‘Why Australia and not X?’ ones. Then the questions focussed on her family and the reasons why they sometimes travelled to the mainland. They told me they answered honestly… they had no association with the Chinese Communist Party and any trips to the mainland were for family reasons alone. They had two rounds of interviews each.

The problem appeared to be her background. She came from a prominent Chinese family in China. Her grandfather was influential in her home region from an inherited title and was held in high regard but ostensibly, he did not belong to the Communist Party.

Although they met all the criteria in every way (skilled, no police record, settled, good character etc…) they were rejected. They were invited to reapply after a waiting period (I think he said it was 1 year).

They reapplied after the waiting period and went through a similar process.

About a year later their second application was finally approved. They arrived in Australia five years after first applying.


There is the Australian Values Statement requirement and Immigration do have a published policy regarding background checks and character assessments :
Quote:

I’m guessing Immigration like to keep it to themselves what they actually ask potentially controversial applicants.

If all this is not good enough for you regarding Muslims entering Australia (given that you believe that the practise of Islam is fundamentally opposed to Australian values and thereby implying that being a devout Muslim alone is one criterion  for refusal of entry), then the only option you could argue for is a blanket ban on Muslim immigration or entry of any kind into Australia.

A final solution, as it were.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 2^nd, 2009 at 12:18am:





sprint,

Please.

Absolutely not!!!

If we ban something, such as the Koran for instance, how can we have an informed opinion about its contents, and what it encourages???

Should we ban the practice of ISLAM [within Australia]?

Yes [in my opinion].



But do not ban the source of the information, which informs us, about the values which ISLAM promulgates among its followers.

Don't ban the knowledge of the 'evil'.




'Book burning', is dumb.

'Book burning', is promoting a 'darkness' in the world.

We need more LIGHT in the world.

So many ppl in our society have so little discernment, between good and evil.

How do we get such discernment?

Shine a LIGHT on evil, on everything.

Yadda wrote on May 3^rd, 2009 at 1:12am:

What I mean is this – As with the Jewish Torah, the Christian Old Testament and to a lesser extent the New Testament, texts that advocate and describe extreme violence against non-believers (although much less prevalent, more metaphoric and encrypted in the NT), their prescribed extremism is not practised today. So too, it is possible for Islamic extremist text to be abrogated in practise… It is, after all, only text.

Of course if any religion, where some of whose adherents claim expressly justifies violence and intolerance towards non-believers, could be easily banned, then that would be a more preferable option to its accommodation (much like new religious cults can be dealt with while their membership is small). But I don’t believe banning is a viable option with an ancient, widespread and widely practised religion such as Islam and the search for a reasonable accommodation should continue.

Perhaps the answer lies with modern Sufism, which advocates a practise of Islam that is tolerant and has been described as ‘undogmatic, flexible and non-violent’. Even the Indian government (a nation that has been in a state of almost perpetual cold and hot war with an Islamic state for over 60 years) praises Sufism for its tolerance.

In the coming decade or two, however, there may be a ‘Pax-Cathayan’ imposed on our region, with its source being ‘liberated’ from the constraints of democracy, human rights and respect for religion. If that is the case, then Islam will no longer be a problem, as it’s practise will probably be banned or severely curtailed (along with many other things)… and these constraints will be enforced by a colossal iron fist.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 3^rd, 2009 at 10:19am:

If you want an official reply that you can track, write a letter to the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship either directly or via your Federal MP requesting a response.

Since October 2007, all potential migrants are required to sign an Australian Values statement, that expressly requires the new immigrant to respect democracy, human rights and freedom of religion. Falure to do so will result in refusal of entry.

mantra wrote on May 3^rd, 2009 at 11:26am:

Well, until someone has pledged to do something, they can't be censured for not having done it. As they're on a visa, they can be refused citizenship and the visa can be revoked if they violate their undertaking to respect Australian values. But there is no process which requires honesty that cannot be subverted. However, every permanent resident must wait at least one year before applying for citizenship, which is in effect a probationary period. If that is deemed too short, make it five years.