Australian Politics Forum - Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 138740
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #45 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:32pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:27pm:

You are misrepresenting it by selectively quoting from it.

The single biggest problem when interpreting law: reading one section out of context.

I have to deal with crap like this on a daily basis.

If one wants to be absolutely certain of what a particular section in a piece of legislation means, it's always best to read the entire Act.

Back to top

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #46 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:27pm:

Quote:

Yes you can hold anything you want in you hand during and affirmation but you cannot swear upon that object during your affirmation.

The word 'swear' is not part of an affirmation.

Quote:

If you are going to swear and oath in must be on the bible according to the act and if you are going to affirm you must affirm and not swear on anything.

Correct.

Quote:

You cannot ask to affirm and then demand to affirm on say the Origin of the Species, even thought you are a rabid atheist.

Incorrect. In an affirmation, you can hold your appendage if that pleases you.

Quote:

I actually asked to swear on a dictionary once, instead of a bible; oddly enough this request was denied.

You are one confused puppy, aren't you!

Cheesy

Is english not your first language?

Because the confusion seems to be yours.

Back to top

IP Logged

Alinta

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1470
Melbourne
Gender: female

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #47 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:26pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:20pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:48pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:38pm:

I believe the whole point of swearing on a bible is to "somehow" promise "God" you will tell the truth, do your best etc.
Your not promising any old one but God.
Seeing both the Koran and the bible are "God's" word, just brought to you by different reporters, whats the fuss?
I'm pretty sure Muslims swear on the Koran in court, where's your outrage with that?

try using a Bible in on of their courts and see how it works out!!

anyhow, the question was if it was legal or not. Apparently it is.

Or the law has just been ignored to meet a political outcome, not the first time this has happened.

The ACT oaths and affirmations Act is pretty adamant it is a bible to used and nothing else, so if this is the piece of legislation needed to be complied with, then oath is pretty much null and void.
But I doubt whether legal compliance matters much to a politician since the howard era.

It's not the relevant piece of legislation.......

Any chance you want to post the correct piece of legislation so we can all read the federal oaths and affirmations act; or should we just take your word for it.

derives from the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

Back to top

IP Logged

cods Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 88048	Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ? Reply #48 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:51pm John Smith wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 11:40am: It would be kind of pointless to make him swear on a bible if he doesn't believe in it now wouldn't it? You don't swear on the bible top please others! did juliar swear on it.. she doesnt believe in it either remember? it is JUST a book... made with paper.
Back to top	IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #49 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:51pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:27pm:

No - The ACT oaths and affirmations Act is NOT pretty adamant it is a bible to used and nothing else.

You are misrepresenting it by selectively quoting from it. If you bothered to read further to Section 21:

Alternative form and manner for oath
Subject to sections 6A and 15 but notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, where a person who is required or permitted to take an oath states, in the presence of the person before whom the oath is to be taken, that an oath taken in a form and manner other than the form and manner specified in this Act would be binding on him or her, the oath may be taken in that form and manner.

http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/1984-79/current/pdf/1984-79.pdf

And how does 6A oaths and affirmations of ACT legislative members and Section 15 oaths and affirmations of incompetent persons apply in the case of this particular situation.

BTW I did read section 21, just couldn't figure out how it applied, but im sure you will tell me.

Or didn't your read sections 6A and 15?

Back to top

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #50 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:54pm

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:26pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:20pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:48pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:38pm:

I believe the whole point of swearing on a bible is to "somehow" promise "God" you will tell the truth, do your best etc.
Your not promising any old one but God.
Seeing both the Koran and the bible are "God's" word, just brought to you by different reporters, whats the fuss?
I'm pretty sure Muslims swear on the Koran in court, where's your outrage with that?

try using a Bible in on of their courts and see how it works out!!

anyhow, the question was if it was legal or not. Apparently it is.

Or the law has just been ignored to meet a political outcome, not the first time this has happened.

The ACT oaths and affirmations Act is pretty adamant it is a bible to used and nothing else, so if this is the piece of legislation needed to be complied with, then oath is pretty much null and void.
But I doubt whether legal compliance matters much to a politician since the howard era.

It's not the relevant piece of legislation.......

Any chance you want to post the correct piece of legislation so we can all read the federal oaths and affirmations act; or should we just take your word for it.

derives from the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

Derives from?

How about you post the link that you read so we may verify your conclusions.

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21858
A cat with a view

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #51 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:23pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 11:35am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 11:19am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 11:13am:

"Some called it un-Australian and unconstitutional."

Yep, Australia does have its fair share of morons.

"unconstitutional" Roll Eyes

dont be too quick to say that. While I agree it is a little bit hysterical, you cannot swear on any book other than the Bible when taking oaths. You can make an affirmation if you wish but using the Koran actually may be unconstitutional. If it does not apply in court I doubt it is legal here either.

Does anyone have some actual legal/constitutional information about this?

1. Yes you can.

2. Yes, it's not unconstitutional.

Yes, of course it should be legal for moslems to take an oath in our parliaments and in our courts, on a book which declares; Tongue

".......Jews......and the Christians......Allah's Curse be on them....."

Muhsin Khan
http://quran.com/9/30

It is a disgrace.

Will you never learn ?

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ? Reply #52 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:24pm He's a Muslim for goodness sake I'm fine with him swearing on the Koran, his religious book. Even if he isn't a devout Muslim. Most ALP members just affirm, no swearing on a bible or other religious book.
Back to top	IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 74939
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #53 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 11:54am:

John, there is a typo in your signature comment: "To pay that $56 billion off, the Howard Government sold almost $72 billion of Government assets". It should read:

"To pay that $96 billion off, the Howard Government sold almost $72 billion of Government assets"

LOL... wait for his reply. he believes that the debt was $56B not $96B. He is full of such contradictions!

what are you waiting for, my reply was 5 posts above your comment dopey .... not the sharpest tool in the shed are you? Never mind, you do still qualify as a tool

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 138740
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #54 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:28pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:54pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:26pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:20pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:48pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:38pm:

I believe the whole point of swearing on a bible is to "somehow" promise "God" you will tell the truth, do your best etc.
Your not promising any old one but God.
Seeing both the Koran and the bible are "God's" word, just brought to you by different reporters, whats the fuss?
I'm pretty sure Muslims swear on the Koran in court, where's your outrage with that?

try using a Bible in on of their courts and see how it works out!!

anyhow, the question was if it was legal or not. Apparently it is.

Or the law has just been ignored to meet a political outcome, not the first time this has happened.

The ACT oaths and affirmations Act is pretty adamant it is a bible to used and nothing else, so if this is the piece of legislation needed to be complied with, then oath is pretty much null and void.
But I doubt whether legal compliance matters much to a politician since the howard era.

It's not the relevant piece of legislation.......

Any chance you want to post the correct piece of legislation so we can all read the federal oaths and affirmations act; or should we just take your word for it.

derives from the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

Derives from?

How about you post the link that you read so we may verify your conclusions.

I posted it twice already.

Back to top

IP Logged

Alinta

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1470
Melbourne
Gender: female

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #55 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:30pm

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:54pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:26pm:

Alinta wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:20pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 2:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:48pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 1:38pm:

I believe the whole point of swearing on a bible is to "somehow" promise "God" you will tell the truth, do your best etc.
Your not promising any old one but God.
Seeing both the Koran and the bible are "God's" word, just brought to you by different reporters, whats the fuss?
I'm pretty sure Muslims swear on the Koran in court, where's your outrage with that?

try using a Bible in on of their courts and see how it works out!!

anyhow, the question was if it was legal or not. Apparently it is.

Or the law has just been ignored to meet a political outcome, not the first time this has happened.

The ACT oaths and affirmations Act is pretty adamant it is a bible to used and nothing else, so if this is the piece of legislation needed to be complied with, then oath is pretty much null and void.
But I doubt whether legal compliance matters much to a politician since the howard era.

It's not the relevant piece of legislation.......

Any chance you want to post the correct piece of legislation so we can all read the federal oaths and affirmations act; or should we just take your word for it.

derives from the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

Derives from?

How about you post the link that you read so we may verify your conclusions.

1.Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900

Section 42
Oath of Affirmation or Allegiance

Every Senator and every member of the House of Representatives shall before taking his seat make and subscribe before the Governor General, or some person authorised by him, an oath or affirmation of allegiance in the form set forth in the schedule to this Constitution.

2. Schedule......Gregg has already posted the link that states the wording

3. Then read the link I've already posted
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_L...

Voila!!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

salad in

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5941

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #56 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:05pm

Let me put this matter to rest. Husic is a traditional muslim and as such he is my enemy. As everyone knows I am a New Age Muslim so I speak with authority and knowledge on this matter. Husic is being unIslamic.

Quote:

Question:

Can Muslim citizens be loyal to a non-Muslim government?

Summary Answer:

Many Muslims are loyal to the non-Muslim countries in which they live, of course, but it is in spite of Islamic teaching. Unlike other faiths, Islam is not just a religion but a political system as well. The state is intended to be inseparable from religious rule. Islamic law, or Sharia, is complete and not designed to coexist with or be subordinate to other legal systems.

Muslims are not meant to be ruled by non-Muslims. The Qur'an is very clear that they are to resist unbelievers by any means until Islam establishes political supremacy. This doesn't mean that everyone must be forced to become Muslim, but rather that everyone must submit to Muslim rule.

Additional Notes:

In Islam, loyalty is to Allah and his religion. It cannot be to a kafir country. As the former mufti of the Grand Mosque in Mecca put it in a recent fatwa, "His homeland may be not Islamic, so how can he be loyal to his homeland?"

Scholar Jamal Badawi insists that, "Muslims should not melt in any pot except the Muslim brotherhood pot."

A CAIR executive director (in the United States) recently said, "if we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land."

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/014-loyalty-to-non-muslim-government.htm

Husic cannot swear allegiance to the Crown because the head of the Crown is the Queen who is also head of the Church of England.

Husic's first and only fealty is to Islan and allah. You kafirs need to wake up.

Back to top

The ALP, the progressive party, the party of ideas, the workers' friend, is the only Australian political party to roast four young Australians in roof cavities. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ?
Reply #57 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:10pm

salad in wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:05pm:

Let me put this matter torest. Husic is a traditional muslim and as such he is my enemy. As everyone knows I am a New Age Muslim so I speak with authority and knowledge on this matter. Husic is being unIslamic.

Quote:

Question:

Can Muslim citizens be loyal to a non-Muslim government?

Summary Answer: 6

Many Muslims are loyal to the non-Muslim countries in which they live, of course, but it is in spite of Islamic teaching. Unlike other faiths, Islam is not just a religion but a political system as well. The state is intended to be inseparable from religious rule. Islamic law, or Sharia, is complete and not designed to coexist with or be subordinate to other legal systems.

Muslims are not meant to be ruled by non-Muslims. The Qur'an is very clear that they are to resist unbelievers by any means until Islam establishes political supremacy. This doesn't mean that everyone must be forced to become Muslim, but rather that everyone must submit to Muslim rule.

Additional Notes:

In Islam, loyalty is to Allah and his religion. It cannot be to a kafir country. As the former mufti of the Grand Mosque in Mecca put it in a recent fatwa, "His homeland may be not Islamic, so how can he be loyal to his homeland?"

Scholar Jamal Badawi insists that, "Muslims should not melt in any pot except the Muslim brotherhood pot."

A CAIR executive director (in the United States) recently said, "if we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land."

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/014-loyalty-to-non-muslim-government.htm

Husic cannot swear allegiance to the Crown because the head of the Crown is the Queen who is also head of the Church of England.

Husic's first and only fealty is to Islan and allah. You kafirs need to wake up.

oh noes!!!!! Wont somebody think of the children?????

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

BigOl64 Gold Member Offline Posts: 14438 Townsville QLD Gender:	Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ? Reply #58 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:11pm greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 3:28pm: I posted it twice already. Do you have multiple log ons, cause Im pretty sure I was talking to Alinta And without a condescending gif I find myself ignoring your words.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:23pm by BigOl64 » IP Logged

adelcrow Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20133 everywhere Gender:	Re: Ed Husic - unconstitutional act ? Reply #59 - Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 4:19pm Really...who cares what a bunch of bible bashers think. A person could swear on "Andy Pandy Goes Troppo" and it would have as much meaning as the bible.
Back to top	Go the Bunnies IP Logged