GA wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

Where in the article does it state that these eleven people demonstrating outside a Liberal MP's office were right wingers?

GA wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

The Exclusive Brethren are not a mainstream Christian group.  There is also no evidence contained in the article that they were involved in this protest.  Why are you dragging them into it?

Vuk11 wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 12:13pm:


Philosophy has never had an effective hold on society because it's not really offering anything of of 'substance'. I mean it has no 'God' for example. Besides it's to lofty in most cases to appeal to a majority. And would be mostly irrelevant in a Godless universe anyhow, because it would be overridden in most instances by all 'survival of the fittest' type values. What religion needs to do is adopt a more philosophical approach, that way in itself it becomes a vector for logic as well as morality etc. But of course it must be kept in mind that there may be philosophies that are in themselves Darwinistic, capitalism for example.

Peter Freedman wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 12:17pm:


That's what the left will have you believe. Kevin Rudd, for example, and as you'll remember, branded them: " an extremist cult and sect". And followed it up with: "They split families and I am deeply concerned about their impact on communities across Australia." Only to backtrack on it all all later when no doubt he realized he had got his rhetoric all arse about. For example, the Brethren may split some families, but that's absolutely nothing in comparison to the destructive effects that our own Aussie 'cult'-ure has had on the family. That is the number of EB families that actually stay together is far greater as ratio than is just about any (I'm guessing) in the western world.

And they really are a culture, more than they are simply a 'cult', or just an organization. 

Quote:


They have just as much right to lobby politicians as does any other group or individual. And by lobbying they are in effect still staying as detached from politics as is possible without making too many concessions to those who want to impose 'alternate' moral values on society. 

Quote:


You bet. They're emerging as a cultural group that needs to be examined closely as an example of an improvement on our presently decaying society. 

Try 'watching' some of them yourself, the first thing you'll notice is that they are generally more physically attractive than are the typical Aussies. I'd noticed this about ten years back when I didn't know any thing at all about them, but I was of course looking at the 'sisteren' (their womenfolk).

Schu wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 12:32pm:


Our society is presently dictating plenty of things to us. For example who has had the opportunity to vote against (or for) gay rights? (the argument being that it would be appropriate for a government to cater to those that are different, but should we the people be made to pander to them just because they are different?)

Quote:


If you are so anti-Brethren wouldn't it be easier for you to buy the island and move to it.

The Brethren are well within their rights to express a bias by doing their best to remain as separate as is possible from the rest of society. So it's people like you that should follow that example and isolate yourselves rather than attack them for their values. It's the 'Aussies' that are on the attack here in this country, not the Brethren.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 16^th, 2014 at 11:51am:


Gays aren't human?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 12:57pm:


Cults usually have cult leaders, charismatic psychopath types. If Bruce Hales were one of these he'd be a lot better known, but he's not. It's the left that are trying to label the EB as being a cult, and Aussies in general want to see them lopped down for being tall poppies/successful types. 

The Aussie: " If my kids are always in trouble with the law, then why shouldn't theirs be too" kind of thing.

Quote:


That's right it's not a political movement. But that not saying it's not entitled to a political influence. Some people misunderstand what secular government exactly means. And it's not that religion can't have its influence, but is provided that religion is itself not 'legislated' in any way. Otherwise the theists have the same democratic rights as everyone else. Liberalism is taking  advantage of this freedom 'from' religion aspect to try and deny the democratic rights of believers.

fezz wrote on Apr 15^th, 2014 at 4:50pm:


Sounds a lot like the chinese.