Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Australia  > Are you a racist ?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Tah,
Joined: 11/18/2008
Msg: 71
Are you a racist ? Page 4 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)
Iran is under sanctions by pro isreali countries, sanctions that are creating refugee's....Also iran is under attack by american supported insurgency groups that carry out shit people flee from....

Still ironic Afghans go there and understanable why iran wouldn't be critisised .



Neither do many to most boat people


You would be labelled paranoid if you can't back this up, can you back it up?
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 72
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/5/2012 3:34:04 AM
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/lost-at-sea-37-of-3237-boatpeople-had-passports/story-fn9hm1gu-1226256747251
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 73
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/10/2012 6:23:32 PM
Even though I wanted to respond to some of the comments posted by TieMeUp about boat people, in advance I will say that I am aware of the futility of discussing some of these issues with anyone of that particular staunch and absolute mindset. But, my reason for wanting to respond is moreso to put some additional information out there for others who, like me, are still forming their opinions and are trying to do so based on facts and broader information than is ever offered in oversimplified catchcries and angry accusations.


Many of these illegals have most probably never heard a shot fired in anger.

In comparison to those kinds of sweeping generalisations, according to the Edmund Rice Centre, 84% of asylum seekers are determined to be valid refugees coming from places where there is strife and persecution. Some of them have been waiting a while for help and are escaping this sort of thing >>> “According to the Afghanistan NGO Security Office, a non-profit organisation that advises nongovernmental organisations on safety conditions in Afghanistan, in 2010 there were more than 12,000 attacks by armed opposition groups throughout Afghanistan. That is roughly 33 attacks every single day of the year. In comparison, in 2009 there were about 12 attacks every day and fewer in 2008. These attacks include ambushes, abductions, suicide bombings, and rocket attacks; all of which kill and injure thousands of innocent Afghans every year.” (http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/44374.html)

In 2012 this has reduced and yet it’s far from peaceful and safe. Some random examples >> In February, 9 were killed in an airport when a bomb went off…in March 16 civilians were murdered… in May there was an hour long gunbattle during which two attackers were fatally shot and the remaining four detonated vests rigged with explosives killing 2 civilians and several police officers (they’d been on their way to blow up a local government office)…in recent weeks there was a suicide attack outside Kandahar university and seven people died. There’s plenty plenty more where that came from. ANSO’s map representing levels of attacks across provinces still shows a lot of bad stuff going on. And “the Taliban launch a fresh offensive every spring as snows melt and the weather warms across Afghanistan, making both travel and fighting easier. It normally leads to a surge of militant attacks as they attempt to retake lost territory and intimidate the government.” And Afghanistan has been in the midst of wars for decades, been in drought for years, and has one of the highest rates of infant mortality and one of the lowest average lifespans. It must have been a glossy tourist brochure I was reading cos it sounds a veritable paradise doesn’t it!


That's why they choose to come the illegal way as a loophole to destroy evidence of who they are and where they really came from. That way, they can lie through their teeth. If they had nothing to hide, they wouldn't be doing this.


First point to share… “In Iraq and Afghanistan, there are no queues for people to jump. Australia has no diplomatic representation in these countries and supports the International coalition of nations who continue to oppose these regimes and support sanctions against them. Therefore, there is no standard refugee process where people wait in line to have their applications considered.” (Source: Edmund Rice Centre)

Second point…some automatically assume that no documentation means they all wish to hide where they really came from. This is repeatedly claimed despite the fact that 84% of all asylum seekers are found to be legitimate refugees. So if 84% are genuine, why do these people have no documentation? Valid question. They have no genuine documentation for varying reasons; because they fled without it, because the government they were escaping wasn’t exactly keen to help them out with documents to help them escape, or because it would be dangerously stupid to travel under their real identity in the countries where their identity would get them persecuted/killed or deported back to be tortured/killed. Ginger has already pointed that out. So ok, how did they get to Indonesia? Also a valid question, but the answer is so obvious. They can relatively easily get a fake passport. This is what they use to use to get to Indonesia. And if they had say, a fake passport of Saudi Arabia (or one of 51 other possible countries) then Indonesian policy allows them to apply for a visa on arrival. Or if they had a fake passport from certain other countries (11 possibilities in total) they wouldn’t need a visa at all. So, if we want, we can all certainly feel smugly judgemental towards these people for being likely to have bought a fake passport to get to Indonesia. Disgusting isn’t it…the things some people will do to escape persecution/torture/death. Anyway, once they get to us, they can revert to their real identity as refugees…meaning destroying the fake passports…not the real ones that they never had in the first place. That’s a decidedly different explanation, and one I think we need to consider.

It would mean it’s not Australia these people are lying to…it was the risky and non-refugee-accepting countries they had to pass through to get here. If they actually had their real documents they would stand to gain nothing by destroying them, as those who accuse them so often point out. So yep, they did dodgy stuff with a fake passport…naughty…but did it for the sake of survival. Their true position is likely to be that of having no genuine passport. But this still doesn’t make them illegals, because nothing in international law requires someone claiming refugee status to have documents. It’s not illegal for a refugee to not have a passport simply because of the impossibilities involved in getting/having a genuine passport from their country of origin which I’ve already mentioned. And apparently we do manage to weed out the far smaller percentage who are not genuine, so it would be a bit harsh to just automatically reject everyone with no documents given the high percentage who are.

Third point… some keep asking why they don’t just stay in Indonesia, or a country they reached sooner than Australia. If refugees make it to Indonesia they cannot apply to stay in Indonesia because Indonesia is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention. Australia, however, did sign up. In that region only Cambodia, the Philippines and Timor-Leste are also signed up, but their refugee frameworks are in varying states of development. We’re affluent and politically stable, so are in a good position to offer refuge. But we take in very low numbers of refugees compared to other countries…places like Germany, and even Kenya, take in massively more than we do. The disparity is huge. And yet you see people claiming that we’re so unusually generous compared to everyone else that we’re at risk of being labeled a soft touch? Hilarious. Those “we’re full” stickers are a bit of a joke…we’re contributing very little to the international effort to provide refuge. It should also be noted that whilst our political and economic situation appeals to those fleeing conflict and who make it to Indonesia, very low numbers actually head our way. We’re not quite the penultimate destination we think we are. We’re just one port in a storm for those who have the will and means to try this path.

Fourth point…if refugees make it to Indonesia, there are a grand total of two (yes, two) staff there who are processing refugee claims for Australia and there are about 8000 people waiting for claims to be processed. This equates to a long queue, and a long wait. Long queues are always pressure cookers especially if the queue doesn’t seem to be moving. It creates competing interests, and the humans are always tempted to want to find a quicker way. Can you imagine 2 people serving 8000 people. Not even the Department of Transport can claim to be that slow. Now hands up amongst us who would not, when stressed and afraid and desperate and long-delayed, be potentially be tempted to jump some kind of queue to get quicker relief for ourselves or our family. Waiting at the hospital in pain, stacks of people waiting, if an opportunity to get seen quicker presented itself would you say in your best saints voice, no, I’ll wait my turn because all these other people came before me and I don’t want to wreck the orderly system you have here…? If busting for the loo, and someone told you there was another toilet nearby nobody knew about…would you tell aaaaall the people in front of you in the queue to be sure that you didn’t go ahead of anyone else, or would you make a run for it? Traffic jam …you see people lane jumping, cutting people off, driving over traffic islands…you name it, people do it to get up in the queue. When a new checkout opens in a really backlogged supermarket…stampede! I reckon it’s just typical human behaviour, and the higher the stakes, and the more competing interests, the more tempted people will be towards queue jumping. So I don’t think we should kid ourselves that refugees who hit the boats are doing something we ourselves would never do in their position with those stakes and those competing interests. And really, how hard would it be for us to put more staff on to process the claims and relieve a lot of that pressure that causes some of them to jump on leaky boats.

You can check out an example of what Afghan refugees do to get here, here:
http://www.abc.net.au/innovation/seekingasylum/

It always strikes me as a little ironic that the people who are most loudly outraged by this terrible self-serving queue-jumping behaviour seem to have a rather selfish agenda themselves …that of not wanting to share because there will be less for those of us already here. And hey, I admit that’s pretty typical human behaviour too, and it’s not entirely unjustified if you look at the bigger/future picture …but Australians who rant and carry on (about what terrible people these people must be for queue-jumping) are hardly somehow adopting the more righteous position. We’re not battling to survive and yet our behaviour, comparatively with other countries, shows us to be far less willing to share than people who have far less to share than we do.

Besides…earlier in this thread, wasn’t preservation of our supposed devoted christianity being held up as a lofty goal? And doesn’t it say in Leviticus that foreigners should be welcomed and treated as our own? ‘Course it also hates on gay people, but hey, it’s not my bible.


and start giving them more benefits than what legit aussie citizens get

Not true. The Asylum Seeker Assistance (ASA) Scheme helps some eligible asylum seekers who are in the process of having their refugee status determined. What they get is less than Centrelink benefits. If they are granted refugee status, they can apply to Centrelink and will receive the same rate as non-refugees…same as Newstart allowance, which is $90/wk less than the aged pension Or, single mothers get the same rate as non-refugee single mothers. There are no separate Centrelink allowances they can receive simply by virtue of being a refugee. So quite simply, they don’t get more than Australian citizens as is so often claimed.


It's funny how they can afford all this money to come on a dangerous leaky boat when they could be paying far less on the comfort of an plane

People will scorn them for not being dirt poor and stoney broke, and yet in their next breath will claim they are ‘economic refugees’, not escaping risk of torture/death at all but merely seeking to move because they are sick of being poor. That’s a contradiction for a start. From what I can find out, many refugees who come this way are middle class, well educated, etc…which is what made them a target for persecution at home in the first place. They are not claiming refugee status because they are poor, but because they are scared. So yes, they can afford the $10,000 it costs to get on a boat, and no they are not coming here for economic reasons or to live forever off our Centrelink payments.


The UNHCR doesn't heap criticism on Iran for deporting 900,000 Afghans last year, even giving them $150 each to leave, but expects Australia to take them all in.

They have been massively criticised for it actually. But even so, Iran has been taking Afghan refugees for decades and hosted about 2.5 million refugees with almost no international assistance. Good effort I’d say. Pakistan took in about a million or so. In contrast Australia currently accepts a total of 13,750 refugees per year (which is only 7% of our total immigration every year). So now that Iran can’t keep so many due to having their own problems, we could be jerks about it, or we could decide to pick up the slack and help out those whose country has been really messed up, most recently by a war we’re involved in. They’re being sent back to a war-ravaged country where violence is still more the norm… and they aren’t keen about it? Funny that.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 74
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/10/2012 10:31:31 PM
In response to MsNamaah,

I think a lot of issues that Australians have with the immigration issue is the reasonable perception of inequity. For example: Mary was born in Australia, and has worked hard all her life and paid her taxes. When she gets old, she receives the old age pension from the Australian tax payer. Fatima comes from a leaky boat, as her children didn’t want to leave her behind. She is too old to work, so she receives an old age pension from the Australia tax payer. She has never worked a day in her life in Australia, never paid a cent of tax, and she never will. The Australian public notice this, say so, and are automatically branded racist and intolerant.

An Aussie single mum gets paid single mothers pension. Her children were born in Australia. Fatima jnr. who came off the boat also gets single mother’s pension, at the same rate. Her parents, grandparents etc have never worked a day for Australia, and never paid a cent of taxes. The Australian public notice this, and speak out. Because Fatima jnr. isn’t white, the Aussies are automatically branded racist and intolerant.

My dentist told me the hell he went through to migrate from South Africa to Australia. He had money, a medical degree, and perfect documentation. My dentist is white...so he waited for years. If he was a black African with no education, no money, and no passport, he would be here in no time at all by hopping on a leaky boat.

Are you people starting to see the picture?

We are constantly being bombarded by the media and the politicians and self interest groups with the message that “White” is bad, and “Black” is good. If a white person speaks out on anything to do with a non-white, we are all collectively obligated to label him/her a racist. But by not crying out the word “racist” immediately and really loudly, you are yourself assumed to be a racist through your non-compliance with the PC manual. Yes it is like a witch hunt. Burned to death if you are...drowned to death if you say you’re not. Take your choice.

So if you think I’m wrong about this, then just review the abolition of the “White Australia Policy.”

You see, taking in white people is bad...really BAD.
 Blalah
Joined: 3/25/2012
Msg: 75
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/10/2012 10:39:41 PM
Just don't ever criticize a black president or even disagree with one single policy of his if you ever elect one because then you will be labeled a racist forevermore.
 robertaus
Joined: 1/26/2010
Msg: 76
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/11/2012 12:25:16 AM
The issue about Asylum Seekers/Refugees is complex due to the many International laws that Australia is privy to.
However i can shed some light on the costs involved:
1/ $2.5billion has been budgeted by the Govt. for the next four years to process Asylum Seekers.
2/$44million has been allocated to upgrade Christmas Island.
3/It costs $1.1billion to run our Border Patrol pa.
4/$80 million is allocated pa to Refugee Charities (now doubling to $160 million).

Now no one can argue that Refugees get more on Centrelink than anyone else.However they can apply to the various charities for $5000 per person per household to furnish such house.Four people in house =$20,000.Not a bad lurk really.Not to mention they can also get a motor vehicle and apply for free day care for their children.I could go on and on but i couldn't be bothered.Australia takes 20,000 refugees pa.Why then the enormous cost?.I don't know.The only solution is that Australia withdraws from the 1951 Refugee Convention and redirects resources to the various refugee camps worldwide.At least then we would be certain that we are assisting genuine refugees.
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 77
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/11/2012 10:11:40 PM
Are you people starting to see the picture?

… ‘you people’? Who are these ‘you people’ of which you speak?

I’m not a fan of kneejerk reactions. And if I was going to raise a concern about immigration it wouldn’t be race, religion, easter hats, Centrelink payments, tax, boats, refugee conventions, passports, political correctness and all the other stuff that gets bandied about. That doesn’t mean I have no concerns. I think it’s a really complex issue, with more than one dimension. Anyway… back to what we;re being told are the key problems…


I think a lot of issues that Australians have with the immigration issue is the reasonable perception of inequity. For example: Mary was born in Australia, and has worked hard all her life and paid her taxes. When she gets old, she receives the old age pension from the Australian tax payer. Fatima comes from a leaky boat, as her children didn’t want to leave her behind. She is too old to work, so she receives an old age pension from the Australia tax payer. She has never worked a day in her life in Australia, never paid a cent of tax, and she never will. The Australian public notice this, say so, and are automatically branded racist and intolerant.

I’m a bit puzzled that my post would inspire that ^ as a response.

The first reason is that I was responding to previous comments about refugees, whereas it’s not entirely clear whether you are talking about refugees, or, immigrants who are not refugees? If you are talking about immigrants who are not refugees, then I am not sure why you used that example specifically to respond to my post about refugees. But in terms of what I was saying, if Fatima was a refugee, then it’s no wonder the family didn’t want to leave her behind… she was at risk of being shot/persecuted back at home. Especially once they ran away…and as an elderly woman alone, she’d be most vulnerable I’d imagine. I’d find it hard to harden my heart enough to say that an old woman should be left at the mercy of violent reprisals merely because we can’t hitch her up to the tax wagon when she gets here.

And the second reason I’m puzzled by your chosen response to what I wrote was regarding your emphatic concerns about Australians being branded racist and intolerant. Given the complete absence in my post of any accusations whatsoever of racism or intolerance, and given that you’ve used two examples and made it the dominant part of your response, it comes across as needlessly defensive. In my post I was outlining the experiences and actions of human beings in trouble, and in response one of your key concerns seems to be that Australians don’t want to be called racist ?? Unless you’re meaning to suggest that Australians find the thought of being misjudged to be of greater concern than the thought of other humans being persecuted and killed? It just seems to be a bit of a distraction to the real issues.

Actually the most frequent use of the word ‘racist’ that I see, is in context of people who don’t want refugees here but wish to make it clear that they aren’t racist and are “sick of being called racist”. This happens even when nobody actually is calling them racist. They are about the only people I hear talking about it being a racist issue. I’m pretty sure everyone else is just talking in terms of humans from other places who are in trouble. Where does race factor into that? Besides, if someone does call someone a racist…and if that person knows they are not a racist…then why would they even care about being called one …let alone it causing them to go into princess mode whereby more fuss is made about that than about the issue of people seeking refuge from war and strife? Sure, I don’t like being called a racist over things I don’t think warrant it, but in the scheme of things…it’s not the big issue is it? If being called a racist is the worst thing that happens to you in this life, you’re doing alright. I just think incessant claims about not being a racist tend to clutter the argument and get used as a bit of a smoke screen… so that we don’t have to focus on tougher questions and matters more worthy of consideration.

Having said that though…seeing as you have made it a dominant point in your post… if it was Polly from England, or Charlotte from NZ (neither of whom are at risk of being shot back at home) does it not cause the same level of concern? Because refugees make up 7% of total immigration (even counting the ones who bring their old folk), which means there’s a bigger mob (the other 93%) of people who are moving here like Polly and Charlotte, who are availing themselves of our healthcare and schools and roads after contributing nothing to their creation. Does that cause the same level of anger and outrage? And if so, why are we not hearing it? Why are boat people and refugees copping the brunt?

Setting aside all the race stuff, I can understand the concept of feeling resentful about having endlessly contributed to something from which only others receive benefit. You are talking to a lifetime payer of significant amounts of tax, who has no children and has never been on Centrelink payments, is eligible for nothing in the way of assistance, and usually misses out on any sort of special handout the government happens to be giving out to everyone else. Believe me, I understand the sensation more than most. Poor me. But ultimately I guess what it boils down to is a person’s sense of charity. Christian charity, if that is more your language. And let’s face it, compared to refugees, we’re doing alright. There’s food on the table and we can sleep safely at night. At this point we can certainly afford to not be quite so exclusionary as to resent the elderly Fatima receiving an old age pension in our country rather than being shot in hers.

We are currently in a position to help people here, and people from elsewhere. If we don’t, it’s a choice. And if we choose not to then I think we should have the balls to admit why, and not try to come up with reasons why it’s the refugees’ fault.


Burned to death if you are...drowned to death if you say you’re not.

Sounds awful. But like I said, I didn’t so much as suggest racism, let alone ask. Apparently you felt there was a need to defend against it for reasons only known to yourself.


So if you think I’m wrong about this, then just review the abolition of the “White Australia Policy.”
Do you really think abolishing a policy that favoured white over black is somehow evidence that black is favoured over white? The legislation contained in the 1901 Immigration Restriction Act favoured white immigrants. The phasing out of it resulted in race ceasing to be a relevant factor in deciding on who was let in. Looking at everything you wrote, you seem to be implying that it was replaced by the Black Australia Policy. Please share details of the legislation you believe demonstrates that favour is shown to a particular race. And please let the white Brits and Kiwis know, as they still make up the largest portion of our immigrants.


We are constantly being bombarded by the media and the politicians and self interest groups with the message that “White” is bad, and “Black” is good.

Are we? My propaganda filters must be functioning well then.


However they can apply to the various charities for $5000 per person per household to furnish such house.Four people in house =$20,000.Not a bad lurk really.
I couldn’t find specific mention of that. But in all I read, any assistance on offer from charities is means tested and eligibility criteria apply. You’ve got to really really need help before you will get help. And there are quite a few limitations imposed that make life very challenging for them. I suspect there are easier lurks. :)


However i can shed some light on the costs involved:
1/ $2.5billion has been budgeted by the Govt. for the next four years to process Asylum Seekers.
2/$44million has been allocated to upgrade Christmas Island.
3/It costs $1.1billion to run our Border Patrol pa.
4/$80 million is allocated pa to Refugee Charities (now doubling to $160 million).

2.5 billion to process asylum seekers and they have 2 staff in Indonesia? Wow, those two people must get paid well.

But can I ask your source? It’s just that I’ve seen different figures for 2012 according to the Refugee Council:
Refugee and migrant settlement services $329.6 million (an increase of 5.3%)
Immigration detention costs, over $800 million (a tripling of costs in just two years)
Offshore asylum seeker management program $1.058 billion (an increase of 39%)
Redcross (for refugees) $10.6 million
Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme for onshore
asylum applicants $3.16 million

But both sets of figures reflect that the far the greater expenditure seem to be on keeping them out/processing them/putting them in detention …rather than any assistance given. Would it perhaps be cheaper for us to be less detention centre minded about it? Or at least less offshore? Apparently it costs 8 times as much to detain a person at Christmas Island as it does to detain them at Sydney’s Villawood detention centre. And not only that, but offshore applicants receive benefits for longer than those processed onshore.

The figures I saw do concur on the 1.1billion for border security you quoted. That’s a lot of money to stop boats carrying 4500 people in. (based on boats in 2011) But I guess…what happens if we scrap border security, is the other consideration.


Australia takes 20,000 refugees pa.Why then the enormous cost?
The intake has been 13,750 per year not 20,000. But it’s being increased to 14,750 for the coming year. But yeah it does seem an enormous cost. How on earth do far poorer countries manage to take in so many more than we do and survive? Are we just really bad at budgeting? And why are we so slow to sort it? Especially with that kind of budget. Other countries don’t seem to take anywhere near as long to process far more claims. There are people who are here on asylum seeker status and they aren’t allowed to work and they can’t receive medical assistance and in some states aren’t eligible for public housing, and they can only get financial assistance after 6 months (if they have less than $5000 of their own money left, if not they wait longer), which is then less than the newstart allowance….and some of them stay that way for years. As a result, whatever money they had when they got here is inevitably chewed up, so by the time we’ve finished with them, they are broke. I think there are a lot of relevant questions and poorly addressed concerns about our manner of doing things. It’s possible we’re making this worse than it needs to be, for everyone.

Btw we do donate. We just don’t rate highly as a welcoming country. We seem happier to give money than refuge.


The only solution is that Australia withdraws from the 1951 Refugee Convention and redirects resources to the various refugee camps worldwide.At least then we would be certain that we are assisting genuine refugees.
We could withdraw from the Convention, and perhaps if we simply don’t want refugees here then withdrawing might be more honest of us. Because it’s a bit hypocritical…a bit of a façade… if we sign up to something to look good, and then do nothing but look for creative and massively expensive loopholes to get us out of the obligations we signed up to. However I am unclear on how you think this would subsequently ensure greater assistance for genuine refugees?
 Sheridesmotox
Joined: 5/4/2012
Msg: 78
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/13/2012 1:19:47 AM
Christmas isn't only about religion... For those who don't believe in Jesus, it's also a time of year we celebrate family, giving, and good food. It's something for children to look forward to... Santa is not a religious figure. Christmas does promote consumerism these days but thats something else.

Easter - Same thing goes.

I don't see why these things should be banned from schools, or at least why the practise should be stopped. It seems that if events are cancelled for religious reasons, then it should stem across all religions. What kind of uproar would there be if we banned burkas because they are religiously offensive to non muslims? I feel that if one is to be banned, religion should be removed from schools altogether. You have schools specific to religion if you wish to openly practise. It's not racism, it's equal rights.

I personally don't agree with the amount of refugees being taken in. Processing costs me money... and i don't get nearly enough back at tax time. I don't disagree with immigration, but i feel people should come here with something to offer, if you don't have a particular skill you should at least be required to work within a year in a part time or full time job or be sent home.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 79
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/16/2012 11:23:31 PM
1. Aunty Maureen Watson was a storyteller, poet, singer, actor and political activist, highly regarded for her stories which told of Aboriginal culture ...

Black is
my mother’s loving arms
Black is
my father’s hair,
Black is
the deepest shades of night that
soften the day’s harsh glare,
Black is
the babe against my breast,
Black is
the wild swans wing,
Black is
my love and my loved ones,
Black is
the colour of my skin,
Black is
my culture and my people,
Black is
the colour of my spirit

A lovely and simple poem telling how Maureen loved her race and culture and skin colour. Now try this experiment. Substitute the word “white” for every occurrence of the word “black.” The poem now takes on a sinister feel doesn’t it? It now sounds like something you would expect to read in a White Supremacy blog.

That I feel gives us all something to think about.
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 80
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/17/2012 7:08:30 PM

religion should be removed from schools altogether

That’s what I think. But christian worship gets taught incidentally even when you think you’re choosing a secular education for your kids. Friend of mine had her kids come home from a state school asking “Mum…have you heard of this baby called Jesus?” Before her kids went to school they still had christmas, as a seasonal family event without the religion. She sent her kids to school to learn how to think, not how to worship. And yet, against the advice of the science community, it’s actually climate science the LNP are beating drums about having totally removed from the Qld curriculum, rather than belief in invisible magic men getting virgins pregnant which is apparently fine.


Substitute the word “white” for every occurrence of the word “black.” The poem now takes on a sinister feel doesn’t it? It now sounds like something you would expect to read in a White Supremacy blog.

I see nothing supremacist in that no matter what colour you use. Supremacist statements are more along the lines of “my skin colour makes me a better human than anyone of a different skin colour” and/or “there is no place here for any skin colour other than my own”. Being comfortable in your own skin is a far cry from claiming supremacy or attempting to denigrate, exclude, or eliminate others who have different skin. The quoted verse strikes me as someone affirming that they are ok, but not putting anyone else down in order to do so. Is a song about a fondness for brown-eyed girls somehow belittling for blue-eyed girls? Is a poem that celebrates men automatically an insult to women? Unless put-downs about another grouping are contained in the words, I’d say not. Maybe it depends if you perceive other people’s self-esteem as a threat to your own.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 81
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/17/2012 10:26:46 PM
^^^^^^ Oh really ?

Here's a little challenge for you. Name one poem that celebrates being white....outside of "Mein Kampf."

Okay...are you starting to get it now ?
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 82
view profile
History
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/17/2012 11:09:40 PM

Now try this experiment. Substitute the word “white” for every occurrence of the word “black.” The poem now takes on a sinister feel doesn’t it? It now sounds like something you would expect to read in a White Supremacy blog.

That I feel gives us all something to think about.

Literary 'voice' you mean? Like, when you change it arbitrarily, it either doesn't make sense or takes on a different meaning unintended by the original author?

You could substitute the spectrum in order and it would take on a new-age technicolour feel.


Okay...are you starting to get it now ?

No.
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 83
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/17/2012 11:35:36 PM
Here's a little challenge for you. Name one poem that celebrates being white....

I'm not into poetry at all so I would inevitably fail any little challenge to name a specific poem about any topic, even ducks. However from times when I have had poetry forced upon me I can recall endless poetic references to alabaster skin, ivory skin, fair skin, pale skin, skin like pearls, golden hair, light eyes, blue eyes, eyes like crystals, comparison to angels (who are always white) and so on. Fair complexions are described as 'classic beauty'. I can't google for poetry because it will make me nauseous. Plus, it's your obsessive topic, not mine.


Okay...are you starting to get it now ?

I'm not entirely sure I want to get it. It looks quite painful to live with and there doesn't seem to be a cure.

Edit:

doesn't make sense

Tell me about it. And how wonderful to see you around these parts.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 84
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/17/2012 11:45:08 PM
MrsNaamah wrote:


..it’s actually climate science the LNP are beating drums about having totally removed from the Qld curriculum, rather than belief in invisible magic men getting virgins pregnant which is apparently fine


Some very interesting points here. Firstly, God made Mary pregnant, and you refer to men making virgins pregnant. I was wondering why you have assumed that God was a man...or in this case...."men" that all gods are male. Secondly, you are defending the aboriginal poet Maureen because she has expressed love for her culture without putting anyone else’s culture down or deriding it in any way...yet your sarcasm derides the belief in Jesus, which is culturally based. Did you not pick up on that while you were typing, or was it intentional?

Thirdly, religion is not a compulsory subject at school. Those children whose parents want them "to learn how to think and not how to worship" as you so eloquently put it, are free not to participate in RE. They can go on the computers in another room or do silent reading or drawing. Something interesting here too...as these children did not make this choice, it was “pushed” onto them by their parents.

MrsNaamah, no one is pushing their religion on to you or the kids at school, yet you seem to think its okay to push your atheism onto others, starting with banning religion at school. I do not recall any election giving people like you a mandate to push your value system onto others, while taking away their choice of their value system...in this case their religion.

Psuedo-philosphers who say there is no evidence for religion seriously need to see the volumes written some 2000 years ago, as compared to the pseudo-science of climate change. They, the neo-science majors have had their chance to present this evidence, and by having done so, there would be no debate to be had. Evidence generally speaks for itself. Nothing of value has been presented, except an excuse for new taxes.

I understand that Noah didn't build an Ark, and I know that Jesus didn't walk on water, but faith is about understanding messages in parables. It's not, never was, and never will be an absolute science. But then neither is love, yet we spend our whole life cherishing it. Intangible feelings can often have more benefit to us than the objects we can hold or buy or sell or mass produce in a factory or read in a science research paper. Why do you think that university students have to reference every word that they write, to form an 'argument' in their paper. It's because if you put one hundred academics in a room and ask them why kids like candy, you will get one hundred different theoretic answers.

You seem to have donned some God like powers yourself to tell us that religion should be banned. Who gave you the right to take away peoples choices only to replace them by yours?

I’m glad you like the poem by Maureen. Perhaps one day you will be able to fully understand why she had a right to feel that way, without telling others what they should or should not believe in. Aboriginals believe in many different spirits. Okay, so God didn’t make the Virgin Mary pregnant. Well, I’m equally sure that rivers are not the product of dead mythical snakes as found in aboriginal lore. How do you feel about banning those beliefs in public schools too?
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 85
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 12:03:33 AM
expressed love for her culture without putting anyone else’s culture down or deriding it in any way...yet your sarcasm derides the belief in Jesus, which is culturally based.

You are born with the colour skin you have without choice. Your thoughts and beliefs are a choice. I make no apology for holding people accountable for what they think.


you seem to think its okay to push your atheism onto others, starting with banning religion at school.

You seem only to comprehend an absence of teaching religion as replacing that with teaching atheism. Therefore it seems to be you who cannot fathom the concept of not taking away people's choices. I guess...if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 86
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 12:14:23 AM
You seem only to comprehend an absence of teaching religion as replacing that with teaching atheism. Therefore it seems to be you who cannot fathom the concept of not taking away people's choices. I guess...if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.


I guess when you feel like you're a nail....everyone with a valid argument to present looks like a hammer.



plus...it's your obsessive topic, not mine


You have posted more onto this thread than any other forum user. I do value your opinions... even if they are not valid.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 87
view profile
History
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 12:16:54 AM

Psuedo-philosphers who say there is no evidence for religion...


There is evidence for religion. But no evidence for gods.
Which kind of relates to the topic? Because there is evidence that racism exists, but no evidence that 'races' do.

So the common thread I guess is that there's a lot of irrational people around who can't distinguish between a belief, an opinion. and a fact.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 88
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 12:29:03 AM
livingcheat wrote:


Because there is evidence that racism exists, but no evidence that 'races' do.


Tell that to the people who run ABSTUDY and Aboriginal housing....and all the other government agencies that provide specialist services for that one particular "race" of Australians. All these services are based on race.

Just two blocks away from where I live, the government is building a small medical centre for Indiginous Australians.
I don't qualify for medical service there because I am not an aboriginal, but as we are all part of the same "race" as I keep being reminded on here, I feel somewhat discriminated against. Skin colour is not an issue here, some part-aboriginals have got blue eyes, skin lighter than mine and blonde hair, yet are of the "Aboriginal race" and thus can use the free clinic.

I can understand that you people feel all warm and fuzzy inside by being so PC, but for goodness sake, can you at least try to provide a well researched post from time to time. I too would like to believe in fairies, but I don't use that to make irrational posts on here.

PS: We don't stop aborigines, of whatever skin tone, using our hospitals. No such thing as a "White only" hospital as that would be racist. If you truly believe in "one race" ...the human race...start writing letters to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission telling them how racist they are for discriminating. (Not sure if this organisation even exists any longer...but you get my point)
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 89
view profile
History
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 12:47:50 AM

Because there is evidence that racism exists, but no evidence that 'races' do.


Tell that to the people who run ABSTUDY and Aboriginal housing....and all the other government agencies that provide specialist services for that one particular "race" of Australians.

This may come as a surprise, but social programs run by governments aren't considered particularly meaningful in terms of biological taxonomy.


All these services are based on race.

Non sequitur.


Just two blocks away from where I live, the government is building a small medical centre for Indiginous Australians.
I don't qualify for medical service there because I am not an aboriginal, but as we are all part of the same "race" as I keep being reminded on here, I feel somewhat discriminated against.

I suggest you write a book - call it "My Struggle".


I can understand that you people feel all warm and fuzzy inside by being so PC, but for goodness sake, can you at least try to provide a well researched post from time to time. I too would like to believe in fairies, but I don't use that to make irrational posts on here.

The irony award for this page goes to...
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 90
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 1:00:03 AM

I suggest you write a book - call it "My Struggle".


Read it. There is only mention of Jews on three occasions, and this occurs in the one chapter.

...No other racial issues are raised, despite the sheer volume of this piece of work.

I am assuming you haven't read it, otherwise you would not have made such a generalisation about my position on this topic.

By-the-by the Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939, ...
Im not suprised, he was after all Time Magazine's man of the year for 1939
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 91
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 1:07:18 AM

I suggest you write a book - call it "My Struggle".

Or a poem?
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 92
view profile
History
Are you a racist ?
Posted: 7/18/2012 1:13:59 AM

I don't qualify for medical service there because I am not an aboriginal, but as we are all part of the same "race" as I keep being reminded on here, I feel somewhat discriminated against.


I suggest you write a book - call it "My Struggle".


Read it. There is only mention of Jews on three occasions, and this occurs in the one chapter.

...No other racial issues are raised, despite the sheer volume of this piece of work.

I am assuming you haven't read it, otherwise you would not have made such a generalisation about my position on this topic.

I haven't made any generalisations. You're just making stuff up.


By-the-by the Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939, ...
Im not suprised, he was after all Time Magazine's man of the year for 1939

Therefore?
Show ALL Forums  > Australia  > Are you a racist ?