|
Islam Illegal Under Australian Law?
Islam was an illegal religion because the Koran preached violence against Christians and Jews, a Christian group told a judge yesterday.Back in the 60s, there was a commotion in the Commonwealth when Zambian president Julius Nyerere banned the Jehovahâs Witnesses as a "public nuisance." Imagine the uproar, not excluding that from car bombs and Michael Mooreâs mouth, if the Oz courts actually bought this argument and moved to ban the RoP. I mention Moore because he is practically a living god to Oz lefties, enjoying about the same status among the down-under Pinko element that the late Hirohito possessed in pre-war Japan. The groupâs barrister, David Perkins, said that Christianity was established under Australiaâs constitution and had special protection, especially through the blasphemy law. Mr Perkins told the Victorian and Civil Administrative Tribunal that if the stateâs new religious hatred law intended to fetter the teaching of Christian doctrine it was invalid. Victoriaâs Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 referred to lawful religion, and it was in that sense, he said, that by preaching violence Islam was disqualified. This act is then used to silence Christians who fail to adhere to the politico-cultural orthodoxy. As usual, Orwell saw it coming. "The Koran contradicts Christian doctrine in a number of places and, under the blasphemy law, is therefore illegal," he said. In the first case under the act, the Islamic Council of Victoria has complained that Catch the Fire Ministries, Pastor Danny Nalliah and speaker Daniel Scot, also a pastor, vilified Muslims at a seminar in March 2002. Opening the defence yesterday, Mr Perkins said Christianity was embedded in the constitution. He said the law still entitled Christian religious principles to a special place. He said the reference in the constitution to the people "humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God" referred to Christianity and was inserted at the request of Christians. He said Australiaâs blasphemy law - still in force, if little used - took precedence over the state act, and the Victorian Parliament could not legislate away protection given by the blasphemy law. The law of self-preservation should also come into play at some point but it is not thus far codified. OTOH, if the blasphemy law were enforced, the denizens of Melbourneâs pubs and nightclubs would be rounded up and imprisoned en masse. Mr Perkins cited the Choudhury case in England, involving Salman Rushdieâs book The Satanic Verses, which held that the blasphemy law protected only Christianity, not Islam. An excellent precedent Judge Michael Higgins asked if Mr Perkins meant that the Victorian law did not protect Muslims? Mr Perkins replied: "Yes." Judge Higgins: "So it might protect Christians but not Muslims from vilification?"Judge Higgins said a no-case submission claiming the seminar was exempt as a religious activity would fail "at this time", so Mr Perkins withdrew the application. The judge said it was "strongly open" that the seminar breached the act. He based this on listening to the tape of the seminar, evidence of the effect it had on the complainants, expert evidence about Pastor Scotâs references to the Koran, and that the seminar was not limited to academic study of what the Koran says about jihad. He said the seminar described the attitudes of a small group of fundamentalist Muslims who "lack association with those Muslim people who live and work peacefully in this community".
Catch the Fire Ministries is not exactly a poster-child for secular modernism itself, since they claim among other things that Catholicism is not really Christianity (though they donât claim it is illegal), but their defense does raise some interesting questions about the status of Islam in countries that do in fact have an established Christian church. Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2004-02-23 |
|
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=26744 |