Australian High Court rules against public school chaplains

[Skepsis]

Democracy protecting the rights of the minorities as a defining feature? LOL no. Democracy is all about majority rule....Democratic Socialism (almost said socialism, but that would bring up the Fascists as well) protects the minorities.

I don't know about Australia, but in America the constitution revolves around majority rule and protecting the rights of the minority.
These are distinguishing and primary features that have allowed America to survive for so long.
We aren't a country of objectivist, Lassez-faire capitalists, ut we aren't socialistic either.
Regardless, we aren't talking about the fiscal protection of minorities, but rather the rights of minorities.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Democracy protecting the rights of the minorities as a defining feature?

Sadly, not under the American system,which empathises individual rights, and leans towards fuck-you-Jack-I'm-Ok libertarianism. Australian democracy emphasises equality and social justice.

In this instance I was commenting on Australian democracy, not what passes for democracy in the US.

[Skepsis]

Democracy protecting the rights of the minorities as a defining feature?

Sadly, not under the American system,which empathises individual rights, and leans towards fuck-you-Jack-I'm-Ok libertarianism. Australian democracy emphasises equality and social justice.

In this instance I was commenting on Australian democracy, not what passes for democracy in the US.

Now, now. Just because the system itself is failing in almost every way possible doesn't mean that there aren't positive forces trying to counteract this. The ACLU is just one organization here that works towards upholding constitutional rights and rights for minorities.

[KnockEmOuttt]

Sadly, not under the American system,which empathises individual rights, and leans towards fuck-you-Jack-I'm-Ok libertarianism. Australian democracy emphasises equality and social justice.

In this instance I was commenting on Australian democracy, not what passes for democracy in the US.

Now, now. Just because the system itself is failing in almost every way possible doesn't mean that there aren't positive forces trying to counteract this. The ACLU is just one organization here that works towards upholding constitutional rights and rights for minorities.

The ACLU upholds as many rights for minorities as they do for religious institutions and hate speech, however.

[Skepsis]

The ACLU upholds as many rights for minorities as they do for religious institutions and hate speech, however.

Religious insitutions and people whose only purpose is to rant about this and that have the same right to say as they wish as I do.
If I am to have the right to say that religion is the worst thing to ever happen to humankind bar smallpox. Hate to say it, but organizations like the Westboro Church have the right to spew their hatred all day long as long as they don't cross the line into violence.
My point was that we have positive forces working towards the adherence to our founding documents, and I don't think the fact that the ACLU protects all free speech is a detriment to my intention.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

This country needs a bill of rights like that of the United States with same strict separation between church and state clause.

Agreed, as long as the people enforcing it have some balls.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

It's a wonder that they even banned the leading of prayers

Because of a legal challenge against what was an unconstitutional practice. There was one person above all responsible for that challenge; Madayln Murray O'Hare, a militant atheist.

Madalyn Murray O'Hair (April 13, 1919 – September 29, 1995) was an American atheist activist. She was the founder of the organization American Atheists and served as its president from 1963 to 1986. One of her sons, Jon Garth Murray, was the president of the organization from 1986 to 1995, while she remained de facto president during these nine years. She is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling ending official Bible-reading in American public schools in 1963. Officially-sponsored prayer in schools had been ended a year earlier by the Supreme Court in Engel v. Vitale. O'Hair later founded American Atheists and became so controversial that in 1964 Life magazine referred to her as "the most hated woman in America."[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_O%27Hare

[KnockEmOuttt]

The ACLU upholds as many rights for minorities as they do for religious institutions and hate speech, however.

Religious insitutions and people whose only purpose is to rant about this and that have the same right to say as they wish as I do.
If I am to have the right to say that religion is the worst thing to ever happen to humankind bar smallpox. Hate to say it, but organizations like the Westboro Church have the right to spew their hatred all day long as long as they don't cross the line into violence.
My point was that we have positive forces working towards the adherence to our founding documents, and I don't think the fact that the ACLU protects all free speech is a detriment to my intention.

Perhaps. That aside, the U.S. is still very lax on allowing religious doctrine to be inserted into non-religious affairs. You wouldn't see what happened in Australia happen here...at least not in the next few decades.

[Justtristo]

Religious insitutions and people whose only purpose is to rant about this and that have the same right to say as they wish as I do.
If I am to have the right to say that religion is the worst thing to ever happen to humankind bar smallpox. Hate to say it, but organizations like the Westboro Church have the right to spew their hatred all day long as long as they don't cross the line into violence.
My point was that we have positive forces working towards the adherence to our founding documents, and I don't think the fact that the ACLU protects all free speech is a detriment to my intention.

Perhaps. That aside, the U.S. is still very lax on allowing religious doctrine to be inserted into non-religious affairs. You wouldn't see what happened in Australia happen here...at least not in the next few decades.

Australia is a much less religiously observant country than America. To give an example a Christian organisation (Olive Tree Media) in their Australian Communities survey reported that 50% (18% of that were spiritual but did not identify with a religion) of Australians did not identify with a religion, compared to less than 20% in the United States. In contrast Evangelical Christians are around perhaps 5% of the population.

http://www.olivetreemedia.com.au/resourc...ry-web.pdf

[KnockEmOuttt]

Perhaps. That aside, the U.S. is still very lax on allowing religious doctrine to be inserted into non-religious affairs. You wouldn't see what happened in Australia happen here...at least not in the next few decades.

Australia is a much less religiously observant country than America. To give an example a Christian organisation (Olive Tree Media) in their Australian Communities survey reported that 50% (18% of that were spiritual but did not identify with a religion) of Australians did not identify with a religion, compared to less than 20% in the United States. In contrast Evangelical Christians are around perhaps 5% of the population.

http://www.olivetreemedia.com.au/resourc...ry-web.pdf

Well of course. Land of the free, home of the brave, and dumping ground for Europe's puritans. Besides that, the christians here are far more militant about it. It's like this constant battle to keep America christian.

[Skepsis]

Religious insitutions and people whose only purpose is to rant about this and that have the same right to say as they wish as I do.
If I am to have the right to say that religion is the worst thing to ever happen to humankind bar smallpox. Hate to say it, but organizations like the Westboro Church have the right to spew their hatred all day long as long as they don't cross the line into violence.
My point was that we have positive forces working towards the adherence to our founding documents, and I don't think the fact that the ACLU protects all free speech is a detriment to my intention.

Perhaps. That aside, the U.S. is still very lax on allowing religious doctrine to be inserted into non-religious affairs. You wouldn't see what happened in Australia happen here...at least not in the next few decades.

Completely and undeniably correct.
The ACLU wouldn't allow religion to put its nose where it doesn't belong; the reason we see the right wing rage so hard on the ACLU is due to precisely that.
Religion has no place in the public sphere at all.