[Discussion on Issues raised by] AJ getting pie in the face

[andyhui01]

I used to respect many of your postings - that view just changed.

You respect someone less because they have a different political/religious opinion?

I have my views on this topic but I don't need to express it in public. I choose not to say anything because as expected, we get people who try to force their beliefs onto someone else or get judged because it is not the common consensus in the social group they are in.

Melbournian1 has been a valuable contributor to the MEL airport delays thread and I am thankful for his work. Are you saying that because of his political/religious beliefs, his aviation related posts are no longer respected?...

My thoughts on AJ. I just saw the Rainbow colored QF livery in BNE and just shook my head. I would never use the company I own or run to put forward my political/religious beliefs. My business is about making profit for my business partner and I. I don't try to upset a sizable portion of customers by changing the livery of a company asset to put forward my opinion or thoughts.

Do that on his own time and money. The board who appointed him to run a profitable business, not lobby for whatever he feels like.

 

[Hvr]

On balance, 'The Church' (by which I assume you mean 'The Catholic Church', since it alone is a bulwark) makes an enormously positive contribution to Australian and worldwide society.

Not just the catholic church, they've been the most reported recently but all churches of all religions.

Once upon a time they may have made a contribution whilst keeping people controlled, now they are just money making corporations who want to control our lives.

 

[Melburnian1]

...Once upon a time they may have made a contribution whilst keeping people controlled, now they are just money making corporations who want to control our lives.

Odious, but also a sad post. Many Catholic religious live simple lives for a small stipend and work extremely long hours. Money is most definitely not a focus!

 

[dajop]

Lefties might think that one could 'move on', but unfortunately allowing homosexuals and lesbians to 'marry' leads to all sorts of other social problems.

Such as children growing up without a mother and a father, even more than is the case at present.

Such offensive comments. An insult to all people growing up without a mother or father due to whatever circumstances, whether they have gay parents, or whether they have a divorced or widowed parent. If this is your take on things, let's ban divorce, and make it compulsory for children who have one parent due to death of the other to be adopted out families so they have a mother and a father once more (unless their remaining parent remarries within 12 months). Same logical conclusion. Let's also ban children out of wedlock whilst we're at it.

I don't know how you draw a conclusion that same sex marriage will make one iota of a difference. Currently many lesbians can easily - very easily - mother children and raise them with their partner, marriage will make no difference to that, but what it can bring is legal parenting of both partners in the relationship. Gay men can with more difficulty, arrange to bring up children. I don't see permitting gay marriage will make it any easier to do so, it's not a simple for gay men to have children, takes resources, effort and a great degree of committment to the process - I can't understand how allowing gay marriage will make that any different to the current status of common law relationships.

And lastly, my partner and I don't have children, but, if something god forbid, should happen to my brother and his wife, then his children will be raised by their two uncles, as they see us fit to raise their children and have appointed us guardians. Do you think the alternative is better - to have them fostered out or adopted by strangers?

I was ambivalent about a plebiscite on the issue, but I can see why it may not be a good idea.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You respect someone less because they have a different political/religious opinion?

But it's not just 'different opinion'... this is not a case of 'the world was created in 7 days' v 'the science says otherwise'. That sort of debate is harmless.

When discussion turns harmful, becomes homophobic, it is no longer just about religion. it is actually about the person and their mindset. There is no excuse for homophobia, just as there is no excuse for child molestation or domestic violence, or any of the other behaviours which are deemed unacceptable. Rolf Harris may have been considered by many to have been a good artist. But I'm not sure you'd get many who agree with that now. He is disgraced, and that reflects on him.

 

[dajop]

But the central question still remains: Is marriage defined as between a man and a woman (as it has for milienia, throughout different cultures and societies).

Or a man and several women in some cultures ....

It is actually illustrative to read about the history of marriage, and it does vary between cultures, and the reasons have varied over time. Even the different concepts or rules around marriage such as arranged marriages, marrying only within the same race, religion, or same social strata (or in India caste). have all evolved over time in different societies. It is far from an institution that has been fixed for millennia.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

You respect someone less because they have a different political/religious opinion?

Absolutely 100% YES that can be the case. Like my view on Pauline Hanson because of her archaic nonsensical political views I have ZERO respect for her. If anybody thinks they can express what they believe to be a Religious view that SS couples / single mothers cannot be fit and proper parents then I have ZERO respect for them also.

 

[andyhui01]

Absolutely 100% YES that can be the case. Like my view on Pauline Hanson because of her archaic nonsensical political views I have ZERO respect for her. If anybody thinks they can express what they believe to be a Religious view that SS couples / single mothers cannot be fit and proper parents then I have ZERO respect for them also.

Would it hurt to look at her other work objectively rather than just write off everything she says? I meant to ask why would Melbournian1's aviation related posts be less respected from your point of view because of what he said about something completely unrelated?

 

[mannej]

On balance, 'The Church' (by which I assume you mean 'The Catholic Church', since it alone is a bulwark) makes an enormously positive contribution to Australian and worldwide society.

Sorry but I tend to question this.

As someone who grew up as a Catholic, the hypocrisy of the church is appalling.

Secondly, the conduct of Pell during the Royal Commission is cowardly.

For all of the good the church may do, there is a lot of negative as well.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Would it hurt to look at her other work objectively rather than just write off everything she says? I meant to ask why would Melbournian1's aviation related posts be less respected from your point of view because of what he said about something completely unrelated?

Well I was only expressing my views - feel free to grant them ZEO respect if you please - plenty here do.

 

[andyhui01]

Well I was only expressing my views - feel free to grant them ZEO respect if you please - plenty here do.

While we disagree here, your post on other parts of the forum (particular the SQ section) remains valued and appreciated. See you on the other threads

 

[Cruiser Elite]

While we disagree here, your post on other parts of the forum (particular the SQ section) remains valued and appreciated. See you on the other threads

My pleasure

 

[Melburnian1]

I used to respect many of your postings - that view just changed.

Sorry that you feel that way, as I still like your contributions on many aviation matters. You have a lot to offer in that regard.

 

[tgh]

quite warm around here…

The victory of Atheism over religious belief must surely be the most significant social change in the past 100 years.

I enjoy reading the differing viewpoints, but find the denigration of posters for their honestly held beliefs a bit disappointing.

 

[Melburnian1]

...The victory of Atheism over religious belief must surely be the most significant social change in the past 100 years.

I enjoy reading the differing viewpoints, but find the denigration of posters for their honestly held beliefs a bit disappointing.

tgh, perhaps one might qualify that by saying 'the apparent victory...belief in some Western and a few other countries...'

Atheism is most prevalent in Marxist societies such as mainland China and The West.

In much of Africa, South America, the Middle East and a fair bit of Asia, the majority still hold very strong religious views.

Worldwide, atheists may be about 15 per cent of humanity. One source claims only '500 to 750 million worldwide.'

There are agnostics as well.

But it's a fair call that most worldwide have a religious belief, even if the intensity of practice varies.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Would it hurt to look at her other work objectively rather than just write off everything she says? I meant to ask why would Melbournian1's aviation related posts be less respected from your point of view because of what he said about something completely unrelated?

A person who perpetrates domestic violence isn't excused because they know the best credit card referrals, or know the best seats to sit on a plane. You sanction their behaviour as a person.

 

[dajop]

quite warm around here…

The victory of Atheism over religious belief must surely be the most significant social change in the past 100 years.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a victory of atheism, but more the declining influence, particularly in the west, of institutionalised religion. Someone can have theist beliefs, or even have a personal affiliation to a particular religion without taking on board all the baggage associated with the institutional forms of that religion, and pick and choose specific things to believe and follow or not. After all religious texts were all written by humans, have been translated, re-interpreted, and evolved, over the centuries so it is inevitable that many become a little cynical about literally following all the teachings in their particular branch of religion.

Also what we are seeing is the effects of freedom of religion and separation of religion and state.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

You can't say "this is just my genuinely held religious belief / political opinion" and pretend those beliefs / opinions are disconnected from the discrimination, exclusion and violence which is an everyday reality for so many.
You are simply not entitled to believe some people are worth less than other people.
If you believe such a thing you are wrong, and dangerous.
Because such a belief is incompatible with the universal enjoyment of fundamental human rights.

 

[tgh]

I almost never write what I think..but I do throw the occasional pebble in the pond..

A perception that functional Atheism has triumphed over traditional belief seems reasonable.
Organised religion seemed to be quite a broadly accepted belief system in the 50's and 60's , I have even been to sunday school….
One might argue that the belief vacuum left from the crisis of "believability" and the resultant exodus... has not been filled.

Anyway .. a bit ot here..
Back to the nasturtium casting competition…..who's next.. ?

 

[dajop]

There are still far more Christians in Australian than atheists or agnostics.

Be that as it may, that doesn't mean every one of those christians follow all - or even big parts - of their chosen doctrine.