• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Congratulations to Victoria and Daniel Andrews

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Congratulations to Victoria on electing a government that has the best interests of the people in mind.

'Addressing the Labor faithful on Saturday night, Mr Andrews declared that "hope always defeats hate" and suggested critics who accused him of dividing the state during his government's controversial handling of the COVID-19 pandemic had been proven wrong.

"We were instead united in our faith in science and in our faith and care for and in each other," he said.'

Source: 'Vindication' for Daniel Andrews as Labor secures emphatic victory in Victoria

May that faith in science and our care for each other spread to NSW.

In my opinion.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
Congratulations to Victoria on electing a government that has the best interests of the people in mind.

'Addressing the Labor faithful on Saturday night, Mr Andrews declared that "hope always defeats hate" and suggested critics who accused him of dividing the state during his government's controversial handling of the COVID-19 pandemic had been proven wrong.

"We were instead united in our faith in science and in our faith and care for and in each other," he said.'

Source: 'Vindication' for Daniel Andrews as Labor secures emphatic victory in Victoria

May that faith in science and our care for each other spread to NSW.

In my opinion.

Good to see the Fox Sky News propaganda had no effect on the result.
 
Last edited:

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Congratulations to Victoria on electing a government that has the best interests of the people in mind.

'Addressing the Labor faithful on Saturday night, Mr Andrews declared that "hope always defeats hate" and suggested critics who accused him of dividing the state during his government's controversial handling of the COVID-19 pandemic had been proven wrong.

"We were instead united in our faith in science and in our faith and care for and in each other," he said.'

Source: 'Vindication' for Daniel Andrews as Labor secures emphatic victory in Victoria

May that faith in science and our care for each other spread to NSW.

In my opinion.
What had the losing side done to earn the reference to "hate"?
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
What had the losing side done to earn the reference to "hate"?
I dont know. A quick googling brought to my attention the following claim from the human rights law centre,

'“Right now, our politicians and police are hamstrung in the face of rising hate in Victoria. Last year, Premier Andrews didn’t have the power to stop a Neo-Nazi concert. This year, Victoria Police didn’t have the power to remove a Nazi Swastika flag flying above a house in regional Victoria.'

Perhaps they are the manifestations of hate referred to.

In my opinion.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
That 2nd video makes me proud to be an atheist.

I think Daniel Andrews has good motives but does tend to go too far in his law making and makes laws that end up being prejudicial against the rights of Christians and other religious groups.
I suppose you did not listen to the video as far as his laws on full term abortion and allowing abortions of feeling fetuses without anaesthetic where the fetuses are ripped apart and allowing them to slowly die if they are aborted alive. Imo that sort of thing is not something to be proud of for anyone. (It might be a logical conclusion of the way someone views a fetus however)
Victoria it seems is pretty much the most socially "advanced" state in the world because of Andrew's laws.
I don't think euthanasia should be banned. But I can see how some people would feel that way, given the way euthanasia laws tend to slide into easier options over time and can can end up as things that unscrupulous people can take advantage of.
I can see that he wants to stop bullying of kids at schools (esp gay inclined kids) but that imo has gone too far and has ended up with the state taking over parental roles and with the legal right to prosecute parents who council their kids against seeking gender transfer therapy and with the legal right to prosecute anyone to whom a someone might come to for guidance and who prays with them about the issue.
This also has gone to targeting religious schools who want to hire people based on their suitability for a job of teaching their particular ethic and who now cannot do if a person is gay. It would be better if the hypocrisy was not there and they brought the same law to political parties who can discriminate on a person's political beliefs when hiring.
Interesting the Victorian law says that employers cannot discriminate against people because of their religious views but when recently a CEO of a football team was sacked for his religious views that was OK according to Daniel Andrews who called the views bigoted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and they were just normal Christian views about the abortion and about homosexuality that his church expressed years before.
It seems Christianity and other religions are not really welcome in Daniel Andrews Victoria if they express their beliefs.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I made it to the same spot.

Yes the ACL is right wing but you probably switched it off too early. That was in the first 4 minutes.
Kids actually can be brought up in any environment and not be harmed too much probably imo but the other side is that the best environment is where there is a mother and father and imo if there is a choice the mother and father environment is usually the best choice for adoption.
 
Last edited:

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
I think Daniel Andrews has good motives but does tend to go too far in his law making and makes laws that end up being prejudicial against the rights of Christians and other religious groups.

I'm not Victorian so can you give some examples of the prejudice?

I suppose you did not listen to the video as far as his laws on full term abortion and allowing abortions of feeling fetuses without anaesthetic where the fetuses are ripped apart and allowing them to slowly die if they are aborted alive. Imo that sort of thing is not something to be proud of for anyone. (It might be a logical conclusion of the way someone views a fetus however)

No I didn't nor would I be likely to trust someone on youtube with an obvious agenda to be speaking the truth.

Victoria it seems is pretty much the most socially "advanced" state in the world because of Andrew's laws.
I don't think euthanasia should be banned. But I can see how some people would feel that way, given the way euthanasia laws tend to slide into easier options over time and can can end up as things that unscrupulous people can take advantage of.

I've never heard of this happening. Got any examples of it?

I can see that he wants to stop bullying of kids at schools (esp gay inclined kids) but that imo has gone too far and has ended up with the state taking over parental roles and with the legal right to prosecute parents who council their kids against seeking gender transfer therapy and with the legal right to prosecute anyone to whom a someone might come to for guidance and who prays with them about the issue.

Good luck to him if he can reduce bullying, it's a difficult problem to tackle.

This also has gone to targeting religious schools who want to hire people based on their suitability for a job of teaching their particular ethic and who now cannot do if a person is gay. It would be better if the hypocrisy was not there and they brought the same law to political parties who can discriminate on a person's political beliefs when hiring.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. What particular ethic?

Interesting the Victorian law says that employers cannot discriminate against people because of their religious views but when recently a CEO of a football team was sacked for his religious views that was OK according to Daniel Andrews who called the views bigoted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and they were just normal Christian views about the abortion and about homosexuality that his church expressed years before.

I've heard the issue mentioned but don't know the details.

It seems Christianity and other religions are not really welcome in Daniel Andrews Victoria if they express their beliefs.
I don't know enough to comment.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
Yes the ACL is right wing but you probably switched it off too early. That was in the first 4 minutes.
Kids actually can be brought up in any environment and not be harmed too much probably imo but the other side is that the best environment is where there is a mother and father and imo if there is a choice the mother and father environment is usually the best choice for adoption.

I've seen some pretty ordinary heterosexual parents.

Interesting that you said "not be harmed too much". So you feel same sex parents are definitely going to cause at least some harm to a child?
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I dont know. A quick googling brought to my attention the following claim from the human rights law centre,

'“Right now, our politicians and police are hamstrung in the face of rising hate in Victoria. Last year, Premier Andrews didn’t have the power to stop a Neo-Nazi concert. This year, Victoria Police didn’t have the power to remove a Nazi Swastika flag flying above a house in regional Victoria.'

Perhaps they are the manifestations of hate referred to.

In my opinion.
Thanks. Sounds odd ─ maybe just more political invective? I assume the winners are center / left, so their toleration of Nazi nonsense isn't the first thing I think of.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I think Daniel Andrews has good motives but does tend to go too far in his law making and makes laws that end up being prejudicial against the rights of Christians and other religious groups.
I suppose you did not listen to the video as far as his laws on full term abortion and allowing abortions of feeling fetuses without anaesthetic where the fetuses are ripped apart and allowing them to slowly die if they are aborted alive. Imo that sort of thing is not something to be proud of for anyone. (It might be a logical conclusion of the way someone views a fetus however)
Victoria it seems is pretty much the most socially "advanced" state in the world because of Andrew's laws.
I don't think euthanasia should be banned. But I can see how some people would feel that way, given the way euthanasia laws tend to slide into easier options over time and can can end up as things that unscrupulous people can take advantage of.
I can see that he wants to stop bullying of kids at schools (esp gay inclined kids) but that imo has gone too far and has ended up with the state taking over parental roles and with the legal right to prosecute parents who council their kids against seeking gender transfer therapy and with the legal right to prosecute anyone to whom a someone might come to for guidance and who prays with them about the issue.
This also has gone to targeting religious schools who want to hire people based on their suitability for a job of teaching their particular ethic and who now cannot do if a person is gay. It would be better if the hypocrisy was not there and they brought the same law to political parties who can discriminate on a person's political beliefs when hiring.
Interesting the Victorian law says that employers cannot discriminate against people because of their religious views but when recently a CEO of a football team was sacked for his religious views that was OK according to Daniel Andrews who called the views bigoted,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and they were just normal Christian views about the abortion and about homosexuality that his church expressed years before.
It seems Christianity and other religions are not really welcome in Daniel Andrews Victoria if they express their beliefs.
I won't comment on all of this because I'm not Victorian myself and don't really know the intricate details of victorian politics and it mostly seems like a gish gallop to me anyway, but can you explain what a "full term abortion" is? It sounds like a baby that is actually ready to be born to me. So what is another name for that, like a cesarian or something? Are you objecting to babies being born by C section? Are you claiming that full term babies are getting ripped to pieces without anasthesia by qualified medical professionals? It sounds suspiciously like right wing slander to me. If you want to be taken seriously you should at least cite reputable sources of information.

In my opinion.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Thanks. Sounds odd ─ maybe just more political invective? I assume the winners are center / left, so their toleration of Nazi nonsense isn't the first thing I think of.
Perhaps, but going off @Brian2 's second video I think there is something more to it. It seems as though there is hatred of the LGBT community amongst the right as well, I mean discriminating against LGBT parents because they allegedly aren't *ideal* parents? Since when do we even check if parents are perfect before permitting them to become parents amongst heterosexuals?
In my opinion
 
Last edited:

Brian2

Veteran Member
I've seen some pretty ordinary heterosexual parents.

Interesting that you said "not be harmed too much". So you feel same sex parents are definitely going to cause at least some harm to a child?

That was not specifically about a same sex household but I would say that there is harm done in every environment, iow there is no perfect environment.
However if there is a choice of a heterosexual couple for parents and a gay couple for parents the heterosexual couple should get the tick over the gay couple simply because it can offer male and female parental roles to a child.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
That was not specifically about a same sex household but I would say that there is harm done in every environment, iow there is no perfect environment.
However if there is a choice of a heterosexual couple for parents and a gay couple for parents the heterosexual couple should get the tick over the gay couple simply because it can offer male and female parental roles to a child.
How are you determining that the heterosexual couple are automatically better? Would for example a largely absentee father be better than a lesbian couple with two mothers and close male relatives such as uncles or brothers? And do you have any evidence that such a choice even presents itself? I mean there is probably a shortage of decent parents anyway, so is the market for adoption as competitive as you are making it out to be that such a choice is required?

In my opinion
 
Top