Australia is nominally a Christian nation, due to the fact that initial settlement was from Britain, however a statistical analysis of present day
Australia indicates a much wider spread of religious belief. Overall the balance is changing continuously away from a predominance of Christianity,
because until the 1970s Australia had a migration policy that effectively barred many races from coming here. The policy became known as 'The White
Australia Policy'. A matter of shame for the then elected representatives of Australia and the attitudes of Australian citizens.
Given the history of the CIA, and its fallibility, I wonder at the reliablility of the CIA factbook, although it is a fairly reasonable summary.
Both the American and Australian legal systems are modelled on the British justice system, which in turn is based on the British religious system
(called the Anglican model here and in Britain, but I believe that you call the Anglican church something else in America). Anglican belief diverges
from Catholic belief in fairly minor ways - but seemingly of huge concern to those two organisations - that were introduced by King Henry VIII -
mainly for his own personal benefit.
However, the American and British legal systems have evolved in different ways and many of those present differences (particularly capital punishment)
are seen in a critical light by some of Britain's senior barristers - I refer you to Geoffrey Robertson's book 'The Justice Game'. (It also makes
interesting reading concerning the ongoing case of the 'friendly fire' incident during the first Gulf War, where two American A-10's attacked a
British armoured column and the politically motivated withholding of evidence from the British Coroner). The book is a collection of observations
from Geoffrey Robertson's career as a QC and is quite eye-opening with respect to the British legal system as practiced in many countries around the
world as well as Britain.
Just as an aside (and well off topic) I don't actually see OBL as the real mover and shaker of al-Qaeda. He is certainly the figure-head, but I
rather see the situation as being similar to that of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. While Castro sought, essentially, a nationalist revolution (ie a
political revolution for Cuba), it was Guevara who provided the idiology with which to rally support for that revolution. In the present case, I see
Dr. Ayman Muhammad Rabaie al-Zawahiri (called, by the West, OBL's 'deputy' and a failed revolutionary in Egypt) as fulfilling the role of Che
Guevara. Regardless of the success or otherwise of al-Qaeda, I think that al-Zawahiri will eventually move on to 'other revolutions', because he
will never be satisfied until his beliefs (not necessarily himself) rule the whole world - a trait he shares with Guevara and Hitler.
Can you cease attempting to convert others until everyone shares your 'faith' ? No, you are not Guevara, al-Zawahiri or Hitler, but on a lesser
scale there is a parallel here. The insistance that everyone else share your 'faith'.
Originally posted by GreatTech
I generally follow Catholic law as I believe it frequently has a higher moral code than American law in regards to many issues, abortion, euthanasia,
marriage, divorce, Baptism, Communion... Because the Catholic Church has a higher standard of law then common law
Many of these things are matters of great debate in society at the moment. That you consider Catholic law as being the definitive answer on these
matters is purely a matter of your adherence to that faith. In that sense you are making a rhetorical decision for yourself and telling yourself that
you will not give the subject matter any serious personal and independant thought because it is not in accordance with what your church and its
teachings proscribe. (And this has been evident on this thread, in that you defend your position merely by re-stating your position, rather than with
As you can see from many of the responses you've received, there is a vast wave of feeling that your church, the Bible, and the teachings of your
church are open to some doubt, with regard to translation and interpretation. Obviously, and logically, your 'faith' precludes you from addressing
those doubts, and some of the subjects you quote, as others are able to. If you like, others are able to think more 'outside the box' than
yourself, because they are not inhibited by the thinking that the answer is already laid down for them.
Originally posted by GreatTech
American law is not perfect nor is the law of any nation. But it is relatively just by world standards.
Given the incarceration rate in America compared to other developed countries, I'm not at all sure that you can claim this.
The Winged Wombat
Sorry for all the edits and additions. Contrary to GreatTech's praise of my verbal abilities, he is in error - I need time to formulate my responses
- my verbal ability is 'crap' actually, so a written communication works better for me.
[edit on 18/4/07 by The Winged Wombat]