Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Who knew? (Original Post) uriel1972 Mar 2019 OP
The Lemon Test Act_of_Reparation Mar 2019 #1
When you think they can't go any lower Lordquinton Mar 2019 #2
OMG Are these people real? gtar100 Mar 2019 #3
We have a DUer who parrots out RCC talking points on why they should be exempt Major Nikon Mar 2019 #4
Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said.... guillaumeb Mar 2019 #5

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
1. The Lemon Test
Tue Mar 19, 2019, 01:49 PM
Mar 2019

Does the law:

1) Have a legitimate secular purpose?
2) Not have the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting the practice of religion?
3) Not result in excessive entanglement of government and religion?


If the answer to these three questions is "yes", then the law is fair game. Or it should be. With this supreme court, who knows.



Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
2. When you think they can't go any lower
Tue Mar 19, 2019, 03:07 PM
Mar 2019

Comparing the murder of 49 people in a mosque to a law removing protections from priests who shelter child abusers...

gtar100

(4,192 posts)
3. OMG Are these people real?
Tue Mar 19, 2019, 04:37 PM
Mar 2019
Mrs Jones used the Christchurch attacks, in which 50 Muslim worshippers were killed during Friday prayers, to further her point.

"The good people of faith who will be drawn into this are unnecessarily being demonised," Ms Jones said.

"It is a very bad precedent at a time when we have all been reminded how the targeting of particular religious communities can have devastating consequences."

Mrs Jones said the ACT Government's move to implement the recommendation of the royal commission into child sexual abuse was alienating.

"It is divisive the way this bill … this week of all weeks, should be picking apart the detail of someone's religious practice," she said.


That makes *no* sense in reference to the murder of Muslims by the white supremacist. Maybe her extra-curricular activities need to be looked into. Who argues against protecting children from sexual predators.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
4. We have a DUer who parrots out RCC talking points on why they should be exempt
Tue Mar 19, 2019, 08:47 PM
Mar 2019

Which according to child welfare experts inevitably leads to more child rapes.

It’s a helluva thing when you put the interests of the RCC above children abused by RCC officials who are then allowed to use legal exemptions to hide their evil.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
5. Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said....
Thu Mar 21, 2019, 03:17 PM
Mar 2019

Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said Mrs Jones' comments were out of step with the views of both her party and the community.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Who knew?