THE Moslem gentleman, who challenged Pauline Hanson on her perceived problem of Moslem prejudice, talked of fear, ignorance and hate. (ABC’s Q and A, Monday, July 18).
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
These states of mind are the key elements in the dangerous unrest within Australia, and even more in the wider world.
Pauline Hanson has fear, and represents the fear of this country. She is also ignorant of Islam and Moslems, I would suggest.
The Moslem gentleman also has fear, and is also ignorant of our culture.
Both of these people are therefore generating prejudice against each other. Prejudice can lead to hate. This is xenophobia, unreasonable fear of the other.
Unfortunately our Attorney General, George Brandis, has stated that we are allowed to be bigoted, which is not good advice, especially coming from an Attorney General, I would suggest.
We are talking about freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, which in our democracy we are privileged to enjoy.
Moslems have to understand both these privileges.
They come to Australia understanding there is freedom of religion, but presumably they do not understand exactly what freedom of speech means, in relation to their spiritual beliefs.
I would say to Pauline Hanson, if we have freedom of religion then she cannot stop Moslems, as such, from coming to this country.
I would say to the Moslem gentleman you are free to practice your religion, but you also have to understand freedom of speech.
I would also ask him whether he knew that Salmon Rushdie, a British writer, had a fatwa imposed on him by the Ayatollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of Iran, because Rushdie was perceived to have written a blasphemous book.
Here is a spiritual leader of one country imposing a death sentence on the writer of another country for writing a book. Is that right?
The British taxpayers footed the bill for Mr Rushdie’s police protection from a seriously threatened crime.
The blasphemy laws vary in Australian states, but the last conviction for such an offence in NSW was in 1871.
Sharia law is very different from NSW law.
I would also ask our Moslem gentleman to read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s book ‘Infidel’. She speaks as a Somalian Moslem, who was circumcised by her own grandmother at the age of five.
We call that genital mutilation. Is that right?
Because Ms. Hirsi Al became apostate, a sentence of death was imposed on her! Is that right?
Those Australians represented by Pauline Hanson have the right to ask, with a mounting toll of death and destruction throughout the world, all perpetrated by people calling themselves Moslems and chanting “Allahu Akbar” – God is the Greatest – how do they know which Moslem is which?
I believe Sharia law applies both sticks and carrots to persuade followers of Islam to continue to follow Islam: the sticks involve death for apostasy, following in your responsible position in the Senate.
If not God, then for the sake of our own and children’s united, multicultural society.
With freedom of speech in mind, why is there a need to insult people, which may well jeopardise our privilege?
What is notably absent there is love. Maybe we should start with the Fair Go.