[pugsville]

The government funds private schools simply to help cut costs down to help the secondary private system be a viable option for people so as to relieve some stress from the overstretched public school system.

It's not a government school. The government has CHOOSEN to send them some financial support in order to support the dual public-private system. Same as in healthcare and other areas. So your point is silly, you clearly don't understand why they actually send support money to private schools.

If you have a problem with that take it up with your political party, since they all mostly agree with it, including the Greens too.

"Helps the public school system to thrive having a healthy private sector taking a large chunk of students away"

No that the propaganda rhetoric about rather than the actual reasons.

We have it because Labour wanted catholic votes, and it remains because the privileged elite who run the country represent this privileged group,

Really if you don't understand how politics works, it's about interests rather than reasons.


Private education and health should not receive 1 cent of public money. The public system would massively better off without them.

It;s the private school educated and health system users who devote their resources to destroying the public system. That they get public funds while avoidng paying tax is just annoying.

We don't need the class system and it;s problems.

'

[pugsville]

If it's a Catholic school, they have global church rules they are under obligation to follow and the parents have indicated they want their kids to be raised in a Catholic environment.

Why are you delibrately trying to get a job at a Catholic or other type of Christian school and at the same time want to be "Out and proud!"?

Why are you trying to force a Catholic school to bend to your personal will when you know the Roman Catholic Church has an anti-LGBT stance based upon their interpretation of their religious scriptures?

Why don't you go find a job teaching in PUBLIC SCHOOL or in an LGBT community affiliated educational organisation? They're more likely to hire you anyway!

Or why not just keep your sexual orientation to yourself in your Private Life.

This wouldn't be a significant issue if the LGBT community wasn't so completely totally obsessed with being "out and proud". Christians often go to work for major corporations that also support the LGBT community and they usually have no issue since they keep their views at home. Even Israel Folau kept his views to his social media account and clearly was not representing the organisation (he's had issues because they were idiots).

Some members of the LGBT community are completely and totally obsessed with being "out and proud" and wanting everyone else they work with and all the kids to bow to the narcissism. If you oppose it, you get accused of discrimination for absolutely NO valid reason.

Don't mention your sexual orientation in the interviews you idiots, don't bring your gay partner to work and don't force the kids to learn your sexual orientation and stupid pronouns. Keep it to yourself and you get to keep the job. Take a leaf out of the Christians playbook when they go to work at Walmart and McDonalds (both of which financially support the LGBT community).

Silence the dissenters, make self censorship the norm , control people's thoughts, make a pretend world to teach children that everyone conforms......

Make employment and education contingent on supporting religious dogma.

Employees should not have the right to dictate over employees private lives.

This is not religious freedom it's , enforcing a lack of freedom of religion and sexuality. it's repressive.

[Igor Antunov]

If they ever come back to this after shelving it, maybe reform the way the church does business too. Anglican Church owns much of the privately owned land in NSW and as a charity is banking massive TAX FREE profits on plot sales and residential building deals with developers. It's bullshit.

[colliric]

If they ever come back to this after shelving it, maybe reform the way the church does business too. Anglican Church owns much of the privately owned land in NSW and as a charity is banking massive TAX FREE profits on plot sales and residential building deals with developers. It's bullshit.

The Church of Scientology should straight up be banned again in Australia and have their tax exemption revoked again until the organisation starts offering their basic religious services for free in Australia. It was a mistake giving it to them in the first place. You have to pay to advance "up the bridge" in that "religion" until you pay a house and find out about Xenu.

I would support Hillsong church and other prosperity gospel churches getting audited every year to see if they conform.

The Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican churches should be audited every few years. It's mainly real estate
corruption issues with them. Their charities actually do a shitload of stuff in society after all. They just get more donations than is actually required to run their charitable services so it all builds up war-chest style. Not sure what they should do there.

I personally would ban the Church of Scientology first(worst tax avoidance offenders on a global scale), audit Hillsong regularly once a year second and discuss the real estate issues with the "classic churches" third.

Jehovah's witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and the Latter Days Saints I'd need more information about. I'd open up an investigation into their potential tax avoidance.

Tax avoidance in religious organisations is indeed a problem. Although they should be exempt overall, they also need to abide by the laws and not engage in corruption.

[quetzalcoatl]

There is only one freedom of religion that matters: the freedom from religious proselytizing in public places. Freedom "of" religion as practiced in the US is a very thin cover for imposing a particular cultural/political pov - and it has almost nothing to do with God or Jesus.

To put it bluntly, freedom of religion is a scam.

[pugsville]

The Church of Scientology should straight up be banned again in Australia and have their tax exemption revoked again until the organisation starts offering their basic religious services for free in Australia. It was a mistake giving it to them in the first place. You have to pay to advance "up the bridge" in that "religion" until you pay a house and find out about Xenu.

I would support Hillsong church and other prosperity gospel churches getting audited every year to see if they conform.

The Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican churches should be audited every few years. It's mainly real estate
corruption issues with them. Their charities actually do a shitload of stuff in society after all. They just get more donations than is actually required to run their charitable services so it all builds up war-chest style. Not sure what they should do there.

I personally would ban the Church of Scientology first(worst tax avoidance offenders on a global scale), audit Hillsong regularly once a year second and discuss the real estate issues with the "classic churches" third.

Jehovah's witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and the Latter Days Saints I'd need more information about. I'd open up an investigation into their potential tax avoidance.

Tax avoidance in religious organisations is indeed a problem. Although they should be exempt overall, they also need to abide by the laws and not engage in corruption.

Religion should have zero privileges. Tax, Speech whatever.

[Patrickov]

He was not representing Rugby Australia at the time, and everyone with a brain knew it.

You're arguing that listeners are not intelligent enough to understand the difference between a rugby player on the field and rugby player clearly expressing his personal religious views online.

Chris Pratt wasn't fired by Universal Pictures or Disney for attending Hillsong USA and openly expressing his religious views online as well. It's legal in most western countries for a reason. Everyone knows he's simply working for them as an actor. No matter his celebrity influence.

Every celebrity does that. Tom Cruise has been pushing Scientology(also an anti-LGBT religion) publicly for decades. He's never been fired.

Yes, I am saying that there are listeners not intelligent enough to understand the difference between "a rugby player on the field" and "a rugby player clearly expressing his personal religious views online". Although they shouldn't number a lot, these people are likely to be more vocal than the majority.

The response of Rugby Australia was, certainly, not their only option, but I have no problem if they did think it's what they had to do at that time.

And of course I know most celebrities do want to push their agenda with their influence. For many it's probably the reason they are in the business in the first place. The issue is that sometimes what they say can be controversial and sometimes they do have to pay, even just for a short while.

For Cruise's case, though, given how much a scam Scientology has been, it's strategically sound to leave him alone so as not to ironically fuel the "religion" in question. Also, if scams like Scientology are to continue, it's better for them to suck money from well-off but less intelligent people, rather than to have them scam from the already poor. (P.S. who said capitalism don't do justice?)