I hope you politely told her that it was none of her fucking business.
Yeah, I didn’t mean to imply that I though it had a decent chance of passing… just that the probability isn’t zero.
While I’m here I’ll also apologize for the snarkiness of the “godlady” and “church people” quips… it just gets really old after a while when so many assume right off the bat that you must share their fundamentalist beliefs.
Damn fuckers trying to save my “soul”. I don’t have one. 
In retrospect, I wish I had. Or that I had told her Church of Satan or some such just to freak her out. IT’S DARKSIDED!!!
But, alas, I just wanted to get the hell out of there with an account as quickly as possible so I lied and said something about how we just moved into town and hadn’t decided yet. Of course she invited me to hers (the bitch) 
We hope to find a very nice mosque, God willing. May Allah bless you. Salaam.
:eek: :eek: :eek:
That’s not quite true:
Now, that does not bind the States, and has not been interpreted to give as strict a separation of church and state as the First Amendment gives in the U.S., but Australia does have constitutional freedom of religion.
:eek:
Talk about startin’ 'em young!
Giles, since education is the responsbility of the states in Australia, Australia would, just as I said, be powerless to prevent the hypothetical I was discussing. Also, as you say, Australian courts have not ruled that Article 116 mandates the seperation of church and state to the extent that the United States’ First amendment does. Perhaps my statement could have been more accurately phrased, however, in substance it is true. Australian Federal and State governments directly fund religious schools - vouchers don’t even enter into the equation. Government support of religious schools is so great that Australia has the world’s largest publicly funded private school system - and in Australia, private school almost universally means a religious school.
Further, in some Australian government-run schools - certainly all in New South Wales - time is specifically allocated for religious instruction, and although most high schools do not make use of that time for this purpose, primary schools do run religious-instruction classes which require parents to opt their children out of if they do not wish them to attend.
As such, I maintain what I say. Australia, despite the lip-service it receives in the constitution, does not enjoy the protection of freedom of religion that the United States does. Specifically, any moves to introduce Intelligent Design into an Australian classroom would not be barred by Section 116, firstly because it would be the states introducing it, not the Commonwealth, and secondly, because religion is already taught in Australian public schools.
Yeah, I miss good old Milwaukee myself.
My county (Rankin, for those in the know) had a referndum last election about allowing the sale of alcohol here.
Nope. Not even a little bit. Which is just amazing, seeing as how every good Baptist boy down here doesn’t drink, but none of them would ever go hunting or fishing without something to drink.
-Joe
Yes, explore like dora, you’re right, because s. 116 of the Constitution does not bind the States of Australia. So the State of New South Wales could establish Scientology as the state religion, forbid the followers of all other religions from following their religions in public, and require all New South Wales public servants to be Scientologists. (No, it’s not at all likely to happen – but in theory it could).
Yes, the Commonwealth of Australia funds private religious schools, and the High Court of Australia has held that this does not violate s. 116 – but it is funding them as schools, not as religious institutions, and some private schools in Australia are non-religious, though the majority are Catholic, and most of the rest belong to other religions.
Yes, state schools in Australia generally have about one period per week for religious instruction, which is given by outside teachers sent by particular religions. However, students (or their parents) are quite free to opt out of this, and spend the period quietly studying.
Though there would seem to be no constitutional barrier to creationism being taught in state schools, there might be some question about it being taught in schools in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory, since (although those territories are self-governing) any territory law ultimately derives its authority from the Commonwealth, and the High Court might hold that teaching creationism violates s. 116 – the issue has never been raised, and it’s unlikely to be raised, because it’s politically unlikely that any government in Australia would require the teaching of creationism or intelligent design, regardless of what that idiot Brendan Nelson says.
However, my point was to dispute your assertion that “Australia [is] lacking the First Amendment protection of freedom of religion that the United States’ enjoys”, since Australia (as a federal state) does have constitutional freedom of religion, even if it’s not exactly the same as the freedom of religion given in the First Amendment.
Oh I hear that. Having moved to the state next door to you, from a country where talking about religion at all is considered odd and slightly distasteful I hear you 100%
Is Brendon Nelson as fervent as you say? My impression is that he knew that he could say what he said without it ever leading to any changes because everyone else would find the idea laughable, but that in the meantime he would pick up fundie votes.
From the linked article:
So, let’s not overreact. This is apparently a gesture some Mississippi state legislators make every year for the sake of a religious-conservative segment of their constituencies. It never goes anywhere.
Since being a Christian is supposed to be a given in this state, it is also considered a necessary formality to introduce legislation that makes the masses believe you are promoting such obvious attempts to get religion back into the schools. They know it will be declared unconstitutional, but it brings in the votes of the faithful.
I would think that some people in Mississippi might think that generalizations about them based upon what a few state legislators do would carry about as much weight. The attitudes of people living in Mississippi can also vary widely.
DtC, why the comment about inbreeding? Was that a factor in Kansas and Pennsylvania?
I like to borrow and oldie from Firesign Theater: Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light. (It serves me well.)
I would think that some people in Mississippi might think that generalizations about them based upon what a few state legislators do would carry about as much weight. The attitudes of people living in Mississippi can also vary widely.
The Pluralism Project: Religious Diversity in Southern Mississippi
DtC, why the comment about inbreeding? Was that a factor in Kansas and Pennsylvania?
I like to borrow and oldie from Firesign Theater: Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light. (It serves me well.)
Hey, before you go lopping Mississippi off and pushing us out into the Gulf…Just post a message on this board so some of the intelligent Mississippians can get the memo and a plane ticket.