Religious tolerance and multiculturalism

Id sue every religious organization in Australia saying you will go to hell if you dont follow Christ is an intent to arouse fear.

I own no copyright to the idea so you just start a new thread if you want to id probably loose interest before an admin approves it Thnx i do try my best If that is the exact wording of the law then yes they are braking the law. Well the believers believe it and the none believers dont give a shit so they get a free pass as long as someone dosent stand up to them In most cases power and influence in this case the above statement is probably the cause. Technicaly it should work though you might try to consult a lawyer i studied economy so law was not a focus point though i did have a few classes on law.

You have 2 choices either do whatever i want or i kill you everyone who dies by my hand chooses it whiteout this choice all would have lived.No matter how you try to rap the whole going to hell part in nice words and charm it still says "Do what i want or suffer for eternity, the choice is yours" .Both statements are made to instill fear for the purpose of making someone do something that another wills. And that is braking the Australian law probably Slovenian law too id would have to check

And who would suffer if religious institutions abstain from threats with the intent of arousing fear that will make them comply with their desires of what one should do or not do?

Yea a really good choice either serve god and praise him for all eternity do whatever he asks, or go to hell where you will be tortured for ever and ever and ever.No wait the choice is actually this you come to service every Sunday praise Jesus give money to our church or you will go to hell where you will be tortured for ever and ever and ever.If i put a gun to your face and demand money do your realy want to be denied the choice to give me your money willingly or should i just take it and not kill you.Telling someone something offul will happen if he does not do what you say is wrong and against the lawIf god dose not like it he should fight to change the law in the mean time his representatives the church are liable for threatening people in to doing what they will.How would you like it if i told your kid if he does not bow down to the grate chicken of peace in the sky and give him his allowance the grate chicken will torture him for ever and ever and ever in a fiery lake of fire where he will cry and cry and cry

Wel not in every case but your example is just bad parenting , cant you get your kid to love your sister whiteout the threat of violenceWell the law it self would be a better example if you do this you go to jail.But would it be ecceptable if i told your child that if he dosent give me his pocket money the all loving wombat in the sky will torture him for ever and ever?The difference i think is personal gain when you threaten your child you are protecting your other child when the state threatens us with jail they protect other peoples rights when the curch tells you you will go to hell it protects its income. A religious institution who would tell to their flock well you get to see god either way and go to heaven either way but do attend our services weakly please and do put some money in the collection plate just to make god happy would have a severely lower income then a church who says if you dont follow us you will go to the worst place possible after death if you do you will go to the best possible place. Its no different then a mugger who says your money or your life. The difference is the mugger actually has a gun religious institutions only have their fairy tales.

Hmm i dont know of other acts does this mean that a religious institution can practice hate speech like a Christian church preaching all Scientologiests should be shot hung and burned ?

So you do have limitations on free speech, just only on violence not including instilling fear. Well at least as fare as we know because of the way your judicial system works a judge at one point in history could have ruled instilling fear as braking the law.Still haven't checked our wording of the law it could be similar but the Australian law could bring the matter to trial if you find an atheist judge

U actually have a pointBut dose it apply to hate speach like kill all whites, Jews, atheists, Christians ....
I dont think that kind of speech needs protection.

Well clearly the tolerance of multi culturism is quite low in the US

Page not found - ZENIT - EnglishSure looks like it Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Just checked our constitution 39th paragraph deals with freedom of speech strangely it also deals with information of public characteristics almost in the same breath.Basically it says freedom of speech is guarantied to all about everything and anyone has the right to information of public character except where it is restricted by law lolSo now i would have to check every law if there is any restriction on our freedom of speech if there even is such a law and do to the strange in one breath wording im not sure if the restriction by law applies only to information of public character or to bothSo as fare as my knowledge goes the same speech could be conducted under the protection of freedom of speech in our country much to my protest And this is not the only place where our laws are written as if school kids where writing them.a funny one would be what you need to have in your car the law goes you need:- a spare tire
- first aid kit
- spare lights
-the triangle
- a tool to unscrew the bolts on the tires
.....Recommended by law not mandatory:
A jack to lift the car