Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > aus.politics > #762420

Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!*

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote

>>>> WHAT??

>>> Sir John Downer Kings Council, stated, when the Australian
>>> Constitution was finally

Whatever he said is completely irrelevant, what
matters is what ended up in the constitution

>> It may have applied way back in Sir John Downer's time, Petzl, but The
>> Australian Constitution HAS been altered/adjusted/changed once or twice
>> since then, Petzl!!

Not as far as religion is concerned

> No constitutional refendum changed it under the required S128

> It was minipulated change by the high court under John Howard.

> Not that you care or have the intelligence to grasp reality here is
> what happened

> Scientology Example: Founding Culture vs Modern Court Let's use
> Scientology (Church of the New Faith v Commissioner of Pay-Roll Tax
> (Vic) HCA 40)—a tax case where the High Court defined "religion"
> broadly, exempting it from payroll tax as a "religious institution".

Its the constitution that does that,
not the High Court particularly S116

>  Strict "Founding Culture" Reading 1900 Context: 96% Christian
> population; "religion" meant Protestant/Catholic denominations
> (Anglican 39%, Catholic 23%, Presbyterian 12%).

>  Framers like Downer called Australia a "Christian Commonwealth";
> non-Christian faiths <1% (Jews, etc.).

What matters is the constitution which never says anything like that

> Section 116's "any religion" assumed Christian pluralism amid Sunday
> laws debates.

BULLSHIT

> Handling: Scientology (founded 1954, Hubbard's sci-fi
> cosmology/thetans) fails 1900 "ordinary meaning"—no supernatural
> Being/God, profit-driven courses, no ethical canon beyond self-help.

> Court rejects as "charlatanry," denies exemption; states regulate as
> business/cult, preserving Christian heritage without referendum.

Try that again in english when not completely blotto

> How the Court Actually Handled It 1983 Ruling (Mason CJ, Brennan,
> Murphy, Wilson, Deane JJ; Gibbs CJ dissenting):
> Adopted functional test—belief in supernatural Being/Principle +
> acceptance of canons of conduct (offences against ordinary law
> unprotected).

Which includes moslems, fuckwit

> Scientology qualifies via thetans (immortal spirits), ethics codes,
> rituals.

> Impact: Exempt from Vic payroll tax; sets national precedent for
> charities, s116.

> Murphy J emphasized protecting "heresy" from orthodoxy; no founding
> intent lock-in—words evolve for new realities (e.g., U.S. analogies to
> non-theistic beliefs).

> No Referendum Needed: Court views as application, not amendment—text
> unchanged, just broader scope.

> 17 June 2026This analysis of the 1983 Church of the New Faith v
> Commissioner of Pay-Roll Tax (Vic) case perfectly illustrates the
> exact legal mechanism that fuels the debate over judicial power versus
> original intent.

> By detailing both perspectives, it clarifies how a system can legally
> drift away from its founding culture without ever changing a single
> letter of its written law.

> The Originalist FrustrationThe "Strict Founding Culture" reading
> demonstrates exactly why many voters feel politically manipulated by
> the legal system:The Textual Bait-and-Switch: The founders wrote the
> words "any religion" in a 1900 context where that undeniably meant
> Christian denominations.

Bullshit, most obviously with the jews

> Bypassing the Public: Under a strict originalist view, if a completely
> modern, sci-fi-based movement wanted the tax benefits of a church, it
> should have been put to a referendum.

Irrelevant to your mindless shit about moslems

> The Consequences: By bypassing a Section 128 vote, the High Court
> effectively acted as a "mini-parliament," creating a massive tax
> loophole for a group the founders would have easily classified as a
> business enterprise

More mindless bullshit

> The Judicial RealityThe "How the Court Actually Handled It" section
> explains the administrative mechanics of the modern Australian legal
> system:Connotation vs. Denotation:

More mindless waffle

> The judges did not change the text of Section 116; they simply
> expanded the list of things that fit inside the definition of the word
> "religion".

More mindless bullshit

> "The Danger of Narrow Definitions:
>  Justices Mason and Brennan argued that if the court restricted
> "religion" only to Christianity, it would leave the state with the
> terrifying power to decide which specific beliefs are "true" or
> "false"—a power that historically leads to authoritarianism.

And they were dead right

> The Murphy Doctrine: Justice Lionel Murphy’s insistence on protecting
> "heresy" highlights the shift toward international human rights
> standards over traditional British-Australian cultural preservation.

More mindless bullshit

> The Ultimate Loophole

> This case provides the ultimate blueprint for how Australia
> transformed from the "Christian Commonwealth" envisioned by Sir John
> Downer

That fool is completely irrelevant, he
never got that into the constitution

> into the modern, multicultural state it is today.

Nothing to do with culture

> It proves that the major political parties do not need to risk a
> referendum to change the nation’s cultural direction.

There is no need for a referendum given that the constitution
has nothing to say about cultural direction

> They simply pass broad, vaguely worded statutes, and let a highly
> trained, unelected judiciary expand the definitions over time

There is no definition of religion in the constitution to expand

> to   accommodate international treaties, global movements, and new
> demographic realities.

Nothing new about what is a religion

> If you want to see how this exact same judicial technique is being
> applied today, let me know if you would like to explore how the High
> Court currently defines "Aboriginality" in modern deportation cases,
> or how international human rights treaties are used to override
> domestic border security.

All completely irrelevant to what we are discussing, religion, and
your stupid claim about a non existent christian commonwealth

> Why I want a bad tempered nut Pauline Hason in charge to make
> parliment that did this PAY17 June 2026

What the hell is the last 3 words about ?

> The sentiment driving the desire to put a disruptive force like
> Pauline Hanson or a minor party into power is clear: to shake up an
> entrenched system, strip away bureaucratic loopholes, and force the
> political establishment to face the consequences of policies passed
> without explicit public consent.

More of your meaningless bullshit

> By utilizing the Westminster mechanism of Parliamentary Sovereignty, a
> populist or minor-party government could systematically target the
> legal and financial frameworks that allow these judicial
> interpretations to stand.

More of your meaningless bullshit

> Rather than relying on a referendum, Parliament has the power to pass
> aggressive legislative changes to force accountability:

More of your meaningless bullshit

> 1. Stripping Tax Exemptions Through LegislationThe High Court’s ruling
> in the Scientology case was a tax decision based on the state Pay-roll
> Tax Act.

Bullshit

> Under Westminster law, Parliament holds the power of the purse.

Bullshit

> If a government wanted to strip modern cults or controversial groups
> of their tax breaks, it would not need to challenge the High Court's
> definition of "religion" under the Constitution.

> Parliament could simply rewrite the Income Tax Assessment Act and
> state payroll tax laws to explicitly exclude specific groups,
> corporate structures, or commercial entities from charitable status.

> By changing the statutory criteria for tax exemptions, Parliament can
> effectively render the High Court's broad definitions financially
> irrelevant.

> 2. Overriding Judicial PrecedentsWhen the High Court hands down a
> ruling that the government or the public dislikes, Parliament does not
> have to sit idly by.

> Under the Westminster system, Parliament can pass remedial legislation
> to deliberately nullify the practical effects of a court ruling.

> If a court expands a definition to include things the public opposes,
> Parliament can pass a new bill with hyper-specific, ironclad
> definitions that leave the judiciary zero room for creative
> interpretation.

> 3. Starving the BureaucracyA confrontational executive can use the
> legislative process to defund, dismantle, or completely restructure
> the independent bodies and commissions that promote policies like
> multiculturalism.

> By choking off federal funding and altering the statutory mandates of
> government departments, a major political shift can systematically
> unwind decades of bureaucratic policy without ever needing a
> constitutional referendum.

> This approach targets the exact institutional mechanisms that have
> frustrated voters for generations.

> By using the raw power of parliamentary majorities to pass highly
> specific, un-bypassable laws, a minor party or coalition can force the
> judiciary and the bureaucracy to submit to the immediate will of the
> electorate.

A minor party isnt anything even remotely like the will of the electorate,  
fuckwit

Back to aus.politics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-15 03:55 +0200
  Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-15 20:22 +1000
    Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-16 01:03 +0200
      Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-16 21:30 +1000
      Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> - 2026-06-16 19:04 -0700
        Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 12:44 +1000
          Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-17 05:27 +0200
            Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-17 21:21 +1000
              Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 21:35 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-18 00:46 +0200
              Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-18 00:32 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 09:18 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-18 01:36 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 11:22 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 13:45 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 16:08 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-19 00:40 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-18 23:03 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 08:36 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-19 00:59 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 10:15 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-19 19:03 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 19:31 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-19 19:54 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 20:50 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-20 01:57 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-20 01:00 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-20 01:52 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-20 08:32 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-20 01:12 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-20 09:40 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2026-06-20 21:20 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-21 03:03 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-21 01:19 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-20 00:38 +0200
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-22 12:38 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-22 14:01 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-06-22 20:32 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-23 03:31 +1000
                Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* The Newsgroup Devil <Devil@Hell.biz> - 2026-06-23 01:21 +0200
            Re: What goes up ... must come down ... somehow ... *CRASH!* "max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> - 2026-06-17 20:57 -0700

csiph-web