Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 52 of 52

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: is this true? atheists are more intelligent than religious people

  1. #51
    Active Member spartacus has made a donation to the forum!

    Array
    spartacus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Albury-Wodonga
    Gender:
    Posts
    10,448
    Mentioned
    137 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fadi View Post
    I'm not an atheist but a Muslim, where I'm clearly instructed by Islam to abide by the law of the land in which I reside. With that said, the law of the land here in Oz tells me the following:

    The presumption of innocence imposes on the prosecution the burden of proving the charge and guarantees that no guilt can be presumed until the charge has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.


    I more than agree with such a stance as written above. So why the hypocrisy in democracy here? Why put out your dirty linen for the whole world to see, and in the process, accusing someone in public where the legal process (of which this democracy claims to be), is virtually thrown out the window for the sake of making some news headline.

    As I've stated (and as you all know), I am not a Christian, let alone being a Catholic as cardinal Pell is. So I am not here to defend the man but the constitution of which I live under, as I detest hypocrisy beyond any measure. So if I'm attacking anyone, I am attacking our media and all who support it under such circumstances.

    Turning the page, we see the following...

    Can we (the law of the land), take measures of derogation from certain obligations, one of which includes the right to the presumption of innocence? The answer to that question is yes, the law does allow for such a "loophole" if I may call it that. Well, under what circumstances then would (or could) this act or measure of derogation take place you may be wondering?

    In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed. Such measures may only be taken to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.

    I draw from the above, that there has to be some sort of public emergency which threatens the nation...if we are to enact this measure of derogation to the presumption of innocence.

    Now that you've been made aware of the above, would you continue with your finger pointing; would you continue giving your support to ones who are (carelessly) doing the finger pointing on your behalf, or would you take a step back and reconsider your stance and obligations towards the fundamental principle of the common law, a law that encompasses the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?

    If I come across as one who is just a tad bit too serious for your liking, then I make no apology for my attitude, as I for one, respect the law of this land and would not stand for anyone making a mockery of it if I can help it.

    Over to you gentlemen...




    what are you on about
    I can't wait for Kevin Aitken to join World Powerlifting.





  2. __________________

    Ausbb Sponsors
    littleblokefitness new and used home gym and fitness equipment at great prices
    Iron Tanks Apparel Gym & Fitness Apparel
    BioFlex Nutrition Bioflex Nutrition, Australia's Purest Supplements
    Bulk Nutrients 100% Pure bulk Nutrients
    Flex Fitness Equipment fitness Equipment Specialists | warehouse direct
    Iherb code : code ZSG863 iHerb.com - Vitamins, Supplements Natural Health Products

  • #52
    ...

    Array

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Gender:
    Posts
    6,914
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spartacus View Post
    what are you on about
    Don't try to understand, it would be best I say
    1984 Age 18, BW 73kg: FS195kg, BS200kg, 162.5 3x10, PC 140kg, C&J 160kg. 1987 Age 22, BW 77kg BS 130kg x20, 120kg x50.


  • Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •