<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Catch the Fire hate Muslims?</title>
	<link>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/</link>
	<description>musings from those on the journey</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  7 Jan 2009 20:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: alan</title>
		<link>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156975</link>
		<dc:creator>alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156975</guid>
		<description>I've followed the case as it has been promoted as a freedom of speech issue,discrimination issue etc,but what has intrigued me is why there has not been any discussion on whether or not Christians should end up in court on such issues. There's a stack of material and docs on interfaith relations and dialogue but not much material on the issue of Christians and courts.In the only  article I could find( "Christians in conflict:should Christians go to court?" http://www.lcf.pnc.com.au/christianconflict.htm/) the author argues that "Scriture says that Christians should not be in court because of the following 8 principles:
1. the non retaliation principle
2. we have the power principle
3. we have the presence of Christ princoiple
4. the forgiveness prnciple
5. the eschatalogical principle
6. the wisdom principle
7.the witness principle
8.the defeat principle"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve followed the case as it has been promoted as a freedom of speech issue,discrimination issue etc,but what has intrigued me is why there has not been any discussion on whether or not Christians should end up in court on such issues. There&#8217;s a stack of material and docs on interfaith relations and dialogue but not much material on the issue of Christians and courts.In the only  article I could find( &#8220;Christians in conflict:should Christians go to court?&#8221; <a href="http://www.lcf.pnc.com.au/christianconflict.htm/" rel="nofollow">http://www.lcf.pnc.com.au/christianconflict.htm/</a>) the author argues that &#8220;Scriture says that Christians should not be in court because of the following 8 principles:<br />
1. the non retaliation principle<br />
2. we have the power principle<br />
3. we have the presence of Christ princoiple<br />
4. the forgiveness prnciple<br />
5. the eschatalogical principle<br />
6. the wisdom principle<br />
7.the witness principle<br />
8.the defeat principle&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet</title>
		<link>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156139</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:35:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156139</guid>
		<description>Mmm... I don't think mounting a daft argument is illegal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mmm&#8230; I don&#8217;t think mounting a daft argument is illegal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gareth 'LovesTha' Pye</title>
		<link>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156118</link>
		<dc:creator>Gareth 'LovesTha' Pye</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:04:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.signposts.org.au/2007/02/12/does-catch-the-fire-hate-muslims/#comment-156118</guid>
		<description>"such as “Islam was not a religion”, “distribution of the Qur’an was illegal” and “’Victorian Muslims’ were not a relevant class of persons”"

Shouldn't arguing such things in court be enough to get some serious action taken against you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;such as “Islam was not a religion”, “distribution of the Qur’an was illegal” and “’Victorian Muslims’ were not a relevant class of persons”&#8221;</p>
<p>Shouldn&#8217;t arguing such things in court be enough to get some serious action taken against you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
