cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-01-23 - Re: Anti-porn conference in Manila

Header Data

From: Dave Horsfall <dave@esi.COM.AU>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: e11a595ccb19515d2b4bcae991da58895b7cbc367100e73b8811ce6bffcd601b
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950124104650.28961G-100000@eram.esi.com.au>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9501222311.A9801-0100000@netcom19>
UTC Datetime: 1995-01-23 23:53:08 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 15:53:08 PST

Raw message

From: Dave Horsfall <dave@esi.COM.AU>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 15:53:08 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Anti-porn conference in Manila
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9501222311.A9801-0100000@netcom19>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950124104650.28961G-100000@eram.esi.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Mon, 23 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:

> Church of England in Australia was, and I believe still is, government 
> funded by the Australian government.

As are many other schools of various religious persuasions.  So?

> Furthermore when my kids went to government school in NSW, Australia,
> they were taught Church of England religion by my neighbor, Mrs Law, 
> in school, in the classroom.  

It's not compulsory - as an avowed atheist I always avoided them.

> If it quacks like a duck ...

Not necessarily...  If they fund one school, they can hardly refuse
to fund others.

> I was unaware of the portion of the constitution that you mention.

Obviously - it's handy having an on-line copy of the Australian
Constitution.  Anyone want a copy?  I don't run an FTP site.

> I suspect that the government and the church are none to clear on it
> either.

You might be amused to know that our Governor-General (the "Queen's Man")
is himself an avowed atheist - is it likely he would have been appointed
by a pro-religious government?

-- 
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU) | dave@esi.com.au | VK2KFU @ VK2AAB.NSW.AUS.OC | PGP 2.6
Opinions expressed are mine. | E7 FE 97 88 E5 02 3C AE  9C 8C 54 5B 9A D4 A0 CD

Thread