Comments on: Where is the funding for the Atheist Convention Melbourne 2010?

By: BeerWill

BeerWill — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:03:11 +0000

In a 2001 Government report, the committe decided quote: "'the advancement of religion’ should continue as a head of charity. It is clear that a large proportion of the population have a need for spiritual sustenance."

How does that make sense? What is "spiritual sustenance" anyway? A large proportion of the population also have a very large need for actual defineable mental states such as "happiness". Surely then a business that creates amusing cartoons is a charity?

I think atheistic organisations should become official tax deductible charities based on one of the other offiical designations of a charity – "the advancement of education". Then we could use some tax payer money to educate society, including educating them about how their money is spent by the govt. Such an organisation could then compete with the Bible society "charity" by handing out free books promoting the wonder and TRUTH of science and reason wherever they are handing out their medieval books of fiction.

By: Viola Wilkins

Viola Wilkins — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 23:19:12 +0000

A SEXUALLY explicit illustrated Book of Genesis by the controversial artist, Robert Crumb, which features biblical characters having intercourse and ''gratuitous'' depictions of violence, has been condemned by religious groups.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/entertainment/books...

By: Cara

Cara — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:16:38 +0000

Too bad the proposition for an Australian bus campaign was refused :s

By: Warren

Warren — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:55:56 +0000

I'm heading down to the convention from Qld, and looking forward to it. I'll be heading down with about 10 others from our atheist group.

This isn't about supporting atheism it's about supporting an event that will be bringing money into the state. However if support isn't given when it's given to other 'belief' sectors then it would certainly seem that the government has a bias, and an unconstitutional one. That would make for some great publicity. Perhaps a lead up bus campaign even?

By: Gee Suss

Gee Suss — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:26:29 +0000

Not quite sure, but from what I have been told, the AFA are waiting patiently, but their members are getting toey not hearing from their reps.

The event will bring a lot of tourism to victoria, will be an outstanding event bring thousands of people to Melbourne.

Come over and enjoy Victoria

By: Gee Suss

Gee Suss — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:12:31 +0000

Yes the ABS tho has to list statistics of those not professing a faith, so puts that in the category of religion.

The government however does not.

I think personally the issue is the government does not want to be seen ’supporting atheism’ and it has people internally just avoiding touching it because of that.

I will have to contact a mate in the AFA to see if he can find out more.

By: John

John — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:03:36 +0000

“In 1983, the High Court of Australia defined religion as a complex of beliefs and practices which point to a set of values and an understanding of the meaning of existence. The ABS 2001 Census Dictionary defines “No Religion” as a category of religion which has sub categories such as agnosticism, atheism, Humanism and rationalism.”

The state government precedents could be different.

Can the ‘avoidance of confronting those with non-belief’ be a case for discrimination? Does Victoria have legislation for this issue?

They provide funding straight away to religious events and not to non-religious events.

The treatment of “Parliament of the World’s Religions” versus “Global Atheist Convention”.

By: Gee Suss

Gee Suss — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:04:57 +0000

Where did you get that information? Atheism is not classed as a religion.

Funding from the Victorian Government is not dependent on whether the AFA are a religion or not. The criteria is whether they have over 1,000 people, with some from overseas and interstate who will be staying hotels and buying food for a number of days from what I know.

The issue is however, that religious groups get funding, but there has been total avoidance of confronting those with non-belief.

In other words, there is open slather with those of belief of a god, but total avoidance of those with no belief in a god.

Both are philosophical positions.

To distinguish a religion from a non-religion, a religious from a non-religious purpose, and in determining what constitutes a religion for worldly purposes such as relief from taxation, the indicators for government recognition may include:

* belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle;
* acceptance of conduct in order to give effect to that belief;
* ideas that relate to humanity’s nature and place in the universe, and its relation to things supernatural;
* acceptance that adherents constitute an identifiable group or groups, and
* participation by adherents in practices believed to have supernatural significance

By: John

John — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:23:40 +0000

In Australia, Atheism is considered by the government as a religion.

Past High Court rulings in Australia have deemed the government must not discriminate in funding religious organisations.

So it is all or nothing. The AFA should lobby on the behalf of Australian Atheists for the right to funding.

Or we do not accept or request funding to direct the attention to the fact Atheism is not a religion…