Poor Matthew Hooton; he really does try hard. As news broke of the Brethren story I mentioned below, Matthew found himself on National Radio (sorry, Radio New Zealand National) slugging it out with Kathryn Ryan and Laila Harre (podcast). It's a regular gig but this morning's topic was a little more up-close and personal than usual.
Matthew, to his discomfort, was in the National Party campaign team at just the same time as the Brethren were going about their sinister business with Dr Brash and Mr Key. He is a key figure in The Hollow Men. He was responsible for a lot of policy and strategy ideas, some of them very good; somewhat unfairly, in one of the notorious emails, a superior describes him as an idiot. Yet still, he feigns a certain detachment from the issues. Take, for example, this article from the Sunday Star Times. You would never know that he was in the office from which these emails were supposedly stolen.
This morning, Matthew found himself batting for the Brethren. Of course, he said repeatedly, it was just seven individual members, not the church hierarchy, who were responsible for the leaflets that attacked the Greens, (those leaflets which Don Brash and others in National's own hierarchy knew all about, all along). It was just a coincidence that similar random acts of electioneering were breaking out in various Australian states. Matthew tried to make this claim continually, inserting it awkwardly into otherwise syntactically pure sentences. He tried to say it often enough that it would be accepted. He failed. Laila Harre made mincemeat of him.
Poor Matthew is one of several who have taken on the task of trying to divert attention from the real issues in the Hollow Men. The first tactic they used was to express grave concern about the emails supposedly having been stolen. Mr Key and Mr English tried this themselves in their interviews with Ian Wishart, who handed them the question on a silver platter: "...there seems to be a growing suspicion that there was no leak out of National, but instead somebody hacked into the Parliamentary servers and stole your emails. What are your views on that?" Of course, in replying, Mr Key and Mr English both expressed grave concern. So did certain opinion writers in sundry papers. It was a matter of grave concern that the emails had been released from captivity. The content of those emails, not just about the Brethren but Maxim and a whole gang of nasties, was ignored.
Now the tactic seems to have changed to one of serious worries about religious persecution. This government, you see, is oppressing a religious minority. They said so themselves but others are saying so as well. Matthew is concerned that the Prime Minister should dictate who is involved in politics, although he is equally worried that the Brethren should be smeared by the actions of a few members.
Poor Matthew; it is all very confusing and he is very confused. What can you say, when the Elect Vessel himself has expressed regret and his Spokesman cannot put enough spin on the issue to make it fly away? Matthew admitted that "there were issues around transparency" but these are just about putting an address on a leaflet; he has no apparent concern about the truckloads of money that went Nationals' way and he is not interested in how it was used: $1.2 Million would buy a lot of leaflets. He has no concern either about the contents of the package that a senior member of the Brethren arranged to hand to Dr Brash. Perhaps he should be, because it does not look as if the Brethren are going to go away.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Pretty fly for a white guy
The Exclusive Brethren now have a spokesman and he has been spoking. Apparently, the Elect Vessel, the Man of God, Mr Bruce Hales is not happy.
"He expresses regret for New Zealand," McCorkell reports. "He reckons that's just a nightmare. That's ridiculous. That's terrible … They went too far." What does he mean by that? "I think it was the hiring of private investigators, because it brought a bit of flak.Also worthy of note is that, despite banning computers and mobile phones, Mr Hales chooses to fly by Cessna Citation.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Radio dada
You probably missed it, because you are busy people, but yesterday I was on the radio. Mr Simon Pound of 95bFM invited me to speak about the Draft Statement on Religious Diversity. It was all good fun. I would have told you in advance but it was at rather short notice. Sorry.
Apropos the Statement, here is the revised version, the result of the Interfaith Forum in Hamilton. Make of it what you will. At least it recognises that 37% of the population have ‘no religion’ and that our numbers are growing. Still it gives the impression that New Zealand is a land of the devout and does not mention that only a minority of those who profess religious beliefs worship regularly.
Apropos the Statement, here is the revised version, the result of the Interfaith Forum in Hamilton. Make of it what you will. At least it recognises that 37% of the population have ‘no religion’ and that our numbers are growing. Still it gives the impression that New Zealand is a land of the devout and does not mention that only a minority of those who profess religious beliefs worship regularly.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Tough love
Criminal acquittals under Section 59 of the Crimes Act – Media Reports
Man who chained stepdaughter goes freeInformation compiled by Barnardos
Reported: New Zealand Herald 17/11/99
A jury in the High Court at Palmerston North acquitted a man accused of chaining his wayward 14-year-old stepdaughter to himself, from charges of kidnapping and cruelty to a child.
The report states that the defendant’s counsel successfully utilized a defence of "tough love” without having to call evidence.
Belting okay for wild boys says jury
Reported: New Zealand Herald 21/6/02
Man acquitted of spanking
A jury in the North Shore District Court cleared an Auckland man of assault after he took a belt to his hyperactive stepchild as punishment for continually running on to the road in front of cars.
Father acquitted in pipe beating
Reported: New Zealand Herald 3/11/01
Jury acquits thrasher dad
A jury in the Hamilton District Court decided a father who struck his 12-year old daughter with a hosepipe was within his rights to do so and acquitted him from assault charges.
Smacking father discharged
Reported: The Dominion 22/02/2001
A jury in Napier District Court acquitted a man who struck his son several times on the buttocks with a piece of wood. A pediatrician stated that the injuries the boy received must have been caused by "considerable force”.
Smacking laws stay unchanged for now
Reported: The Dominion 21/12/2001
This article refers to the above cases in Hamilton and Napier and also refers to a case heard in the Christchurch District Court, where the judge, Judge Graeme Noble, acquitted a man for hitting his daughter with a doubled over belt, finding that the man used reasonable force.
Media hoard
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Dispatches from the frontline in the diversity war
I expect you are wondering what the Exclusive Brethren have been up to recently. It's funny you should ask; you see, they are feeling persecuted so we had better be careful with what we say. Apparently the government has made over 330 demeaning comments about them in Parliament.
Of course, the Brethren would know this because, as any visitor to Parliament will tell you, they are always there, sitting in the public gallery. A friend of the lovely Maria von Trapp once observed that the Brethren go to Parliament to look after their investment. Someone else suggested that a trip to Parliament is an outing for Brethren women: a relief from the drudgery of housework and Christian marriage. Whatever the reasons, it is obvious that they have been paying attention.
Of course, nobody will believe their claims to be persecuted, except the folks at Sir Humphrey's and those at TBR and most of the rest of the rightosphere. The Herald also reports that support for the Brethren has come from an unlikely quarter: the Buddhists. One Joan Buchanan (fine old Tibetan name, that one) told them: "when you are disenfranchised and marginalised and the media is misrepresenting your views, I'd like to welcome you to our world. Kia ora." Oh gawd; like a bridge over troubled water, I will lay me down. Since when have the Buddhists been disenfranchised or marginalised? Misrepresented I can believe, since nobody can understand a word of what they say; but persecuted, I think not. It is years since they last had a pogrom in Grey Lynn and I am quite sure that arts administrators are no longer required to submit to religious tests. Of course the urge to smack your Buddhist up is often strong, particularly when they make that beatific smile as they tell you about the sound of one hand clapping. Even more so when they demand not tolerance, but respect. But we restrain ourselves because we celebrate diversity and at least they are not Hare Krishnas. Bloody hippies.
Anyway, back to the plot: the Brethren's wailing and gnashing of teeth occurred at an inter-faith forum in Hamilton, organised by the Human Rights Commission in aid of its statement on religious diversity. The Brethren, true to form, distributed leaflets. Then they claimed that those other leaflets they had distributed, all $1.2 million of them, were paid for personally by the members who had organised them. Funny that, because these were identical leaflets to those that a member in Australia paid personally for; funnier still, similar acts of charity took place in the USofA and Sweden, of all places. Perhaps this synchronicity is testament to the power of prayer. Whatever the cause, it worked in Australia, as The Age attests.
Of course, this is what happens whenever religious groups are gathered together in the name of inter-faith dialogue; they wail and gnash about persecution. Then they fall out amongst themselves. This time, the falling out happened early when Glyn Carpenter of the Vision Network declared that he did not agree with the diversity statement, although he is on the panel that came up with it. Apparently it is us Atheists and Humanists who are imposing our "belief systems" when we ask for religious instruction to be kept out of state schools, although we are probably unaware of what we are doing.
Joris de Bres, the Race Relations Commissioner, then did his best to pour water on troubled oil by saying that we have no state religion. This has provoked the ire of none other than Bishop Brian Tamaki, who has been quiet of late. He brings his fine legal mind to the issue and accuses us of treason, while insisting that HMQ chooses to be an Anglican.
Also spluttering about the diversity statement is international man of pomposity 'Professor' Bill Cooke, who disturbed my enjoyment of Morning Report by talking a load of tosh about New Zealand always being a secular state. You can hear it here (under the title 'New Zealand culture') for a limited period, if you must. No doubt 'Professor' Cooke has an explanation for why we sing God Defend New Zealand.
At least the warring factions can agree on one matter: they don't like the diversity statement or, for that matter, diversity. Further public debate will ensue.
Meanwhile, the rest of us can get on with our lives and worship any god or none.
Of course, the Brethren would know this because, as any visitor to Parliament will tell you, they are always there, sitting in the public gallery. A friend of the lovely Maria von Trapp once observed that the Brethren go to Parliament to look after their investment. Someone else suggested that a trip to Parliament is an outing for Brethren women: a relief from the drudgery of housework and Christian marriage. Whatever the reasons, it is obvious that they have been paying attention.
Of course, nobody will believe their claims to be persecuted, except the folks at Sir Humphrey's and those at TBR and most of the rest of the rightosphere. The Herald also reports that support for the Brethren has come from an unlikely quarter: the Buddhists. One Joan Buchanan (fine old Tibetan name, that one) told them: "when you are disenfranchised and marginalised and the media is misrepresenting your views, I'd like to welcome you to our world. Kia ora." Oh gawd; like a bridge over troubled water, I will lay me down. Since when have the Buddhists been disenfranchised or marginalised? Misrepresented I can believe, since nobody can understand a word of what they say; but persecuted, I think not. It is years since they last had a pogrom in Grey Lynn and I am quite sure that arts administrators are no longer required to submit to religious tests. Of course the urge to smack your Buddhist up is often strong, particularly when they make that beatific smile as they tell you about the sound of one hand clapping. Even more so when they demand not tolerance, but respect. But we restrain ourselves because we celebrate diversity and at least they are not Hare Krishnas. Bloody hippies.
Anyway, back to the plot: the Brethren's wailing and gnashing of teeth occurred at an inter-faith forum in Hamilton, organised by the Human Rights Commission in aid of its statement on religious diversity. The Brethren, true to form, distributed leaflets. Then they claimed that those other leaflets they had distributed, all $1.2 million of them, were paid for personally by the members who had organised them. Funny that, because these were identical leaflets to those that a member in Australia paid personally for; funnier still, similar acts of charity took place in the USofA and Sweden, of all places. Perhaps this synchronicity is testament to the power of prayer. Whatever the cause, it worked in Australia, as The Age attests.
Of course, this is what happens whenever religious groups are gathered together in the name of inter-faith dialogue; they wail and gnash about persecution. Then they fall out amongst themselves. This time, the falling out happened early when Glyn Carpenter of the Vision Network declared that he did not agree with the diversity statement, although he is on the panel that came up with it. Apparently it is us Atheists and Humanists who are imposing our "belief systems" when we ask for religious instruction to be kept out of state schools, although we are probably unaware of what we are doing.
Joris de Bres, the Race Relations Commissioner, then did his best to pour water on troubled oil by saying that we have no state religion. This has provoked the ire of none other than Bishop Brian Tamaki, who has been quiet of late. He brings his fine legal mind to the issue and accuses us of treason, while insisting that HMQ chooses to be an Anglican.
Also spluttering about the diversity statement is international man of pomposity 'Professor' Bill Cooke, who disturbed my enjoyment of Morning Report by talking a load of tosh about New Zealand always being a secular state. You can hear it here (under the title 'New Zealand culture') for a limited period, if you must. No doubt 'Professor' Cooke has an explanation for why we sing God Defend New Zealand.
At least the warring factions can agree on one matter: they don't like the diversity statement or, for that matter, diversity. Further public debate will ensue.
Meanwhile, the rest of us can get on with our lives and worship any god or none.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Another opportunity to say 'apropos'
Apropos my last posting, Idiot/savant has much to say about the decisions of the Star Chamber.
Ash Wednesday
Mild-mannered Matt Robson, former Alliance MP, has been hauled before the Privileges Committee, which he once chaired, after a complaint was made by Peter Dunne. The Committee has told Mr Robson to apologise for suggesting in a Scoop column that the alcohol and tobacco industries supported Mr Dunne and he had "always faithfully delivered his vote for their interests."
What, you may ask, is going on? Is this be the same Peter Dunne, leader of the Sensible Party? Yes, it is. Older readers may remember that Peter Dunne did rather well in the 2002 General Election by stressing the virtues of common sense and moderation. The voters flocked to his side. Then they realised that he may be sensible but the rest of his party was barking.
To plagiarise myself, after he left the Labour Party, Peter Dunne formed Future New Zealand, which then merged with United to become United New Zealand. Then United New Zealand merged with another Future New Zealand, to become United Future New Zealand. The party went on to roam the political landscape absorbing other odd little parties, including Outdoor Recreation, who had guns.
For several years Peter Dunne was his party's sole MP but his success in the 2002 election gained him lots of List votes. It was the second Future New Zealand who formed much of the party caucus. Unbeknownst to most voters, they were once called the Christian Democrats. Their ranks included Paul Adams, who fasted to prevent the Civil Unions Bill passing, and 'Doctor' Bernie Ogilvy. Before entering Parliament, most of them seemed to have been youth workers, missionaries or pastors. They were very keen on The Family.
These were not the sort of people to approve of cigarettes and whiskey and wild, wild, women. But their leader was different from them. Like the heroine of Wolf-Ferrari's opera, Susanna's Secret, he had a hidden vice. Whilst his caucus was fretting about Civil Unions and teenage mothers, he would sneak away to sate his desires. As any tobacco addict will tell you, once you have had one you immediately want another. The Dominion Post of 10th August 2002 recorded his transgressions:
Mr Dunne's distaste for controls on smoking has earned him the nickname of Peter Dunhill in the smokefree rooms of Parliament. His activities have also attracted the attention of a medical professional: George Thomson of the Department of Public Health at the Wellington School of Medicine & Health Sciences has written on Peter Dunne and tobacco issues.
That is not all. While opposing restrictions on smoking, United Future is vehemently opposed to cannabis. The price of giving its support to the Government was a pledge that there would be no change to the laws on cannabis. This rather irked the Green Party, who had their revenge in Parliament on Wednesday, 15th October 2003.
As Scoop reported at the time, Jeanette Fitzsimmons was refused permission to table a letter in Parliament during question time, during a question to Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen from Peter Dunne about the Ministry of Health's funding of anti-tobacco legislation lobbying. The letter was from British American Tobacco in London and read as follows:
Leaving aside the Mr Adams' obvious discomfort at being wrongly associated with a tobacco company, this letter raises some interesting questions. BAT were very generous with the lunch money. Admittedly, in The Old Country, an indifferent ploughman's lunch can cost you the best part of a tenner, even if you can find an indifferent ploughman; but a hundred quid would more than cover the costs, even with a couple of bags of pork scratchings, some cheese 'n' onion crisps and some tizer for the kids.
And what is an 'awayday?' British Rail used to offer awaydays, which were off-peak family tickets, but it seems Mr Dunne did not need to let the train take the strain because he had a driver. So it was not just lunch but also a car, supplied by British American Tobacco. Where did they go? What did they see? Did they buy souvenirs? I think we should be told.
I think we should also be asking why it is Mr Robson who is being censured by the Privileges Committee.
What, you may ask, is going on? Is this be the same Peter Dunne, leader of the Sensible Party? Yes, it is. Older readers may remember that Peter Dunne did rather well in the 2002 General Election by stressing the virtues of common sense and moderation. The voters flocked to his side. Then they realised that he may be sensible but the rest of his party was barking.
To plagiarise myself, after he left the Labour Party, Peter Dunne formed Future New Zealand, which then merged with United to become United New Zealand. Then United New Zealand merged with another Future New Zealand, to become United Future New Zealand. The party went on to roam the political landscape absorbing other odd little parties, including Outdoor Recreation, who had guns.
For several years Peter Dunne was his party's sole MP but his success in the 2002 election gained him lots of List votes. It was the second Future New Zealand who formed much of the party caucus. Unbeknownst to most voters, they were once called the Christian Democrats. Their ranks included Paul Adams, who fasted to prevent the Civil Unions Bill passing, and 'Doctor' Bernie Ogilvy. Before entering Parliament, most of them seemed to have been youth workers, missionaries or pastors. They were very keen on The Family.
These were not the sort of people to approve of cigarettes and whiskey and wild, wild, women. But their leader was different from them. Like the heroine of Wolf-Ferrari's opera, Susanna's Secret, he had a hidden vice. Whilst his caucus was fretting about Civil Unions and teenage mothers, he would sneak away to sate his desires. As any tobacco addict will tell you, once you have had one you immediately want another. The Dominion Post of 10th August 2002 recorded his transgressions:
Mr Dunne's record on smoking includes being the only MP to vote against the 1997 Smokefree Environments Amendment Bill [which included a proposal to raise the age of sale of tobacco to young people from 16 to 18]; attacking the removal of fines for young people buying tobacco, despite no evidence the fines worked; accusing the Government of "continuing to roll over to the insatiable demands of the [Health Ministry] health police; asking the speaker of the House to investigate ASH for contempt for implying he was under the control of the tobacco industry. The action was dropped when ASH apologised; voting against sending the Smokefree Environments Enhanced Protection Amendment Bill to the Health Select Committee; labelling tobacco control laws a failure.Although Peter had good, clean-living friends in Caucus, by the 2005 election he was hanging around with a bad crowd. He had met the WIN Party and quickly formed an alliance with them. The WIN Party (optimistically named, since their chances of winning anything were very slim) was founded by disgruntled publicans to oppose the Government's ban on smoking in bars. Their aim was to create a patrons' revolution against the nanny state. Somehow, it never happened. Not only that, but Peter lost most of his fundy friends in the election and now is it just him, Gordon Copeland and Judy Turner in Parliament.
Mr Dunne's distaste for controls on smoking has earned him the nickname of Peter Dunhill in the smokefree rooms of Parliament. His activities have also attracted the attention of a medical professional: George Thomson of the Department of Public Health at the Wellington School of Medicine & Health Sciences has written on Peter Dunne and tobacco issues.
That is not all. While opposing restrictions on smoking, United Future is vehemently opposed to cannabis. The price of giving its support to the Government was a pledge that there would be no change to the laws on cannabis. This rather irked the Green Party, who had their revenge in Parliament on Wednesday, 15th October 2003.
As Scoop reported at the time, Jeanette Fitzsimmons was refused permission to table a letter in Parliament during question time, during a question to Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen from Peter Dunne about the Ministry of Health's funding of anti-tobacco legislation lobbying. The letter was from British American Tobacco in London and read as follows:
Dear Mr Dunne,According to Scoop, Peter Dunne "promptly sought leave to make a personal explanation. He then explained that the letter dated back to 1994 and related to reimbursement of luncheon expenses incurred by himself and his family while on a private visit to the United Kingdom. United Party MP Paul Adams also sought leave to make a personal explanation to explain that the Paul Adams who signed the letter was not him."
Paul Adams has asked me to send you the enclosed £100 to help pay for your "Awayday". I do hope you will enjoy yourselves.
If at all possible, I should be grateful if you could get receipts for your expenses and pass them on to the driver - even large companies have to account for their money!
Enjoy your visit to England.
Yours Sincerely,
Jean Macy
Secretary to Paul Adams
Leaving aside the Mr Adams' obvious discomfort at being wrongly associated with a tobacco company, this letter raises some interesting questions. BAT were very generous with the lunch money. Admittedly, in The Old Country, an indifferent ploughman's lunch can cost you the best part of a tenner, even if you can find an indifferent ploughman; but a hundred quid would more than cover the costs, even with a couple of bags of pork scratchings, some cheese 'n' onion crisps and some tizer for the kids.
And what is an 'awayday?' British Rail used to offer awaydays, which were off-peak family tickets, but it seems Mr Dunne did not need to let the train take the strain because he had a driver. So it was not just lunch but also a car, supplied by British American Tobacco. Where did they go? What did they see? Did they buy souvenirs? I think we should be told.
I think we should also be asking why it is Mr Robson who is being censured by the Privileges Committee.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Don't let's be beastly to the Muslims
David Farrar comments on an Atheist being kicked off YouTube for posting a video that pointed out logical defects in the Koran, although similar posts about Christianity were considered harmless.
Elsewhere, Sign and Sight is hosting an intellectual stoush: Pascal Bruckner, Ian Buruma, Timothy Garton Ash, Necla Kelek and Paul Cliteur (no relation) fight about multiculturalism.
Elsewhere, Sign and Sight is hosting an intellectual stoush: Pascal Bruckner, Ian Buruma, Timothy Garton Ash, Necla Kelek and Paul Cliteur (no relation) fight about multiculturalism.
Something wicked this way comes
This month's Investigate has a lead story about some particularly mad mullahs coming to New Zealand to spread the word. It is unfortunate that Ian Wishart's credibility is somewhat strained by his previous stories about soy milk and Intelligent Design, because he might be on to something here.
I am always reluctant to get involved in these arguments about the clash of civilisations because Western Values are nearly always represented by people who are fundamentally uncivilised: crazed rightists, Christian soldiers and outright racists. On the other hand, I am not given to liberal hand-wringing about respecting other people's beliefs and seeing everything in context. The people Wishart writes about should not be able to come to our country. If we can keep Ahmed Zaoui locked up we ought to be able to keep this lot out.
Fortunately, we have a draft statement on religious diversity to protect us from the hooded claw. Less than fortunately the 'evangelical community' is represented on the interfaith statement working group by Glyn Carpenter of the Vision Network. He is not very keen on diversity: "words like 'tolerance' and 'reasonable' can be very problematic." Tolerance and reasonableness towards the unfaith community is particularly difficult for him:
So there we have it; clowns to the left of us and jokers to the right. I am not sure of the value of interfaith dialogue but at least it keeps them busy. Still, we can be sure of one truth: however much the People of the Book disagree with each other, they are united when it comes to despising us.
I am always reluctant to get involved in these arguments about the clash of civilisations because Western Values are nearly always represented by people who are fundamentally uncivilised: crazed rightists, Christian soldiers and outright racists. On the other hand, I am not given to liberal hand-wringing about respecting other people's beliefs and seeing everything in context. The people Wishart writes about should not be able to come to our country. If we can keep Ahmed Zaoui locked up we ought to be able to keep this lot out.
Fortunately, we have a draft statement on religious diversity to protect us from the hooded claw. Less than fortunately the 'evangelical community' is represented on the interfaith statement working group by Glyn Carpenter of the Vision Network. He is not very keen on diversity: "words like 'tolerance' and 'reasonable' can be very problematic." Tolerance and reasonableness towards the unfaith community is particularly difficult for him:
Education – some responses (from atheists/humanists) saying there was absolutely no place for religion/belief systems in schools, showed “special pleading” – without (probably) being aware that they were doing it. Atheism, humanism, and secularism, are themselves “belief systems”. Why should they automatically have priority place in state education when the largest belief system in the country is Christian? I said it would not be unreasonable to adopt something like the UK model (mentioned in one of the responses) which allocated a significantly larger portion of time in education to teaching Christianity compared to other religions. The notion of “impartial teaching” was also problematic.Of course, the cause of secularism is hardly assisted by the New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists (Inc) insisting, in its own submission to the religious diversity debate, that Rationalism and Humanism are belief systems. In doing so, the NZARH fell into a trap set long ago by the fundies. Now they have it on record that ours is just another belief, a religion without a god. Some of the more happy-clappy Humanists at the NZARH would like nothing more than to be thought of as high priests; for the rest of us, the NZARH position is disastrous: the fundies will point and say that we are just another competing religion.
So there we have it; clowns to the left of us and jokers to the right. I am not sure of the value of interfaith dialogue but at least it keeps them busy. Still, we can be sure of one truth: however much the People of the Book disagree with each other, they are united when it comes to despising us.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Interlude
Whilst I try to think of something to write, you may want to spend some time at No God Zone , where you will find observations on some of the wildest and weirdest fundies. It's really rather good.
Friday, February 09, 2007
Anna Nicole Smith - a tribute
The Fundy Post learned this morning of the death of Anna Nicole Smith, the well-known celebrity. We would like to make it known that we do not give a stuff.
Roll of honour
The Fundy Post has been selected for The Atheist Blogroll, run by Mojoey. Go there, read his blog and find other Atheist blogs, but come back y'all.
The breakfast club
You might have expected the Maxim Institute to be supportive of John Key's proposal that businesses should provide breakfasts for the children of the deserving poor. More than that, you might have thought it was Maxim's idea: after all, Maxim relies on corporate donations to survive and so should society. It also seemed to chime so tunefully with Maxim's new enthusiam for Social Justice. But you would be wrong. Maxim is really very grumpy indeed about Mr Key's modest proposal. Rather than applaud the reappearance of Lady Bountiful, Maxim is worried:
More importantly, Mr Key's proposal simply has not been thought through. It is all well and good involving businesses in these matters but only if there is profit to be made. As noted above, Maxim relies on corporate donors; at the last count these included Pumpkin Patch, the CD and DVD Store (ever wondered why they have a Christian Music section - now you know) and evangelical souvenir manufacturers the Derek Corporation, the people who put the fundamentalist back in fun. Does Mr Key really expect these good people to start feeding children?
Come on John, there's money to be made! After all Maxim's efforts to bring home the vote for National in 2005, Mr Key should realise that it is time to start putting something back into the business community. Maxim's vision of Civil Society is all about replacing state provision with volunteers and businesses. The volunteers will do it for nothing, just as they always do, but the businesses need payment. It is National's job, once duly elected, to ensure that all these services provided by the state are privatised.
Remember John: it's about taking, not giving.
However, it's not just important that we help to feed those children but it is important how we feed them. We need to be careful that in dealing with dysfunction we do not generate more. For example, if a single mum is struggling to get by, and her son's school starts providing breakfast then it's likely that she'll stop feeding him in the morning. The challenge then is to devise a way that businesses such as Tasti can work in partnership with homes and families, rather than taking on their role and placing greater burdens on schools.Indeed: the slattern will stop buying breakfast and will spend the money on Vodka Cruisers and party pills. Before you know it, she will be up the duff again and the Tasti Foods will have another mouth to feed.
More importantly, Mr Key's proposal simply has not been thought through. It is all well and good involving businesses in these matters but only if there is profit to be made. As noted above, Maxim relies on corporate donors; at the last count these included Pumpkin Patch, the CD and DVD Store (ever wondered why they have a Christian Music section - now you know) and evangelical souvenir manufacturers the Derek Corporation, the people who put the fundamentalist back in fun. Does Mr Key really expect these good people to start feeding children?
Come on John, there's money to be made! After all Maxim's efforts to bring home the vote for National in 2005, Mr Key should realise that it is time to start putting something back into the business community. Maxim's vision of Civil Society is all about replacing state provision with volunteers and businesses. The volunteers will do it for nothing, just as they always do, but the businesses need payment. It is National's job, once duly elected, to ensure that all these services provided by the state are privatised.
Remember John: it's about taking, not giving.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Txtspkrs talk about their lives
I would write more often but I have been busy reading stories like this
OK WELL I WAS WITH THIS BOI NAMED GENE ANTHONY AND WE HAVE BEEN TAGETHER FOR A WHOLE YEAR WE ALWAYS HAVE OUR ARGUMENTS BUT THEYRE ALL JUST PETTY.SO 1 DAY GENE (MUH MANN) GETS A CALL FROM HIS X GURL AMANDA AND SHE AND HIM HADD STARTED TALKIN AGAIN AND THEY HAD DATED OFF AND ON FOR LIKE 2 YEARS.. AND HE ENDED UP CHEATIN ON ME WITH HER AND THEN BREAKIN UP WITH ME AND DOIN MORE STUFF WITH HER AND THEN HE GOT ALL MESSED UP AND HE EVEN HADD SEX WITH HER WHILE I WAS STILL IN THE HOUSE LIVING WITH HIM..AND WHEN I HADD LEFT HIS HOUSE CUH I WAS SO DONE WITH ALL THE BULL I WENT TO MUH BOI SWAZZLE P (PATRICKS) HOUSE FOR ABOUT A WEEK AND I GOT SO DRUNK AND I KALLED HIM AND HE STARTED CRYIN FOR ME BACK AND I WAS SOO DRUNK ME AND MUH GURL AND A COUPLE MUH BOIS SHOWED UP THERE AND I ENDED UP PUNCHIN HIM DEAD IN HIS MOUTH WHEN HE TRYED TO GET BACK WITH ME BUT I DOO LOVE HIMM SO YAH KNOW.. AND THEN I WENT OVER THERE THE NEXT DAY TO APOLOGIZE AND SHE ( AMANDA ) HIS EX THE GURL HE CHEATED ON MEEH WITH.. AND HE TOLD ME AND HER TO GO IN TO A ROOM AND HE TOTALLY TOLD AMANDA HE DIDDNT WANNA BE WITH HER AGAIN AND HE WANTED MEEH BACK.. I FELL BACK FOR HIM DATED AGAIN FOR A NOTHER YEAR AND WE MOVED IN TA GETHER IN AN APARTMENT.. THEN THA SAME BULLSHIT CAME BACK.. I LEFT HIM AND I LOVE HIM BUT HES A TOTALL BULL S**TER AND A CUMPULSIVE LIAR.. HAVENT TALKED TO HIM SENSE BUT I SAW HIS X AMANDA AT LIVINGSTONS AND WANTED TO WHOOP HER A**..!! LOVE B1LL13J0 LYNN G*from RealBreakups
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
I see red
I don't get into the prophecy business usually, but important news has been foretold. Athol, a Catholic Jew (which possibly is a definition of beating yourself up) has heard the following message from God:
Mind you, if you had read the Old Testament you would know that already.
The red haired woman is soon to begin her rise again. She has much to suffer but I will be with her. She is my humble Warrior for Australia. She will lead my people in Australia. She will become Prime Minister in 2011 as I have foretold - do not doubt my word to you. Australia is about to enter the furnace of affliction - I will purify her with my Spirit. John Howard will step down and Peter Costello will have his chance but this will signal a time of turmoil in politics - the voice of my daughter Pauline will be the clear sound of warning for your nation.Now, in the normal course of events I would be with her as well: I have something of a weakness for redheads. But this one is Pauline Hanson. So it would seem that John Howard's attempts to capture the fundy vote and Peter Costello's good works at Hillsong are to no avail. God is a small-minded racist bigot.
Mind you, if you had read the Old Testament you would know that already.
Sunday, February 04, 2007
Local boy in the photograph
I have been absent from mine own blog for a while. This is inexcusable, although I have an excuse: I have been working on my book, Baby Cwm Bach: A History of Welsh Rock 'n' Roll. Unfortunately, that excuse is also a lie.
Gentle reader, I cannot tell you a lie. I have been spending my time doing that crazy little thing called work, as well as making occasional forays deep into enemy territory: the comments sections of fundy blogs like The Briefing Room. It really is extraordinarily good fun. Here, for example, is an object lesson in how not to write a blog posting and how to manage a discussion. Lesson one: choose Fox News as your news source to ensure you have no credibility. Lesson two, criticise a magazine article written in a language you cannot read, so everyone will know that you are talking out of your fundamental orifice. Lesson three: discover that your opponent can read that language and has read the article. Lesson four: attempt to conceal your obvious ignorance. Lesson Five - and this is the really important one, so pay attention: allow discussion to degenerate into a slanging match between the Prods and the Papists. So much for Christian unity.
I have since decided that I am wasting my time arguing with these people. Henceforth, I shall confine my commenting activity to serious blogs which consider the real questions of the day, such as Brainstab.
Meanwhile, Harvest Bird has written an eloquent account of her unspiritual journey . If any readers do not have a blog and would like to contribute their own thoughts about their Atheism, they are welcome to do so here. Send contributions to fundypost at gmail dot com.
Oh, and here's some Welsh Rock 'n' Roll: Stereophonics.
Gentle reader, I cannot tell you a lie. I have been spending my time doing that crazy little thing called work, as well as making occasional forays deep into enemy territory: the comments sections of fundy blogs like The Briefing Room. It really is extraordinarily good fun. Here, for example, is an object lesson in how not to write a blog posting and how to manage a discussion. Lesson one: choose Fox News as your news source to ensure you have no credibility. Lesson two, criticise a magazine article written in a language you cannot read, so everyone will know that you are talking out of your fundamental orifice. Lesson three: discover that your opponent can read that language and has read the article. Lesson four: attempt to conceal your obvious ignorance. Lesson Five - and this is the really important one, so pay attention: allow discussion to degenerate into a slanging match between the Prods and the Papists. So much for Christian unity.
I have since decided that I am wasting my time arguing with these people. Henceforth, I shall confine my commenting activity to serious blogs which consider the real questions of the day, such as Brainstab.
Meanwhile, Harvest Bird has written an eloquent account of her unspiritual journey . If any readers do not have a blog and would like to contribute their own thoughts about their Atheism, they are welcome to do so here. Send contributions to fundypost at gmail dot com.
Oh, and here's some Welsh Rock 'n' Roll: Stereophonics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)