Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Lucia Pope Francis and boys taking their same-sex partners to school balls

Today's Dominion Post contains a perfect example of a person who has taken in the media interpretation of Pope Francis and considers that to be the correct one.  Here's Des Darroch of Kilbirnie's, "Point to the Editor", published in the Dominion Post today:
Monica Devine (Letters, Dec 30) criticises the rector of St Patrick's College, Silverstream, for allowing same-sex partners to attend the school ball.  Pope Francis, Time magazine's person of the year, responding to a recent question about gay rights said: "Who am I to judge".  Pope Francis needs every encouragement in 2014.
There are so many things wrong with Des' interpretation of what Pope Francis said and why he said it and what it might mean, that I really need to break everything down in order to be clear.

Pope Francis talking to the press on the plane back to Rome from Rio De Janeiro after World Youth Day, 28 July 2013

On 28 July, 2013, Pope Francis held a press conference during his return flight from Rio De Janeiro.  He was asked many questions, and you can read all those questions and his answers on the Vatican website.  During that press conference he was asked about Monsignor Ricca's private life and the gay lobby. The specific question was:

I would like permission to ask a delicate question: another image that has been going around the world is that of Monsignor Ricca and the news about his private life. I would like to know, Your Holiness, what you intend to do about this? How are you confronting this issue and how does Your Holiness intend to confront the whole question of the gay lobby?

As you can see from the question above, Pope Francis was not asked about "gay rights" as alleged by Des Darroch of Kilburnie.

However the problem is that the infamous, "who am I to judge" that has been attributed to the pope and applied to gay rights by such persons as Des, has been plucked out of a very long answer because of the goings on of a certain Monsignor Ricca. The actual sentence that the pope uttered, in Italian, so here it is translated, was:

If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him?

People who are searching for the Lord are not agitating for acceptance of their same-sex partners at the school ball.

The entire paragraph answer that Pope Francis gave to the question, I will now quote in full so that you can see the context of that one sentence. I've bolded the sentence that was summarised down to "who am I to judge", by Des of Kiburnie.

About Monsignor Ricca: I did what canon law calls for, that is a preliminary investigation. And from this investigation, there was nothing of what had been alleged. We did not find anything of that. This is the response. But I wish to add something else: I see that many times in the Church, over and above this case, but including this case, people search for “sins from youth”, for example, and then publish them. They are not crimes, right? Crimes are something different: the abuse of minors is a crime. No, sins. But if a person, whether it be a lay person, a priest or a religious sister, commits a sin and then converts, the Lord forgives, and when the Lord forgives, the Lord forgets and this is very important for our lives. When we confess our sins and we truly say, “I have sinned in this”, the Lord forgets, and so we have no right not to forget, because otherwise we would run the risk of the Lord not forgetting our sins. That is a danger. This is important: a theology of sin. Many times I think of Saint Peter. He committed one of the worst sins, that is he denied Christ, and even with this sin they made him Pope. We have to think a great deal about that. But, returning to your question more concretely. In this case, I conducted the preliminary investigation and we didn’t find anything. This is the first question. Then, you spoke about the gay lobby. So much is written about the gay lobby. I still haven’t found anyone with an identity card in the Vatican with “gay” on it. They say there are some there. I believe that when you are dealing with such a person, you must distinguish between the fact of a person being gay and the fact of someone forming a lobby, because not all lobbies are good. This one is not good. If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him? The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this in a beautiful way, saying ... wait a moment, how does it say it ... it says: “no one should marginalize these people for this, they must be integrated into society”. The problem is not having this tendency, no, we must be brothers and sisters to one another, and there is this one and there is that one. The problem is in making a lobby of this tendency: a lobby of misers, a lobby of politicians, a lobby of masons, so many lobbies. For me, this is the greater problem. Thank you so much for asking this question. Many thanks.

Later, Pope Francis had an opportunity to clarify his "who am I to judge?" statement that has wrongly been taken up by all and sundry as Pope Francis giving his endorsement to gay rights. This is what he said to a Jesuit magazine:

In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are “socially wounded” because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro, I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.

A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: “Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?” We must always consider the person.

I totally agree with the pope.

When it comes to boys who are gay in Catholic schools, it is not good for them to be encouraged to take their same-sex partner to the school ball.  For that gives them the idea that same-sex partnership is approved of by the church and is a way of life that is good for them in the long term. I bet if you asked the pope what he thought about boys taking their same-sex partners to school balls, what he would not say was that it was not for him to judge. Earlier in his press conference, he was asked why he did not talk about abortion or same-sex marriage.  His answer was:

The Church has already spoken quite clearly on this. It was unnecessary to return to it, just as I didn’t speak about cheating, lying, or other matters on which the Church has a clear teaching!

The people who think Pope Francis is taking the Catholic Church in a radically different direction, such as Des who wrote the very short letter to the editor which they deign to call a "point", really need to pay more attention to what the pope is actually saying. Again, the pope is Catholic, what a surprise!

Fletch Christmas and Christmas Television

Colin Hogg from the NZ Herald comments today on the dross that was served up to us as holiday fare on TV this Christmas season.
There's no such thing as bad television. There's just some stuff you wouldn't watch unless your life depended on it, and that's a little hard to imagine.

Unless you're a TV critic, of course, and you're viewing your way through that strange and barren time around Christmas and New Year when the channels empty out their rubbish and their recycle bins.

It's a cruel and merciless season and if there's anything new at all it's either full of Christmas cheer or it's stuff they didn't want to run when the advertisers were interested.

On Christmas Day it would have felt almost irreligious not to watch The Queen's Christmas Message (TV One, 6:50) and, anyway, she only talked for 10 minutes and it was about the only time you heard God mentioned during the religious holiday on prime time TV
He is right, of course. It was awful. Christmas Eve daytime shows were exactly the same as any normal weekday, with the usual Emmerdale through to Dickenson's Real Deal on One and whatever it is they put on the other channels. Even the midday One News takes a break as the presenters apparently go on holiday (and still are until next month). And the Vicar of Dibley specials again?

Christmas Day was chock full of repeats as well.

Tonight is much the same - old movie reruns and repeats galore. I guess the advertisers expect that everyone will be out partying and won't be watching - hence, a load of old rubbish programmed.

The point Hogg makes about God and religious programming is also well made. Christmas is slowing slipping into the secular (try saying that three times fast!), and Easter even more so, as people forget the reason for the holidays they are supposed to be celebrating - yes, celebrating.

I looked up the meaning of celebrate online, as it says -
1. To observe (a day or event) with ceremonies of respect, festivity, or rejoicing.
These days, I wonder if some of the younger people know exactly why we have this day off worldwide and what they are supposed to be celebrating?

Monday, December 30, 2013

Lucia What the media tells you about Pope Francis, so make sure you get better news sources

I continue to be amazed how many news articles there have been published in the New Zealand news media on Pope Francis.  This is probably because he is considered to be less Catholic than other Popes have been.  For this reason, it is important for those that are really interested in what Pope Francis has to say, to read better news than just the local Stuff, because there is important information being missed out in the more secular NZ press.

Compare the New Zealand Stuff article from Reuters with the much more comprehensive AsiaNews.it.  Pope Francis was talking about Saint Stephen's martyrdom, celebrated by the Church as a Feast Day on the day after Christmas.  The day we more commonly refer to as Boxing Day, or the day when everyone goes to the shops to get really good sales items.

The Stuff article connects Pope Francis' words to what is occurring in Islamic countries with regards to religious freedom.  However, religious freedom is also under attack in Western countries, those that "protect freedom and human rights on paper".  From the Stuff article:
Francis did not name any countries but the Vatican has long urged Saudi Arabia, the site of Islam's holiest places, to lift a ban on Christians worshiping in public.

This year there have been a number of incidents of intolerance and attacks against minority Christians in Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Sudan, Nigeria and other countries where their rights are guaranteed by law.
In my opinion, if you read carefully what the Pope is saying, he's not referring to just those crazy Muslim places.  From the AsiaNews.it article, much more of his exact words:
For the pope, Saint Stephen's martyrdom is the reason why "we are praying today especially for Christians who suffer discrimination because of their witness to Christ and the Gospel."

"We are close to those brothers and sisters who, like Saint Stephen, are unjustly accused and subjected to violence of various kinds. This happens especially where religious freedom is still not guaranteed or not fully realised. In my opinion, there are more today than in the early days of the Church. As it happens however, even in countries and places that protect freedom and human rights on the paper, believers, especially Christians, encounter limitations or discrimination."

Countries that protect freedom and human rights on paper could easily mean countries such as Britain and the United States, there have been clashes between the right to freedom of religion and the new right to not be discrimated against if a person wants to call themselves married to a person of the same sex and all that leads to.  Such as Catholic adoption agencies having had to close because they won't adopt children to same-sex couples. Where choosing not to make a cake for a same-sex marriage will get you sued.

Then there's the increasing pressure by Muslims and atheists against Christian symbols and holidays, such as the wearing of a cross in Europe.  In America, saying the word Christmas during the Christmas season is not allowed in some places, which then means Christmas carols can't be sung and children's handmade Christmas cards can't be given out.  And then there's the ACLU trying to get the 10 Commandments removed from state monuments.

Etc, etc, etc ...

The Pope continues:
"For these brothers and sisters, I would ask you to pray, for a moment, in silence, everyone," the pope said off the cuff. After a brief moment of silence, he continued, saying, "Let us entrust them to Mary," and called on everyone to say a Hail Mary for them.

"For Christians," he added, "this is not surprising because Jesus foretold it as an opportunity to bear witness. Nevertheless, injustice must be legally reported and eliminated."

"May Mary Queen of Martyrs help us experience Christmas with the ardour of faith and love that shines in Saint Stephen and all the martyrs of the Church," the pope said in concluding.
I started this post off with the intention to just highlighting a couple of the many tabs that I have open on my desktop at any one time that all be turned into a blog post.  However, I can't always seem to be able to just do an off the cuff post, no matter how hard I try, I often have to make sense of it.

So, I will finish off with some snippets of a post by Tim Stanley.  He's writing about the media creating this fictional Pope Francis, and it's that fictional Pope Francis who got named Time Magazine's Man of the Year.  Again, this is why it's vitally important, if you are a person who is interested in news about the Pope to read better news sources than the secular ones for a more complete picture of Francis, because he's not who the media thinks he is.

There are two Popes. One is Francis as he actually is: spiritual shepherd of the Catholic faithful, the man chosen to defend and articulate the beliefs of the Church. The other is Francis as the liberal establishment would have him be: a crusading humanist on the verge of making the Catholic Church socially acceptable at Manhattan dinner parties. Guess which Pope Francis Time Magazine just made Man of the Year?

The Catholic writer Billy Newton has done a great run down of why Time's Pope is not the real Pope, with two killer observations. First, the magazine calls him The People's Pope – as if a pontiff could be anything else, or as if all those that came before him were distant aristos who ate the poor for breakfast. Second, Time is obsessed with sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sexy sex. Will the Pope embrace homosexuality? Will he make it a little less wrong to have an abortion? Will he distribute prophylacticos to the masses of Rio, flinging them from his Pope-copter like confetti on a parade? Or, at the very least, will he stop talking about sex and leave Catholics to run their own sex lives in peace?

...

The Time piece misunderstands Francis and his job description. It trawls through the details of his biography and mines every little ambiguous thing he's ever said because it presumes that the Church is an extension of the will of one man. It is not. It is, according to Catholic doctrine, the mystical body of Christ. It is the Way, the Truth and the Life as discovered through revelation, scripture and tradition. It is not guided exclusively by a man but by the Holy Spirit. It cannot err, change its mind or bend according to fashion because it is a divine instrument and God doesn't change his mind. Sorry if all this language seems a bit religous-y, but we are talking about a Church here – not a political party or a corporation. As such, it can't be reduced to biography.
Related link: Time Magazine's Man of the Year is Pope Francis. Alas, it's not the real Pope Francis ~ Tim Stanley, The Telegraph

Sunday, December 29, 2013

ZenTiger The Universe as a Hologram

The link is not related to this book.  Or it is.
The Universe as a Hologram: A very interesting theory that sounds a bit like looking into the mind of God (but that's just me).

An interesting panel discussion in the link below that discusses the concept and what it means for quantum physics, black holes and our view of the universe.

The thin sheet of reality

ZenTiger The Science Is Settled

It's been suggested by the warmists that AGW Scientists are not the sort that make ridiculous statements without having the full force of scientific consensus to fall back on. This list of newspaper articles shows many stories on AGW are laced with thick doses of hype, made by politicians and experts alike in their crusade to justify global taxation schemes.

Meanwhile, an ice breaker is caught in the ice during the summer months down in the Antarctic. The larger ice breaker sent to free it has had to turn back. Maybe the science isn't settled after all?

On the other hand, do we have the same scientists lining up to announce that man made climate change is the cause behind less extreme weather events? The logic used here is that whenever extreme weather events occur, it must be man made climate change to blame, so I'm presuming the good news for 2013 in the USA can only mean all those extra fuel miles burned up to get to Copenhagen and Kyoto have really paid off for the world.

AGW has been around for a while now, and a lot of those predictions made 5-10 years ago can now be measured, and are found wanting. It really should discredit a lot of the studies that argued their particular climate change models were accurate and to be believed, but I suspect excuses will be made, with no sense of humility nor shame. And for that reason alone, it is fair to consider that the science isn't actually settled.

Arctic Ice Free by 2013
Extreme Weather not so extreme in 2013 in the USA
Ship enjoys a cool summer in the Antarctic
IPCC Floundering (and a link to the graphic I used in this post)
Annus Horribilus for Global Warming
Update: Stll Waiting for Warming

Friday, December 27, 2013

Lucia Animal attack on teenage German Tourists in NZ


NZ is raising more and more of these types of human beings that don't act human, that act like animals with no regard for the safety of the victims, no sense of proportion, no understanding that overwhelming force just to steal is completely unnecessary.

My guess is the teenagers involved in the attack on German tourists on Boxing Day have not been raised in proper family structures and act more like animals in a pack, or even zombies, than rational human beings because they just don't know any other way. It's horrifying.

Four teenagers will appear in court today charged in relation to the alleged aggravated robbery yesterday of two German tourists camping in Whakatane.

The German couple's camping trip turned into a nightmare when they were forced to flee their attackers following the early-morning Boxing Day attack in the Bay of Plenty town.

Three of those charged in relation to the the attack are males aged, 14, 17 and 18. The fourth person is a female aged 15. The 17-year-old is from the Whakatane area and the other three are from Opotiki.

Police said they were still looking for a fifth youth who was believed to have been involved in the incident.

A witness who saw the young couple's injuries described the 18-year-old German woman's blonde hair as being stained red with blood, with a "massive" gash in her forehead.

The 19-year-old German man's teeth had been smashed in and his face was blackened and nearly "unrecognisable".

Police yesterday said they had recovered weapons believed to have been used by the attackers but would not confirm whether wooden bats were used.

In another news item that I've read from the Dominion Post it says the young man has lost hist teeth and that bats were used.  My goodness, an attack on sleeping campers with bats just to steal stuff.  Incredible.  They could have just threatened them.

Quite honestly, even if you don't believe in God, surely those that champion the loss of Christianity in NZ should be able to see that fear of God and eternal burning in Hell could have prevented this sort of attack. Yet without that fear that our actions here on earth have eternal ramifications, anything goes. Why not act like an animal if it gets you what you want and stuff the consequences, because they are temporary anyway?

As an aside, isn't it interesting that the German tourists are being referred to as adults and the attackers as teenagers and youths, yet the tourists are also teenagers, being aged 18 and 19.

Related links: Teens charged over attack on German campers ~ Stuff

Thursday, December 26, 2013

Lucia Comments are now properly functional

Whew, it looks like everything is working now!

What have I done, you ask?  Well, I've added the commenting system, Disqus to this blog.

After seeing it in action on multiple blogs, I came to like how it allowed me to keep track of commenters across numerous blogs.  Though, I seem to be one of the few people that actually follow others on it.

I also liked the ability to reply to comments directly and the voting system.  Having gotten used to voting for really good comments on some blogs, I found myself frustrated when there was no voting ability on others.

Most of all, however, I like how it's more connective.  Through being able to see the activity of commenters on other sites, it's makes blogs that use it feel less isolated from each other.

Here is my profile on Disqus. If you scroll down, you will see comments I have left on other sites as shown below:


I'm also following 10 people, and that allows me to see their comments when I go to my Dashboard. The link I've just given though, is not actually to my Dashboard, it's to the Dashboard of the person clicking on it. So if you are logged onto Disqus, you will see your own comments there and the comments of others you are following.

To follow a person, just click on their name when you see them in the comments and then click on the Follow button on their profile. As an example, here is William Stout's profile. As I wasn't following him when I took this screen shot, there was an obvious Follow button available.  Below, you can see it in grey towards the top right of the screen shot:




To log on in order to comment, just use your Google login.  Disqus accepts Google accounts, Facebook accounts, Twitter accounts and of course, Disqus accounts for logging in.

Here is a screen shot from the Merry Christmas thread.  I've logged out so I could show you how to log in.  Just click on the Login with the arrow just below and to the right of the space for the comment.  It will give you a number of options for logging in.  If you normally comment here easily with no problems, just choose Google and you'll be away:


Please say Hi to test it out!

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Lucia Merry Christmas!



Have a wonderful and safe Christmas, everyone!

We're off to midnight Mass tonight, for the first time for me in many years, and for the first time ever for my children and husband. Should be good!

The commenting does work, so if you don't see it, try using your mobile app for now until I get it sorted out properly.

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Lucia Comments are down for now [UPDATE 5]

I'm changing the commenting system over to a 3rd party and have run into some trouble with it, in that what should have been a simple import and change over has not been. It did pop up briefly for me on one post and then disappear again, which is weird. I'll look at it again tonight, but in the meantime, our commenting is not quite available. Or maybe it will just start working by itself. Hopefully!

UPDATE: I've been in contact with Disqus support and they've sent me a screenshot of this post with a comment loaded in Disqus. That's the comment I made from the mobile. Apparently it's all working. I haven't had a chance to go through all their suggestions to make it work for me on my desktop, but in the meantime, if anyone out there can actually see the comments, please make a comment and let me know.

UPDATE 2: Interesting. Clearing all my cookies (after just trying the Disqus cookie) allowed me to see the comments. Logging into Google made them disappear again.

UPDATE 3: Repeating deleting my cookies now doesn't work in letting me see Disqus. I have Google two-step verification. I wonder if there's some sort of interference there.

UPDATE 4: Moving the Disqus widget to the bottom right-most column seems to have helped with showing the number of comments in each post. Not helping with showing the actual comments, however.

UPDATE 5: I think I have it working!!!! Woo Hoo!! It was a ZenTiger twitter account gadget that might have been stuffing things up. He can move it to his own page if he still wants it.

Saturday, December 14, 2013

Lucia Tony Abbott stands up to the UN on an issue NZ caved over

Image from The Financial Review

Good on Tony Abbott!!!

A ban on parents smacking their children risks turning Australia into a nanny state, says Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who admits he smacked his own kids.

A UN Committee on the Rights of the Child report asks Australia to abolish the right of parents to use reasonable chastisement to discipline children, News Corp Australia reports.

The committee would also like teachers and childcare workers to report cases of parents smacking their children.

But the idea has not grabbed Mr Abbott.

"I was probably one of those guilty parents who did occasionally chastise the children, a very gentle smack I've got to say," Mr Abbott told the Seven Network on Thursday.

"I think that we've got to treat our kids well, but I don't think we ought to say there's no place ever for smacks.

"All parents know that occasionally the best thing we can give is a smack, but it should never be something that hurts them."

Mr Abbott said it was "always a danger" that these types of bans moved Australia towards a nanny state.

"I think we often see political correctness taken to extremes and maybe this is another example," he said.

I always thought that there was something going on in the background that our previous Prime Minister, Helen Clark filled John Key in on when John Key did his infamous about turn on the smacking bill that Green MP, Sue Bradford put into Parliament.

Helen Clark, of course, went on to work at the UN (surprise, surprise) when National, headed by John Key, won the election because of the public's annoyance over the extent of political correctness that Labour had overseen in their years in power.

Most people expected National to overturn the hated smacking bill when he became Prime Minister, especially once the referendum results came in that overwhelmingly supported overturning the legislation despite how the political pundits tried to spin it.

Yet, John Key did not overturn the legislation and tried to find excuses as to why he couldn't. "A whole lot of people" wouldn't like it, he said in an interview on radio when grilled by the host as to why the he couldn't change the law now that the people had spoken.

This one issue alone highlights the differences between the two Prime Ministers.  John Key, raised by a single mother, has not been able to stand up to the pressure exerted upon him by the United Nations, while as Tony Abbott, who had a father in his life that "set out quite deliberately to make his son a fighter and a leader," was able to call out banning smacking for what it is - political correctness taken to extremes.

Related links: Tony Abbott admits to smacking his children, rules out ban ~ The Age (link contains an autoplay video that can be turned off if you're quick enough)

Friday, December 13, 2013

Lucia 2014: The Year of Jan Karski, anti-Nazi Resistance fighter

Jan Karski, before a wall-map of the Warsaw Ghetto at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, recalls his secret 1942 missions into the Nazi "prison-city-within-a-city" (From Wikipedia)


Cool. As many readers will know, I am of Polish descent and all things Polish from WWII interest me greatly.

The Polish parliament has declared 2014 as “Karski Commemoration Year,” named after legendary anti-Nazi Resistance fighter Jan Karski, who brought the first updated reports about the extermination of European Jews to England, and later to the United States, in the fall of 1942. Karski was also one of the Righteous Gentiles and an honorary citizen of Israel.

Last Friday’s decision by the Polish parliament was supported unanimously by all members of both the ruling party and the opposition. It was the result of an intiative by Poland’s Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorsky, and was sponsored by Poland’s President, Bronislaw Komorowski.

Throughout the year, Poland’s representatives around the world will endeavor to remind the world of Karski’s actions, telling people the truth about the struggles of the Polish Resistance movement, and especially about the extermination of the Jewish people on Polish soil.

Karski visited the Warsaw Ghetto many times, before embarking on his dangerous mission. Dressed as a German officer, he also investigated the living conditions in the ghetto-transit camp of Izbica. His report was intended for the Polish government-in-exile in London, but Karski also delivered it to representatives of the Bund and of other Polish Zionist organizations, who had found refuge in England.

While doing so, he proclaimed that “these people still have equal rights, since they are citizens of Poland and their parties were represented in parliament before the war.”

Based on Karski’s testimony and on documents he provided, the Polish Foreign Minister-in-exile, Edward Raczynski, prepared a detailed report on the Holocaust and submitted it to the Allied authorities on December 10, 1942.

He did not receive an adequate response. Winston Churchill refused to see Karski, saying that his reports were exaggerated. In July 1943 Karski was invited to see U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt but, according to Karski, the President treated the reports of annihilation of European Jews with suspicion.

Karski’s requests that the railway lines leading to the camps be bombed were turned down. His suggestion that German cities should be threatened with destruction, unless the massacre of Jews stopped, was also rebuffed. Karski did not despair and met with almost all influential personalities across the country in order to tell his story but, in his words, nowhere did the plight of Europe’s Jews raise real interest.

Read more: Poland names 2014 after anti-Nazi Resistance fighter Jan Karski ~ Haaretz

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Lucia Catholics are now the largest religious group in New Zealand, yet Christianity overall is dropping

From NewsTalkZB:

There's been a massive change to New Zealand's religious landscape.

New census data shows Catholics outnumber Anglicans for the first time in New Zealand history.

At the March census, just over 490,000 people identified themselves as being Catholic, compared with 460,000 Anglicans.

Unfortunately, last census in 2006, there were 508,437 Catholics in New Zealand, so the top position is not really that much of a newly attained status to celebrate.

After the figures were publicised, I was amazed at the number of people who phoned into NewsTalkZB the other day, and believed in God and Jesus and quite a bit of the whole Christian landscape, yet did not want to identify themselves as religious and therefore picked the "No religion" option in the census. As my son says, they're hippies, against authority and human structures, yet people need both in order to flourish.

Identifying as religious has now declined overall in New Zealand to below 50%. This will give the de-Christianisers an intense amount of ammunition in order to remove Christian symbols, holidays and eventually Christianity from public life. Already the Wellington City Council is not putting up Christmas decorations this year, though I doubt that was inspired by the drop in Christians in NZ, and more by the fact that the mayor is a rabid Greenie (who tend to be Marxists and therefore atheists).

I think Catholics need to take advantage of being the largest religious denomination by becoming more obviously Catholic, and therefore attractive to all the lost souls out there. Otherwise, converts to Islam such as Muhammad Grant Morgan, might become the norm:

Christmas is tricky time for Muhammad Grant Morgan, juggling the traditions of the past and present.

Mr Morgan, of Titahi Bay, was raised in a loosely Anglican household in Berhampore, Wellington, but never really took to the church.

"My parents are Anglican but I don't really remember going to church."

He grew up without any religious convictions but, coming into his 20s, became increasingly dissatisfied with his life. "I was looking for something . . . I went through a whole process of searching for three or four years."

While living in Malaysia in 1996, he converted to Islam. Ten years later he returned to New Zealand, with his Malay wife and four children.

He does not drink, prays regularly and last year went on a 28-day pilgrimage to Mecca. He said his faith had given him the clear direction he felt he needed.

Catholicism gives very clear directions, except that many people choose to ignore them. Just look at this thread on Being Frank, a NZ Catholic blog site and read the comments by PaulineM. She is very much representative of what a significant number of Catholics in NZ believe. That type of Catholicism is not attractive because it doesn't lead to Christ.

Related links: Census figures show change in religious landscape ~ NewsTalkZB
Census points to non-religious New Zealand ~ Stuff
Council takes the cheer out of Christmas ~ Dominion Post

Monday, December 9, 2013

Lucia On Rodney Hide's criticism of Conservatives

I used to admire Rodney Hide. His blog was the first political blog that I spent quite a bit of time on when I first ventured into the NZ online political scene. It must have been around 2003. Anyway, I thought he was pretty clued on at the time. Now I can only shake my head at reading this sort of thing:

I am left wondering if the conspiracy theorists have found a welcoming home with the new Conservative Party. Certainly Craig was anxious not to offend those who believe that governments are mass dosing us, that 9/11 was a government job, and that Nasa staged the moon landings in Nevada.

Of course, it could be that Craig genuinely believes such nonsense possible. After all, conspiracy theories have the same amount of supporting evidence as the idea that a supernatural being made the earth and all its creatures in six days in 4004BC and now oversees human affairs.

The defining characteristic of the Conservatives may well be gullibility.

I consider myself to be a Conservative, yet I do not believe the world was made in 4004BC, and not by "a" supernatural being, but by Being Himself, and that it may or may not have taken Him six days to do it, though days are somewhat irrelevant to Him as He is outside of time as he made time exist.

I think the defining characteristic of Conservative critics might very well be petty mindedness and an inability to see the big picture.

Related link: Rodney Hide: Sign up, ye gullible and trusting ~ The NZ Herald

Sunday, December 8, 2013

ZenTiger Rocket science - it's not religion

Rocket Scientists don't always have the answers
Religion. It's not rocket science.  It doesn't pretend to be.

For some though, science is a religion, or at the least, some imagine science can replace it.

I seems some people are waking up to the fact that religion doesn't kill people, politics kills people (The biggest criticism of Islam is it is as much a political system as it is religious.) Getting rid of religion just creates a world of atheists, some of which will find other reasons to run their own power-mad agendas.

An article over on Salon discusses  the "new atheists" (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins and others) are (or were, in the case of Christopher Hitchens) are so fixated on the idea that religion poisons everything, they are unwilling to face up to the flawed nature of human nature, and how this plays out in the real world, not their imaginary world built on biased interpretation of religion.  It's not always about religion, it's more accurate to deal with these issues in the realm of politics. Religious belief is certainly an influence, but so is colonialism, feminism, capitalism, resource availability, media influence, the monetary system, wealth distribution, class division, and so on, and so on.

Now, I'm making a leap here that should be obvious.  It's more correct to say that the new atheists imagine that atheism can replace religion - not that science is religion.  Agreed.  However, their logic is that science, in their minds, seem to "prove" the improbability of God.  There is effectively a direct connection that relies on believing science can explain why and how we got here, and the implications that science might simply be a vehicle God uses to express his will seems even more far-fetched than the billions of galaxies coming into existence in an instant, and life spontaneously evolving from a random chemical soup.

Have a read, it is worth the 3-4 minutes.

Hattip: Whoar

Source: Christopher Hitchens' Beliefs challenged

A couple of quotes I liked:

As a poorly-practicing Christian who reads enough science to be functional at dinner parties, I would like to suggest a truce — one originally proposed by the Catholic church and promoted by the eminent Stephen J. Gould. Science, the study of the natural world, and religion, the inquiry into the meaning of life (or metaphysics, more broadly) constitute non-overlapping magisteria. Neither can invalidate the theories of the other, if such theories are properly within their realm. Any theologian or scientist who steps out of their realm to speculate upon the other is free to do so, but must do so with an adequate understanding of the other’s realm.

--------
A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture-capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated.” I’m sure scientists are well aware of the problem and working to rectify it.

Saturday, December 7, 2013

ZenTiger A double attack - on the Pope and Conservatives

Rush Limbaugh - Shock Jock
Rush Limbaugh, a shock jock (so guess what's coming next) accuses the Pope of preaching Marxism.

That was attack number one.

The liberal/progressive media carrying this story likes to represent that Rush Limbaugh speaks for all Conservatives.

That was attack number two. Here, the media want to promote the idea that Christian Conservatives are for sticking it to the poor. It's a win-win. Paint the Pope as a Marxist, paint the conservatives as heartless.

Rush's comments are dealt with quite easily. His polemic view is simplistic to the point of stupidity. Anyone criticizing excessive greed is not automatically a Marxist. I like the Vatican response: "It does not seem worth the trouble of answering seriously," said a Vatican spokesman.. A quick Google search finds plenty of other places quite willing to take the trouble to answer, although after all is said and done, it really isn't worth taking the time to answer seriously.

What the Pope said makes perfect sense - and I suggest many Conservatives would agree. Unfettered capitalism (greed and economic exploitation) is not a good thing. The solution is not Communism, and any student of history will understand the Catholic Church has a long history of opposing Communism, which is an atheistic doctrine as much as it is an economic one. Marxists can see where unfettered capitalism may lead, but their solution is worse. Catholics and Conservatives understand the role of respecting property rights. They understand the importance of working and receiving a living wage.  Conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism.  Whilst they understand the importance of community they also understand the reality of inequality - it is a necessary side-effect of diversity and freedom.  That does not translate to class warfare, in the Marxist sense.

Rush Limbaugh is a shock jock. So I'm not shocked by what he said.

It is also worthwhile to point out that the progressive/liberal media take every opportunity to mischaracterise Conservatism.  All the better to use the Pope as a convenient object for misdirection.


[Updated/Edited 5 minutes after post to focus some sentences on economic conservatism. ]

Friday, December 6, 2013

Lucia Can't eat your lunch near long dead bodies

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the cultural sensitivity that is being brought up is actually invented for political gain. How else to explain the story today that Maori are will be offended that workers ate food outdoors near a place where archeological work was being carried out?

A Labour MP has accused Kapiti Expressway workers of being "extremely offensive" to Maori by eating their lunch at a wahi tapu site as historical human remains lay nearby.

Darien Fenton said at a transport and industrial relations select committee meeting yesterday that the workers were spotted eating their lunch at the wahi tapu site at El Rancho, Waikanae, which includes the Takamore urupa, and a macrocarpa known as the Maketu tree.

But the New Zealand Transport Agency denied that the particular site in question was wahi tapu, and believed appropriate protocols were followed.

Ms Fenton told the committee she had spoken to two women from Te Ati Awa. "[They] understood the site was tapu until the archaeologists had finished their work, yet we found workers having lunch onsite which was extremely offensive to local Maori."

Speaking later, she said that seeing workers eating on the sacred site, with recently discovered human remains from the burial site nearby, had shocked her.

"It was incredibly culturally insensitive and showed a degree of ignorance I didn't think existed in New Zealand any more.

"I was pretty gobsmacked by it all. People are already stressed enough. Everybody should know that the whole site is wahi tapu."

Maori used to eat people and yet they can be offended when others eat any other type of food near long dead bodies? How does that make any sense??

Related link: Workers eating at 'sacred' site offend Maori - MP ~ Stuff

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Lucia Colin Craig on the Moon

Luna 2, the first man made object to land on the Moon, sent by the Soviet Union.


If what's been spread on the airwaves is to be believed, Colin Craig doesn't believe men landed on the moon. Amazing how what someone says can be spread like Chinese Whispers where it almost takes on a life of it's own. Yet the story, as reported in The Herald is this:

Mr Craig's initial comments were made during an interview with RadioLive host Marcus Lush.

Mr Craig said he had "no idea'' whether astronauts had landed on the moon, and hadn't had the chance to look into chemtrails - a conspiracy theory that suggests the trails left by aircraft come from the deliberate spreading of chemicals.

Asked about the moon landing conspiracy - which suggests the Apollo landings were faked by the US government - Mr Craig replied: "I don't have a belief or a non-belief in these things, I jut don't know."

Asked again, Mr Craig said he had "no idea" whether man had walked on the moon.

"That's what we're told. I'm sort of inclined to believe it. But at the end of the day, I haven't looked into it. And I know there's some very serious people that question these things."

Ouch. I know what he's saying, that things can necessarily be known if you can't verify them personally. In the end you have to take a lot on faith, because you can't be everywhere at once to check out the veracity of every single little thing. However, that subtle conversation of how reality and our beliefs interact is better left in a small discussion with a group of friends, not a swarm of pyranhas looking to take you down and eat you for breakfast.

Later on in the day, given the reaction to what he said, Colin Craig clarified what he believed:

In an interview with APNZ today Mr Craig appeared to move away from earlier comments about whether man has landed on the moon.

Mr Craig said: "Of course I think we landed on the moon, but it doesn't mean that I'm the expert on that."

"I think people should talk to people who are experts, whereas they can talk to me about politics or an issue in New Zealand, that's relevant to New Zealand, and then I will have an opinion on it.

"Do I think they're right? Probably not. But that doesn't mean that I'm the person that's going to be sort of judge and jury of whether their little view of the world is right or not."

But it was far too late, the whisper had been uttered and there was no way to retrieve it. Today, on the Tim Fookes Morning Show on NewsTalkZB, Tim Fookes was asking for people's opinions of a political party leader who believed in conspiracy theories, already carrying on what had been started the night before.  So, John Armstrong told Colin Craig through the NZ Herald, that he had a problem.

... when someone who conceivably could end up being a minister following next year's election is unsure whether he believes man has walked on the Moon, it is time to press the "whoop-whoop, pull-up" warning button on the dangers of potential coalition with a party which might also believe Paul McCartney is dead and Elvis Presley faked his own death.

Craig was not fully subscribing to one of the great conspiracy theories, but he was not dismissing it out of hand either.

That was breakfast-time. By lunchtime, Craig was shifting away from his ambivalence faster than the Space Shuttle on take-off.

Too late. His lunar-tic observations during an interview with RadioLive's Marcus Lush came close to overshadowing John Banks' press conference at which he announced he would not be standing for Act in Epsom next year as well as stepping down as leader at the party's annual conference in March. Given Banks will be in the High Court dock next year facing charges of electoral fraud, both decisions were inevitable. He correctly described his standing aside as a necessary circuitbreaker for the party. It gives Act one last chance of reviving itself. That is going to be a tall order.
Hmmm, I disagree.  Craig could actually make a good conservative leader despite not being a savvy debater who can recognise a pitfall at hundred paces.  He seems like a smart guy, so will hopefully learn fast.  Debating and governing are two different skills.

I don't think whether or not Colin Craig is a bit vague on men landing on the moon is the real issue, however.  I think it's Conservatism itself that scares media people (who are mostly liberal) witless and attacking Craig on this issue is just the poxy for their fear.
Related links:
That Interview on Radio Live - AUDIO
John Key: Colin Craig is 'winding up' media ~ NZ Herald
John Armstrong: Hello Colin Craig - you have a problem ~ NZ Herald

Craig on conspiracy theories ~ David Farrar, KiwiBlog
Colin Craig is a conspiracy theorist—chuckle chuckle—all the way to the bank ~ Terry Wallbank, The Conservative

Lucia Half naked women try to attack Cathedral in Argentina, held back by Rosary praying men

Abortion inspires Diabolical behaviour:

Buenos Aires, December 2nd, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Extremely disturbing video footage from Argentina shows a mob of feminists at a recent protest attacking and sexually molesting a group of Rosary-praying Catholic men who were peacefully protecting the cathedral in the city of San Juan from threats of vandalism.

The women, many of them topless, spray-painted the men’s crotches and faces and swastikas on their chests and foreheads, using markers to paint their faces with Hitler-like moustaches. They also performed obscene sexual acts in front of them and pushed their breasts onto their faces, all the while shouting “get your rosaries out of our ovaries.” (Note: Some of the most graphic content has been removed from the video. Uncensored footage is available here. Viewer discretion strongly advised.)

According to InfoCatolica, some of the women chanted a song, with the lyrics: “To the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, who wants to get between our sheets, we say that we want to be whores, travesties and lesbians. Legal abortion in every hospital.”

During the attack some men were visibly weeping. None of them retaliated against the abuses heaped on them.

Warning: Video below is uncensored. Contains sex acts and half-naked women. Go to the LifeSiteNews link for a cleaner video if you prefer.



I got to just over halfway through before I teared up. The degradation those women are subjecting themselves to is horrendous to watch. What must Pope Francis be thinking about what was happening in his home city??

Related link: Horror: Violent mob of topless pro-abort feminists attacks praying men defending cathedral (VIDEO) ~ LifeSiteNews

Monday, November 25, 2013

ZenTiger Is it important to find your parents?

A winning formula
Dr Manny writes:
Over the years, as sperm donation has increasingly become a public matter, more of the children born from donor sperm are attempting to find their biological fathers.

As people see this movie over the Thanksgiving holiday, I think that it will open up some broader questions about how we can better regulate this industry. I think the film should also raise discussions about just how much information should be available to children born from donors in order for them to better explore their own identity. I think everybody wants to know about their backgrounds, and for some people, this information might make them feel more whole and create a more stable sense of identity.

Is it important to find your biological parents? Is your family tree an artificial construct, potentially filled with pairs of fathers and mothers that are irrelevant to your genetic history? This will increasingly become the case, and even with a certain amount of social conditioning to dismiss a genetic connection to your "roots", I suspect most people deep down would like to know more about their genetic history. But what also about the crazy potential that a man can father hundreds of children? Is this a curse or a blessing? Interesting times.

533 children from one father

Sunday, November 24, 2013

ZenTiger Female Roast Busters

The best decisions are made after a good nights sleep
OK the heading is somewhat misleading, but now that you are here, you may as well read the post.  It isn't that long.

I saw a billboard advertisement that was supposed to be funny. Girl takes boy to a hotel room (the point of the advertisement), barely knows his name, and so uses a sticky note to remember in the morning.

We sow what we reap.

By that, I don't mean I blame the women.  I mean that sending mixed messages such as these confuses people and there are no clear boundaries being set on what is moral, and healthy.  The outcome of such promiscuity are many cases of hurt and emotional pain.  Furthermore, the Chads of this world think consent was valid even when the women can't remember his name.  If it is, that's a pretty low bar to set for future interactions.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Lucia Dunne sounds more than a little desperate over his warnings over the Conservatives

I could not believe what I read in the paper today. Looks like Peter Dunne is feeling very threatened by Colin Craig and his Conservative Party:

United Future leader Peter Dunne is warning John Key he will have a tiger by the tail if he throws his weight behind the Conservatives.

Dunne is famous for his dramatic rise in popularity in the 2002 election thanks to his popularity with TV's "worm", which turned his party from a one-man band to an eight-strong caucus.

But he has claimed that some of the Christian MPs who rode his coat-tails into Parliament that year believed it was God, not him, who turned the worm.

"The explanation I got was I was God's vessel. It was nothing to do with me. I didn't move the worm . . . that was all God's great plan and he used me and the worm debate to achieve the outcome."

Many of the MPs whom Dunne took with him into Parliament that year were promoted by Christian backers, and he has since severed contact with them.

One of them, Larry Baldock, struck out to form his own party before signing up with Colin Craig and standing at No 3 on the Conservative Party list last election.

Oh my goodness, they're Christian and they believe Christian things. Quick, bring out the garlic! Oh no, wait, that's for vampires ...

Craig says his party is socially conservative, but he rejects the Christian-party label and says he has not been to church for years, despite being a devout Christian.

Speaking as a Catholic, I find that position of Craig stressing that he hasn't been to church for years just more than a little strange. But, apparently Protestants can do that as they can just start their own church and there's no Sunday obligation or idea of mortal sin if church is missed. Anyway ...

Dunne said National should be wary of throwing the Conservatives a lifeline seat to ensure they got into Parliament.

Craig and his party were an unknown quantity and Key could have cause to regret it.

Many of those attracted to the Conservatives were those who had previously latched on to UnitedFuture. "If you strike too close a relationship with them in advance . . . when you don't entirely know what it is you're buying, you become hostage to the crazy mad statements."

Yep, totally stark raving bonkers ... because they are Christian. Dunne's just sounding more that a little desperate here.

Related link: Beware Craig's crazies, warns Dunne ~ Stuff

Lucia Exorcism performed in Illinois after same-sex "marriage" bill signed

Bishop Paprocki in Illinois is brave man:

In front of 500 followers, Paprocki asked God to “deliver us from evil” caused by same sex marriage.

“I exorcise you, every unclean spirit, every power of darkness, every incursion of the infernal enemy, every diabolical legion, cohort, and faction, in the name and power of our Lord Jesus Christ,” he said. “Be uprooted and put to flight from the Church of God from souls created in the image of God and redeemed by the precious blood of the divine lamb.

“Dare no more, oh cunning serpent, to deceive the human race, to persecute the church of God, to shake the chosen of God and sift them like wheat.”

“Be gone Satan, father of lies, enemy of human salvation,” Paprocki said at the conclusion of the exorcism. “Give way to Christ, in whom you found no trace of your works. Give way to the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic church, which Christ himself won by his blood.”

If only one had been performed in New Zealand by our Bishops, or even one of them.

Related link: Bp. Paprocki performs exorcism after Illinois governor signs same-sex “marriage” bill

Friday, November 22, 2013

Lucia Problems with homosexuality in the priesthood in Scotland

I'm watching this story with interest. From Congregation unite in protest at suspension of parish priest:
Only a handful of parishioners remained yesterday to take mass at St John Ogilvie's Church in High Blantyre with Archdiocese of Motherwell acting Bishop Joseph Toal after Father Matthew Despard was removed from his ministry the night before.

Before they went into church, people signed a petition calling for the reinstatement of Father Despard, suspended for writing a controversial memoir that claimed there is a culture of homosexual bullying in the Catholic Church.

Father Matthew Despard suspended for writing a book about homosexual bullying in the Church


Fr. Despard was suspended for writing Priesthood in Crisis, available on Amazon in Kindle format. I bought it yesterday morning and am nearly halfway through.  So far I've read about the incident that occurred that prompted him to write the notes that lead to the book, his experiences in the seminary which included a number of heterosexual men either being forced out of priestly training, or leaving because they couldn't take it anymore.  It reminded me of what Fr. Z said this year (sorry, can't find the post) that the homosexuals in the seminary in his day made his life hell. Not word for word, exactly, but the meaning was similar.

What I find interesting, is the coincidence of the date of publication of the Kindle book and the outing of Scotland's only Cardinal, Keith O'Brien.  It seems a lot happened in a short space of time.  Before Pope Benedict resigned,  O'Brien was accused by three priests and a former priest of inappropriate relationships with them, then it became public after the resignation.  Within days of Pope Francis' election, Fr Despard's book was published to Kindle.  It was all on in Scotland, it seemed. 

However, even though Keith O'Brien is now is some unknown monastery where he'd been ordered into by Pope Francis, Fr. Despard is still able to be threatened with the loss of his priesthood because of what he has revealed in his book.  Meanwhile, the latest on Cardinal O'Brien was that before he was ordered into a monastery,  he blocked a planned independent inquiry into historic sex abuse in Scotland. After reading some of Fr. Despard's book, I beginning to understand the power being wielded by those who stand to lose a lot if what is written is to be believed, and I see no reason to disbelieve it given the other reading I have done.

I was alerted to this story by a post written by Edward Peters, on our sidebar: The Scottish Controversy. As an aside, the blog listing , very strangely, disappeared from our sidebar between my reading of this story and my writing of this post. I added it back yesterday, and you will see it listed under Catholic Blogs, with the title In the Light of the Law. I don't know quite what to make of this disappearance, especially since there is no record of it occurring in StatCounter.

Related links: Congregation unite in protest at suspension of parish priest ~ ~ Herald Scotland
With the Pope against homo-heresy ~ LifeSiteNews

Monday, November 18, 2013

Lucia Small plastic babies are offensive and disturbing

I'm just listening to the radio where Tim Fookes compares giving plastic baby toys to children with watching a man getting run over on TV.

When did unborn human babies become offensive?


In the NZ Herald, the current controversy is explained:
Parents are outraged after an anti-abortion stall gave their children plastic foetuses at an A and P show.

On Thursday, anti-abortion groups teamed up to exhibit at the the Canterbury A and P Show on a Voice for Life and ProLife stall.

Amber Murdoch said her son, 11, arrived home on Thursday with a model foetus after a school outing.

"I was shown it at 6 o'clock at night when I got home from work," Murdoch said.

"It led to me having a really uncomfortable conversation when I had to explain to him he wasn't actually going to be allowed to play with this thing, and having to explain what abortion was all about."

Murdoch said her son also received a leaflet written for women who were pregnant. Murdoch said she would ask Canterbury A&P Association to investigate the stall and would lodge a complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority.

Avril Thresh said she saw young boys running around with the foetuses.

"Regardless of whether you support their beliefs or not, we don't feel it's an appropriate platform for them to be spreading their message."

At least the kids weren't handed small plastic body parts, simulating how abortion rips apart babies, in a plastic bag filled with red goo. Now that I could see would be distressing, but a small plastic baby? You've got to be kidding.

It's as if people are far more comfortable with assuming that preganacies don't actually involve babies, that they are someone magicked into existence at birth. Do these people tell their children that the stork brought them and they were found in the cabbage patch?  Is the reality that every person was once an unborn baby just too much for them?  It just boggles the mind.

From NewsTalkZB, more of an explanation:
But Voice for Life President Bernard Moran says the dolls are prizes in a game used to educate people about foetal development.

"We don't give them away. Only if you win the competition.

"We don't hand them out as an anti-abortion thing. They represent what a little baby looks like."

Bernard Moran is surprised by the complaints and says parents usually like the dolls.

"Parents are quite delighted. They show the kids the little babies, and they say 'look, this is what you looked like at 10 or 11 weeks.'

"This is the first time we've actually had complaints."

I wonder if the woman who complained has had an abortion herself and that's why she found the dolls offensive, as the reaction of most parents above seems far more normal to me.

Related links: Anti-abortionists give plastic foetuses to kids ~ NZ Herald
Parents outraged by plastic foetus handouts ~ NewsTalkZB

Friday, November 15, 2013

Lucia On keeping your legs closed and Christian morality in NZ society

I have been doing a lot of listening lately, and yesterday I listened to Tim Fookes' NewsTalkZB Morning programme as people phoned in to give their opinion of that infamous remark made by a defense lawyer on the lines of, if she didn't want sex, she should have kept her legs closed.

Tim Fookes was one of those who was incredibly offended by the inference that this is all women have to do to prevent getting raped, and even apologised on behalf of all men. Good on him, I thought. A number of men phoned in and agreed that the sentiment was disgusting and offensive.

Then the lawyer in question (Keith Jefferies) phoned in and explained the statement was in his closing arguments and that he didn't believe his client had actually raped the woman, and that the sex was consensual, therefore to prevent consensual sex, all she had to do is keep her legs closed. Dear Tim just didn't get it.

Another lawyer phoned in and explained it in more detail to Tim and he still didn't get it.

At this point my mind started to process this apparent obtuseness on Tim's part, and it occurred to me that conservatism runs deep in many NZ males, a conservatism that has it's roots in Christian morality and patriarchy, no matter how liberal these men might be in other areas that have been worked on more in popular culture. I find this really fascinating.

Christian morality basically says that men have no business having sex with women that they are not married to. Marriage is the price of sex - no marriage, no sex. So, if a woman says she did not consent and the man is not married to her, then it is automatically assumed by some (who don't even believe that they subscribe to Christian morality at all) that the man must be a rapist.

Liberals go on an on and on about consent, but consent is one of those airy fairy things that could be assumed by no resistance. Except, that's not what feminists want. Here's an example from Clementine Ford from her opinion piece on the keeping your legs closed comment from the defence lawyer:

Sexual consent does not begin and end with securing a 'yes', but is an ongoing negotiation that must involve respect between all parties regardless of how that sex looks on the surface. Bodily integrity is paramount; it isn't something whose limits can be determined by a collection of individuals still grappling with confusion over their own relationships to sexuality. If we want to change the way sex is used to control and undermine other people, we have to first understand how we use it to control and undermine ourselves.

Clementine wants "an ongoing negotiation" before consent is assumed. Isn't that what engagements are for?

It seems to me that many people in New Zealand are operating from a Christian moral started point, but then messing it up along the way. If women can have sex outside of marriage where-ever and when-ever they want, then as the lawyer says, if they don't want sex they should keep their legs closed, or not put themselves in situations where consent is assumed and the negotiation associated with marriage is not entered into. However, if women want the negotiation and everything that comes with it, then they need to let go of the idea of sex when ever they feel like it with whomever, because such a scenario assumes consent if they put themselves in a situation where sex is likely, and leads to statements such as, she should have kept her legs closed.

This is of course very different from Islamic societies where leading men is astray is always the woman's fault. It's like men in those societies are assumed to have no self control and are never at fault if a woman happens to inspire them to have sex with her, whether she intends to or not. At least the Tim Fookes' position and all of those who agree with him believe that men should be far more responsible with women that they have sex with.

So, while I can see where the lawyers were coming from in regards to their defence of the unfortunate statement made by Keith Jefferies on closed legs, I am heartened by the underlying conservatism that exists in many New Zealand men as typified by Tim Fookes, who would most likely be surprised that I considered him to be conservative and have an underlying Christian morality.

Sunday, November 10, 2013

ZenTiger Cunliffe pushes further on gender equality

Labour Party Leader, David Cunliffe has made huge strides in the Labour Party, pushing for 50-50 gender equality to the amazement and delight of many who see gender equality as essential in a balanced society.

Insiders say that gender equality in the Labour Party is still not enough, though. They have hinted that Cunliffe has set his sights on a new target - something radical in this day and age, designed to shake society to its foundations and question why we ever thought it acceptable to support gender imbalance at all:

Gender equality in marriage and families.

(Satire)

Saturday, November 9, 2013

ZenTiger The Progressives who are awakening to Conservatism

Society is to blame - time to get outraged by the message
The Roast Busters story has fired up many sleepy liberal and progressive types that don't yet realise it, but they are waking up to conservative values.

For example, the letters to the editor and talk back radio linked the story in the same week about the government providing free condoms to 12 and 13 year old's even as others are crying "what went wrong?"

Sean Plunket, in today's DomPost editorial hoped to write something that would make a difference, and generate a change of culture, attitude and responsibility in NZ Male society.  Ironically, his article starts with something along the lines of "I don't want to talk about Len Brown and his adultery, I want to talk about something more important."  He failed to see the connection between Len Brown, in a position of power and influence, being defended by liberals that his "private morality" is of no concern to us.   With that logic, the private morality of these young men is of no concern to us, unless they make it public?  Can you start to see how weak that argument becomes?

The defense of Len Brown's affair is perhaps just as much a symptom as a piece of the puzzle, but it's going to take these urban progressives a little more time to start to connect the dots.

Chris Trotter's column yesterday was along the same vein - "oh, where has society gone wrong?". Well, he could start with reading this blog - we've been pointing it out for years. The progressive liberal experiment is failing and what has been sown is being reaped.

One "gotcha" I noticed in his article was when Chris Trotter declared the school sex education curriculum was a huge failure!  I don't think he realised just how significant his pronouncement actually is. The school sex education curriculum has indeed been a failure because it avoids making moral and value based judgments, and with "initiatives" such as free condoms, effectively does the reverse.  So the answer is not "more of the same, earlier and younger" which is probably going to be the first response to the issue.

 The logic that children are going to "do it anyway" makes me wonder why they don't hand out a case of beer, a fast car and a rubber power pole.  Perhaps a baseball bat, a balaclava and a guide to effective robberies? I digress.

There's some more bad news to digest for the liberal progressives though if they seek to repair this situation. They simply cannot declare that families need to play their part, and leave it at that. It's not that simple. "The family" as a fundamental building block of society was once based on the "til death do us part" institution of marriage. It isn't any more. Less marriages, more children born out of wedlock, evolving definitions of "the family", both parents needing to work to pay the bills, an increase in outsourcing children's early childhood education, the internet delivering porn and violence unfiltered by positive formative life experience - it's just not that simple anymore.

The good news is that many parents are waking up to Conservativism. They've noticed something is very wrong when their daughters can be raped, the culprits brag about their exploits seemingly oblivious to the harm they have done and the police are "powerless", and the government is on the sidelines thinking it is OK, providing a free condom was used.


Start connecting the dots folks, and we'll begin to see some real discussion and hopefully, some real change.

Monday, November 4, 2013

ZenTiger The Bogeyman cometh

"Many of the ills of the modern world — starvation, poverty, flooding, heat waves, droughts, war and disease — are likely to worsen as the world warms from man-made climate change, a leaked draft of an international scientific report forecasts."

There you have it folks. You think war is bad? It's worse under CLIMATE CHANGE. You think poverty is bad? Just wait until you experience the type of poverty brought about by CLIMATE CHANGE.

The Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will issue a report next March...
[Link for the brave]

Surely, these are not wild speculations? They used the words "international", "scientific" and "leaked" all in the same sentence! You think the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPCC's advice smacks of realism and common sense because it is Nobel peace prize quality reliability?

Then let me introduce you to Barack Obama, another Nobel Peace Prize winner who, since his Peace Prize was awarded, hasn't managed to keep his promise about closing down Gitmo, has managed to preside over a level of spying that would have Democrats insisting Republicans were thrown in prison over, and sees nothing wrong with remote-controlled drones killing civilians in the name of Peace. To be fair, this is only what Obama does in his public life. Len Brown has taught us that what you do in your Public Life has no bearing on the morality you abide by in your private life, and vice-versa. So when Obama orders a bombing, you have to understand it's just business and when he goes home he's just a regular Dad. Just like Len Brown, only in reverse. Len is moral when raising taxes and debating policy, and when he heads off to the hotel room, or the back of the council chambers or wherever, then his private morality is of no concern to us.

Which is why Obama, the man, surely deserves the Nobel Peace Prize as much as Obama the President doesn't. And please don't complain about any of this - anything you say will only be made worse by CLIMATE CHANGE.

Friday, November 1, 2013

ZenTiger Radical Democracy

Labour's little red book might be modernised
The Labour Party are keen to get citizens up against the wall and loving the revolution. Some of their policy proposals are designed to encourage people to vote. Possibly for any other party but them.

I don't have a problem with parties having policies to attract their voters, but I do wonder if the policies are consistent with their constant references to democracy and participation. For example, look at these policies and see if you can spot that subtle hint of "Nanny" we saw in the Labour Government of 1999 to 2008.

  • Maori language lessons in schools made compulsory
  • Teachers forced to learn te reo
  • Privatised state assets renationalised (theft by legislation) with compensation based on "proven need"
  • The Government's roads of national significance project dumped in order to force people towards public transport
  • The progressive prohibition of alcohol (banning smoking is already considered a fait accompli
  • New Zealand becoming a republic (let's not have a debate about this)

But the coup de grace goes to another policy in their list:

Teaching of civics and democracy mandatory for all schoolchildren.

Democracy? Ho ho ho. Mandatory of course, just to teach the kids a very clear lesson on what Labour thinks of democracy.


Democracy, Labour Style

Thursday, October 31, 2013

Lucia Not impressed with Len Brown and wasn't to begin with

Sorry, everyone. Been unwell and needing a lot of down time. There's been too much stress on multiple fronts in real life and my personality is such that when things calm down, I need to hibernate. Also, it's been gardening month when the weather has been up for it. Who wants to blog when there's brilliant sunshine outside?

How about that Len Brown adultery thing, then? I wasn't too impressed with the man a couple of years ago when during an interview to GayNZ he told them he was a "staunch Catholic" and then a "proud Catholic". It looks like redefining the word, "Catholic", was just the beginning for him.

Is there a certain irony in Cameron Slater being the one to put all of this out in public? Yes, there is. I won't fault him for it, though. Repentant adulterers understand far more than those who are caught out and all the wannabes out there. They know what damage adultery does to the person, how it compromises them. New Zealanders have been far too soft on the private lives of politicians for far too long. We should be demanding a better class of person. How a person acts in private gives an insight as to how they make public decisions. A liar and a cheat is a bad choice as mayor. A person's private morality determines their public morality, and anyone who thinks that private and public can be separated is deceiving themselves.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Fletch [Update] U.S Govt 'Shuts Down' Catholic Mass On Naval Base

[UPDATE]

Looks like the Govt has backed down and allowed masses to continue, according to an update from the  Thomas More Law Centre, although they are continuing with the lawsuit.

The Government capitulated just one day after the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Department of Defense’s actions which prohibited a Catholic Priest from celebrating Mass at a Naval base under threat of arrest and barred the Chapel to Catholic religious services due to the government shutdown.

TMLC attorney Erin Mersino filed the lawsuit in the Federal District Court in Washington DC on Monday on behalf of Father Ray Leonard and Fred Naylor, a parishioner.  The lawsuit is the only legal challenge to the Government’s shutdown of religious services.  Other Christian denominations were allowed to continue their religious services.

Late yesterday afternoon, in response to the lawsuit, three attorneys from the Department of Justice contacted TMLC attorney Erin Mersino by phone and indicated that Father Leonard could resume all of his religious duties beginning this morning, and that the Chapel would be open for all Catholic activities.  These representations made by the Department of Justice attorneys were confirmed by orders to Father Leonard delivered through the Navy chain of command.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, said, “The actions of the Federal Government were a blatant attack on religious liberty. I would never have imagined that our Government would ever bar Catholic Priest from saying Mass under threat of arrest and prevent Catholics from participating in their religious exercises.  Allowing the Chapel doors to open and Father Leonard to fulfill his priestly responsibilities does not erase the Constitutional violations that occurred.  We don’t want this to occur again the next time there is a government shutdown. Our lawsuit will continue.”
[Original Post]


Yep, according to Thomas More Law Center, the U.S Govt has used the "shut down" as an excuse to stop Catholic Mass on a naval base in Georgia, though Protestant services haven't been affected. The priest has been threatened with arrest if he offers to celebrate for free. This will affect around 300 families. The priest has also been locked out of his chapel and office, and access to the sacraments.

In the wake of the government shutdown, despite provisions in the Pay Our Military Act, Catholics at Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia are being denied religious services. The Catholic priest who serves this community has been prohibited from even volunteering to celebrate Holy Mass without pay, and was told that if he violated that order, he could be subject to arrest. Protestant services continue to take place.  Only Catholic services have been shutdown.

This is an astonishing attack on religious freedom by the federal government, and the latest affront towards the military since the beginning of the shutdown.

As a result, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, today, filed a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Father Ray Leonard, a Catholic priest contracted to serve as base chaplain and Fred Naylor, one of Father Leonard’s parishioners and a retired veteran with over 22 years of service. Fr. Leonard is a civilian Catholic Pastor contracted by the Department of Defense (DoD) to serve as a military chaplain at Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia.

Fr. Leonard who served Tibetan populations in China for 10 years, informed the court in an affidavit; “In China, I was disallowed from performing public religious services due to the lack of religious freedom in China. I never imagined that when I returned home to the United States, that I would be forbidden from practicing my religious beliefs as I am called to do, and would be forbidden from helping and serving my faith community.”

On October 4, 2013, Fr. Leonard was ordered to stop performing all of his duties as the base’s Catholic Chaplain, even on a voluntary basis. He was also told that he could be arrested if he violated that order. The approximately 300 Catholic families, including Fred Naylor’s, served by Fr. Leonard at Kings Bay have been unable to attend Mass on base since the beginning of the shutdown.

Additionally, Fr. Leonard was locked out of his on-base office and the chapel. Fr. Leonard was also denied access to the Holy Eucharist and other articles of his Catholic faith. The order has caused the cancellation of daily and weekend mass, confession, marriage preparation classes and baptisms as well as prevented Fr. Leonard from providing the spiritual guidance he was called by his faith to provide.

The submarine base is remotely located.  It consists of roughly 16,000 acres, with 4,000 acres comprised of protected wetlands.  There are approximately 10,000 total people on the base.