New Zealand Conservative

The march of civilization: sixty years progress

2012-02-01T08:45:00.013+13:00

American Male circa 1944

American Male circa 2004

I'm not sure that potty mouthed feminists are the right people to partake in "shaping the next generation" either

2012-01-31T17:14:00.005+13:00

Hey I feel kinda the same way about folk like him. Having a mouth doesn't come with a right to partake in shaping the next generation so shut the **** up, already, Richard.

From a comment on "MCP Watch: Richard Prosser MP"

Richard Prosser is a new New Zealand First MP and he has written a book that has upset some people it seems.

Be that as it may the right people to "partake in shaping the next generation" are the parents of those children - anyone want to disagree?

Of course some extremely wicked people have infiltrated the education system and think they are the right people to "partake in shaping the next generation" and they teach little girls things like it is perfectly ok to dismember your living unborn child if it is going to get in the way of what you want to do.

And other things, nearly but not quite, as vile.

The fruits of their endevours are quite plain to see - we are a long way from Nirvana.

Scaring us into compliance and servitude

2012-01-31T11:00:00.003+13:00

Recycled United Nations bumph from Reuters and published on Stuff complete with that wonderful tightly cropped picture and caption to left.

The end approacheth and this is our (hot) future.

You'll be surprised, no doubt, to learn that the expert panel who produced the report has no less than 56 recommendations that we may avert our doom.

As reported we see er well the usual bureaucratic boilerplate

Among the panel's recommendations, it urged governments to agree on a set of sustainable development goals which would complement the eight Millennium Development Goals to 2015 and create a framework for action after 2015.

Indeed! frameworks for action incorporating sustainable development goals are indeed very useful in providing sustenance for those who produce them but have never really accomplished anything when it comes to the sustenance of the poor in East Africa.

They should work with international organizations to create an "evergreen revolution," which would at least double productivity while reducing resource use and avoiding further biodiversity losses, the report said.

Water and marine ecosystems should be managed more efficiently and there should be universal access to affordable sustainable energy by 2030.

Doubling productivity while reducing resource usage - huh? What is going to be produced and from what will it be produced? I'll tell you something the UN has way more than doubled its productivity when it comes to producing empty words but I'll bet you its resource usage in this noble endevour has not reduced in the entirety of its existence - indeed I put it to you that it has continued to grow since 1945 or 1949 depending on wherever you choose place its beginning.

To make the economy more sustainable, carbon and natural resource pricing should be established through taxation, regulation or emissions trading schemes by 2020 and fossil fuel subsidies should also be phased out by that time.

There is not a problem in this world that cannot be solved by new taxes and levies. It is the universal panacea for all the worlds problems you might think.

National fiscal and credit systems should be reformed to provide long-term incentives for sustainable practices as well as disincentives for unsustainable ones.

Good thing about defining an activity as sustainable or otherwise is that if you are the one who does the defining you can control what other people can or can't do.

Enough already, you get the gist, we need more Government, more bureaucrats, more rules and regulations for them to administer otherwise ........

The world is an incredibly shallow place

2012-01-30T08:44:00.000+13:00

It's Sundance Film Festival time.

An excerpt from a documentary film that is making a splash there.

There is a certain inevitability about that I suppose.

St Thomas and First Cause

2012-01-29T11:59:00.000+13:00

Yesterday (January 28th) was the feast day in the Church of Saint Thomas Aquinas, the great philosopher, and a Doctor of the Church. He wrote much about the Nature of God, including his massive Summa Theologica. To that end, this reminded me of a part of a book by another Thomas (Thomas E Woods), called "How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilisation", where he takes the idea of Aquinas' First Cause and simplifies it for the reader. I will link to the page on Google books HERE, but also excerpt it below -

Saint Thomas's views are best understood if we begin with thought experiments from the secular world. Suppose you want to purchase a pound of turkey at the deli counter. Upon arrival there, you find that you must take a number before you can place your order. Just as you are about to take a number, however, you find that you are required to take a number before you can take a number. And just as you are about to take that number, you find that you must first take yet another number.Thus you must take a number to take a number to take a number to be able to place your order at the deli counter.

Suppose further that the series of numbers you are required to take is infinite. Every single time you are about to take a number, you discover that there exists a prior number you must first take before you can take the next number. You will never get to the deli counter under such conditions. From now until the end of time you will be forever taking numbers . Now if you were to come across someone in the grocery store walking around with half a pound of roast beef that he had purchased at the deli counter, you would instantly know that the series of numbers must in fact not go on forever.

We have seen that with an infinite series of numbers no one could ever reach the deli counter. But the person with the roast beef must somehow have managed to get to the counter. Thus the series cannot be infinite.Consider another example. Suppose you wish to register for a college course, and you therefore pay a visit to the registrar, Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith tells you that in order to register for that particular course, you must see Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, in turn, instructs you to see Mr. Young. Mr. Young sends you to Mr. Brown. If this series went on infinitely-if there were always another person you had to see before you could register-it is abundantly clear that you would never be able to register for the course.

These examples may appear quite remote from the question of God's existence, but they are not; Saint Thomas's proof is in a certain way analogous to them both. He begins with the idea that every effect requires a cause, and that nothing that exists in the physical world is the cause of its own existence. This is known as the principle of sufficient reason.When we encounter a table, for example, we know perfectly well that it did not come into existence spontaneously. It owes its existence to something else: a builder and previously existing raw materials. An existing thing Z owes its existence to some cause Y. But Y itself, not being self-existing, is also in need of a cause. Y owes its own existence to cause X. But now X must be accounted for. X owes its existence to cause W.

We are faced, as with the examples of the deli counter and the college course, with the difficulties posed by an infinite series. In this case, we are faced with the following problem: Every cause of a given effect itself demands a cause in order to account for its own existence; this cause in turn requires a cause, and so on. If we have an infinite series on our hands, in which each cause itself requires a cause, then nothing could ever have come into existence.

Saint Thomas explains that there must, therefore, be an Uncaused Cause-a cause that is not itself in need of a cause.This first cause can therefore begin the sequence of causes. This first cause, Saint Thomas says, is God. God is the one self-existing being whose existence is part of His very essence. No human being must exist; there was a time before each one came into existence, and the world will continue to exist after each one perishes. Existence is not part of the essence of any human being. But God is different. He cannot not exist. And He depends on nothing prior to Himself in order to account for His existence.

I think I had heard this type of thing before, but seeing it put in this way struck me the first time I read it, so much so that I actually burst out laughing for several minutes at how brilliant and logical and, well, true it was.

Expressway change biased against homeowners

2012-01-27T10:15:00.000+13:00

"They are going through houses and good properties for a few trees and Maori artefacts."

When the Motorway was built in Wellington, the Bolton St Cemetery was in the way of it, so graves were moved, no big deal. But Maori have a pantheist view which means they can decide their land is sacred in a way that a cemetery or homeowner's land isn't. It's superstition really, but pandering to superstition seems to be increasing.

Related link: Shock at expressway change ~ Dominion Post

Government contemplating open-ended plan to combat child abuse that could be changed without legislation

2012-01-26T21:00:00.000+13:00

I've just been reading the Government's Green Paper on child abuse and had to stop and post on this doozy of a section that I just found on page 16. This is all about an action plan for helping vulnerable children (ie those likely to get abused). The idea is to legislate a "plan", but not the details of the plan. That way the details can be changed at any time without legislation. Here's the exact bit from the document.

The New Zealand Government could make changes to legislation that would:

• Set out the requirements for a Vulnerable Children’s Action Plan
• Set out the purpose and goals of having such a Plan
• Create cross-agency accountability for implementing the Plan by, for example, allocating responsibility
for it to a group of government chief executives
• Specifically recognise the needs of tangata whenua tamariki and include a process for a partnership
with iwi, hapu - and other Ma-ori organisations to address those needs
• Mandate regular reporting on progress
• Make specific policy changes (such as requirements for sharing information about vulnerable children)
• Make changes to practice (such as any necessary workforce regulation).

The Plan itself might not be included in legislation because its actions and targets will need to change as progress is made or new evidence becomes available. The legislation could contain a requirement that a Plan be developed, and that this Plan would be publicly available at all times and would contain actions, targets and timelines. Legislation could also clearly determine what must be in the Plan to ensure a longterm commitment.

Everyone will be interested in knowing the difference the Plan is making for vulnerable children. Legislation can set out processes for accountability that are transparent. It can require monitoring and reporting of progress against the Plan so that, as a nation, we know how that progress is being made.

It could do this through existing Government reporting processes. In addition, it could require a report to be tabled in Parliament so that it could be examined, for example, at a Select Committee. Or legislation could mandate monitoring of national progress on the Plan by a crown agency such as the Children’s Commissioner.

I'm flabbergasted. How could a government even contemplate such open-ended legislation? What type of people do they have working in the government right now? It would allow for anything to be inserted into the plan without legislation being necessary, thus bypassing Parliament completely.

Or am I wrong and I'm just freaking out over nothing?

Related link: Green Paper for Vulnerable Childre

Liam Neeson thinking about becoming Muslim

2012-01-26T18:00:00.000+13:00

Neeson says of Istanbul:

“The call to prayer happens five times a day and for the first week it drives you crazy, and then it just gets into your spirit and it’s the most beautiful, beautiful thing.

“There are 4,000 mosques in the city. Some are just stunning and it really makes me think about becoming a Muslim.”

He needs to think about this some more. There's nothing stopping him from praying regularly as a Catholic, which I gather he doesn't really practice. Catholicism is a far more intellectual religion than Islam, so Islam tends to suit those that have trouble with concepts such as The Trinity (three persons in one God) or the Incarnation (the Second Person of the Trinity becoming man). If he stays Catholic, no one is going to make him pray like the almost political nature of Islamic group prayer where if you are not there joining in, people will notice.

Hilaire Belloc said of the Islamic religion that "it was a perversion of Christian doctrine". That on the whole, Mohammad, a pagan who lived on the fringe of the Catholic world, absorbed Catholicism and simplified his own version of it. However, by denying the Incarnation, he went much further than the Arians of his time (Christians that denied Jesus was divine), and by doing so wiped out the whole sacramental system of Christianity, making Islam very different. See an old post of mine, The great and enduring heresy of Mohommad.

Belloc also predicted back in his time (the first half of the previous century) that Islam would return. In a time of massive Christian lukewarmness, it is any wonder that those such as Neeson are attracted to the enforced religiosity of Islam?

Related link: Liam Neeson says he is thinking of becoming a Muslim ~ Holy Post

Waltz at the Brandenburg Gate

2012-01-26T14:55:00.005+13:00

May 1945 and a lovely Red Army soldier directs traffic.

Government taking disturbing new direction under the guise of child abuse preventing

2012-01-26T09:30:00.000+13:00

Average Kiwi families could be subject to greater state scrutiny if proposed rules around mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse are introduced.

A Families Commission report, released today, says agencies' inadequate systems are putting vulnerable children at risk.

It calls for better information-sharing between government departments and enhanced reporting by health professionals to safeguard at-risk children.

But it also suggests controversial new measures that could expose innocent mums and dads to greater government intervention if child abuse is suspected.

More than 22,000 children suffered emotional, physical and sexual abuse, or neglect, in the last financial year. Every year an average of 10 children die at the hands of their family or carers.

And how many of those abused children live with their biological married parents?

That is the elephant in the room - children are far more likely to be abused if their parent is a single mother and she has a live in boyfriend, but is the Government even directing their attention to irregular relationship setups? No. They just want greater scrutiny of parents who love and care for their children and live in such a way that abuse would be incredibly rare.

Related link : Plan to keep Kiwi kids safe

Companies for Conservatives to boycott

2012-01-25T21:00:00.000+13:00

Starbucks

Microsoft

Nike

RealNetworks

Group Health Cooperative

Concur

Vulcan

I think this is disgusting that large international companies are seeking this sort of blatant political influence. They deserve to be boycotted at every opportunity by the majority of people who are against the redefinition of marriage.

Related links:
Starbucks supports gay marriage legislation
Microsoft, Vulcan, other companies support gay marriage

Infected by feminism

2012-01-25T15:00:00.000+13:00

Yesterday I was attacked by occasional commenter, Medusa, who told me to get off my arse and get a real job, the implication being that staying home to raise my children is not worth my time and they turn out just fine if a woman works full-time. In fact she went further and implied her children would turn out better than mine because she worked while they were growing up! Anyway, Medusa's comment was incredibly catty and I responded in kind, but, it reminded me of this post that I wanted to write. Namely that feminism has influenced very deeply how most people see women in society and what little value is given to motherhood.

Marxism early on recognised the bourgeoisie mother at home as a real obstacle in achieving a socialist society and so worked on making all women think that they would be far more valuable working than staying home raising their children and looking after their families. In other words, becoming a generator of income rather than a raiser and teacher of children. This way, the woman would be separated from her children and less able to influence them in order to pass on conservative family values and religion.

Several decades on from when working outside the home was mostly a choice, and something women did only because of necessity; now families rely on that second income, making the mother at home somewhat of an anachronism. What is wrong with a woman who stays home, people think. Well ... nothing actually. In a society where the absurd has become normalised, nothing at all.

So, here's a test for everyone reading this blog. Do you think you are a feminist, or have been infected by feminist thought without realising it? If you agree with any of the core feminist principles below, you are a feminist. If you also think you are a conservative, you might want to think again. Feminism and conservatism are not compatible - you are either one or the other.

At its core, Feminism teaches that:
Men and women tend to behave differently because of social conditioning, not because there are innate biological and psychological differences between them.
The chief reason women have been less often represented in the first ranks of public achievement in scholarship, the arts, politics, and war, is that in every human society of which we have evidence, throughout all of recorded history, they were repressed by a patriarchal power structure maintained through force and indoctrination.
Because large numbers of children in a family constitute both a barrier to the advancement of women and a threat to our ecology, small families should be the cultural norm.
It is unjust that the consequences of sexual behavior are biologically unequal for men and women. As much as possible, those consequences must be equalized through medical technology and reformed cultural attitudes.
To find meaning in their lives, women should look first to their careers, rather than to their role as lifegivers, culture bearers, nurturers, and educators of the next generation of human beings.
Women who regard themselves as mothers first are wasting their education and smothering their talents by staying home to raise their children.

I personally reject all the above core feminist ideas. They are all destructive and all contribute to the disintegration of society. The only way that this can be turned around is for parents to start living in way where they understand that they are the primary raisers of their children and to give that responsibility to other people is to court trouble. As Donna Steichen says:

The sole advantage of living in a lawless time is that you can refuse to be a child of your age. Almost everyone in this workers’ society is too preoccupied with his own place on the treadmill to pay much attention to your eccentricities. What devastated our culture was the flight of mothers from their homes. Society is drowning in the consequences, but nothing prevents you and your family from living your lives differently. Our culture will never be restored until women again take up rearing their children as their chief and indispensable task—and men make the sacrifices needed to support them in that decision. While aggressive forces continue to push the nation toward family disintegration, a healthy resistance movement is awake and growing. It is made up of uncompromising religious believers, pro-lifers, and homeschoolers, both organized and autonomous, along with back-to-the-land agrarians and Tea Party independents. One Virginia women’s organization summed things up in a bumper sticker reading “Be Countercultural: Raise Your Own Kids.”.

Related link : Is Feminism a Heresy? ~ Donna Steichen, Crisis Magazine

Well boo hoo hoo

2012-01-24T11:30:00.002+13:00

Well good luck don't let the door hit you on the way out

An associate professor, who has worked at the university for almost 20 years, said changes to his timetable had led him to look for a job overseas.

Quelle horreur He has to take a class at 8am on one day of the week.

He would now be required to take a class at 8am and his last class that day was scheduled to start at 5pm. On another day, he had classes from 9am to 10am and then from 11am to 3pm.

Perhaps a few years working 12 hour shifts in a coal mine might bring about a change of perspective?

Source: Varsity staff angered by changes to timetables

A significant loss of direction and purpose

2012-01-24T09:25:00.001+13:00

And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

Barack Obama
On the Anniversary of Roe V Wade

What is anybody's life about? It's the big question. What is your purpose? Do you exist just to satisfy your personal desires? To satiate your lusts whatever they be?

Or is there something bigger than yourself?

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

The devastating lie, seductive though it may be, in fullfilling your dreams as an aspiration is that for the vast majority of humanity it cannot be. Only a few can achieve the dizzying heights of rock super stardom while somebody has to dig the coal, milk the cows, seal the roads, dig the drains and all the other things that make the world work.

That's ok - most people accept and make the best of what they have got and get on with it. And the wise and fortunate put their energy and resources not into themselves but their families and children. They dig the coal so that those they love can grow and prosper. And that provides the meaning for everything they do.

And a society and culture that values children and raises them well prospers while societies and cultures that don't wither and die.

We do not value children very much - I saw the term womb turd used to describe a baby the other day. A repulsive term for a precious thing.

Whether you sacrifice children in the name of primitive eugenics as the Spartans did or so that women can aspire to be astronauts as we are doing the net result will always be the same cultural death. This should be obvious but it isn't - alas.

When you are on your death bed contemplating your life, whether man or woman, what will your legacy be? A memory of fancy cocktail parties and now rusting fancy cars or your children and grandchildren?

Update: Powerline's thoughts on this matter

The USA is a very strange country, a very strange country indeed

2012-01-23T18:40:00.000+13:00

Apparently the display of the banner at the left is a violation of the US Constitution.

But the very same document protects this
(WARNING: do not click on the above link without your barf bag handy. Readers with weak hearts are advised to use extreme caution when following it).

I wonder if this is what the founding fathers really had in mind when they were framing it?

Bloody Foreigners: The Untold Battle of Britain

2012-01-23T18:00:00.000+13:00

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four

I really enjoyed watching the above dramatisation on Polish Squadron 303, the men of whom flew in defence of Britain during the Battle of Britain. Despite losing raw recruits left, right and centre, the British were most reticent in allowing the very experienced Polish pilots into the air, and they were only allowed up when one of the pilots broke off from a training run to engage with the enemy. Even then, it was only when their British commander flew with them did he believe they were actually devastatingly effective.

So cool to see it, I highly recommend it.

Hmmmm

2012-01-23T09:14:00.000+13:00

The University College London Union will probably never see any irony in this.

The president of a London university atheist society has resigned over a row about an image of the Prophet Muhammad.

The society at University College London (UCL) published an image on its Facebook page showing "Jesus and Mo" having a drink at a bar.

The atheist group was asked by the UCL union to remove it, but refused and started a petition defending its freedom of expression.

A student Muslim group began a counter-petition asking for its removal.

The cartoon in question of course is designed to be offensive to Christians as well as Muslims.

"The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs."

Source: Muhammad cartoon row leads to resignation

Quote of the day

2012-01-22T16:52:00.002+13:00

The contempt for “women and children first” is not a small loss.

For soft cultures in good times, dispensing with social norms is easy. In hard times, you may have need of them.

Mark Steyn

Branded

2012-01-22T11:26:00.004+13:00

The premise behind this would not need stating in the pre Oprah Winfrey world where naval gazing and touchy feely sensitivity didn't rule because it couldn't afford to.

In the harsh world of the American frontier or on the Eurasian Steppes the worst thing a man could be was a coward - it was perhaps the one unforgivable sin.

Related Post: Don’t know courage until tested

Grandma

2012-01-21T17:02:00.002+13:00

Another image from the 21^st century European Union

A Post for Keith but it's not a Tango

2012-01-21T12:59:00.004+13:00

There is a little in-joke in the title - it doesn't matter if you don't get it the dancing is the thing.

Marriage Destroyers - Pornography (Lolicon Edition)

2012-01-21T11:39:00.000+13:00

We've lost a recent post for some reason, which means incoming links from other sites clicking on that post get a page not found error. So I'm repeating the last post title to fix that link until a new one comes along.

Here's the last post, which has all the magic keyword: Porn and Marriage

And here's a little bit of information on "Lolicon"

Marriage Destroyers - Pornography

2012-01-20T20:00:00.000+13:00

But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Ego autem dico vobis : quia omnis qui viderit mulierem ad concupiscendum eam, jam mœchatus est eam in corde suo.

Matthew 5:28

Pornography is one of the modern world's marriage destroyers, yet very few people today make the effort to stay away from it. As Jesus says, if you look lustfully at a woman, you've already committed adultery with her in your heart.

Jason Evert in the YouTube clip talks about the destructive effects of pornography on a marriage, how can it last if a man is constantly comparing the images he sees in pornography with his wife, how he can be satisfied with her body if he's been trained to become bored with women's bodies in 15 to 30 seconds. Very few marriages can survive infidelity and pornography is a means of being unfaithful, no matter how people rationalise it.

If you are shocked by this whole concept of pornography being harmful to a marriage and you want to stop your addiction, never fear, recovery is possible. Have a look at this link: Breaking free of pornography.

Smackdown

2012-01-20T18:15:00.001+13:00

I don't think he's the right guy for the job but this good to see.

The whole thing is a circus and the media are the ones who have made it so.

A perfect illustration of the decline of a once great nation

2012-01-20T13:06:00.004+13:00

An address at Disney world, Florida in which Tourism is touted as a great hope for the future. Well the USA is a great place to visit - I have been there several times - even been to Disney World, Fla.

It's not so pleasant these days I'm told - heaven help you if you have the misfortune to wear a colostomy bag and seek to travel within the borders of the "Land of the free" in these uncertain times.

Of course in a time of large scale unemployment and uncertainty over energy supplies, along with the reliance upon sourcing oil from places in unfriendly hands you might think that an administration with its hands on the tiller would welcome the construction of a pipeline from its nearest neighbour. A secure and reliable source of the fuel that powers our civilization.

And from a regime that is friendly to the United States.

But in Fantasy Land the provision of jobs and securing energy supplies presumably remains a task for Tinkerbell.

Epiphany 2012

2012-01-20T10:36:00.005+13:00

Epiphany was Feast with a higher profile than Christmas once upon a time.

It is all but forgotten in the West (celebrated on January 6^th) but not in the East where in many places it was celebrated yesterday, January 6^th as reckoned by the Julian Calendar.

You probably wont see this on the TV News - but this is a day to recall the Baptism of Christ and yours also.

Th, th, that's all folks (c)

2012-01-20T00:07:00.000+13:00

Looks like the SOPA Bill has hit a temporary setback: Hat tip Crusader Rabbit

Last I heard, the film and media companies were looking to copyright internet protest action, in the vain hope that the internet would actually pay attention to their copyright.

Please copy this post, and pass it on.

Th, th, th, that's all folks (c)

--------------
Further details bitTorrent, file shared and copied from here: Internet Freedom extended a few months.

And covered on NZC here: Please look at this broken link

Listen to the conversation between the coast guard and the captain of the recently sunk cruise liner

2012-01-19T21:00:00.000+13:00

It's in Italian with sub-titles, however, it's still incredibly compelling. Even thought I've already read the transcript in the Dominion Post today, I was hanging onto every word.

They don't make them like this anymore

2012-01-19T18:25:00.001+13:00

Irene Papas was so beautiful and this is so sad.

When this movie came out this scene caused controversy in Greece, people said Greeks didn't do things like this. The original writer, Nikos Kazantzakis, claimed it happened in 1910 or so.

Who knows, great movie, great scene

21st century masculinity and 21st century something entirely else

2012-01-19T10:38:00.006+13:00

Manhood surrendered

Manhood intact

Update: As more details emerge another name comes to the fore - Captain Roberto Bosio who was on the ship by chance and who took charge after the ships master had failed to

“We managed to avoid the worse and have the world crash down around us. I just want to rest and forget.
“Don’t call me a hero. I just did my duty, the duty of a sea captain – actually the duty of a normal man.
“I and the others with me just did our duty. We looked each other in the eyes for a second and then we Just got on with it.”

Falsehood, Coveteousness, Discord, Injustice

2012-01-18T23:59:00.000+13:00

A reminder of the evils that truly plague the world:

The Venerable Bede records that Fursey experienced a vision, in which angels carried him out of his body to a great height. Looking down into a gloomy valley, he saw four fires. The first, an angel explained, was Falsehood; the next Covetousness; the third Discord and the last Injustice. Gradually these fires drew together into one mighty conflagration.

Fursey became alarmed. The angel, though, reassured him: “It will not burn you because you did not kindle it; for although it appears as a great and terrible fire, it tests everyone according according to his desert, and will burn away sinful desires.” Fursey did not entirely escape, for one of the demons who tortured fallen spirits in the flames thrust a victim against him, causing him to be burnt on his (presumably ghostly) shoulder and jaw.

Fursey recognised the man, and remembered that he had appropriated some of his clothes after he died. Restored once more to his body, he found that he had a permanent scar on his shoulder and jaw.

Related link: The monk who was burned by a demon in his sleep ~ Catholic Herald

Please look at this broken link

2012-01-18T18:22:00.000+13:00

Here's a link to the details of SOPA which threatens internet freedom: Stop Online Piracy Act

Only problem is, the link may not be working for the next 24 hours as Wiki threaten to go dark in protest against the proposed legislation. Apparently, the legislators are backing off and Obama is backing the winds of change - and doesn't support the legislation, at least in its current form.

Text of the SOPA Bill

Among other things, the bill grants immunity from prosecution to all of the companies and organisations that jump on the bandwagon and help to shut down a "suspect" site. The implication then being they face prosecution if they don't take any action.

There are many sites discussing the negative side of SOPA, so I just want to make one point about legislation such as this. That point is that this type of legislation places the onus (costs and risks) on businesses to enforce government mandates, or they themselves be punished. This has been happening for a long time, especially with tax collection. Businesses are required to collect taxes for the government through GST, which is different to actually paying a tax based on a share of the profits. They are required to extract taxes from employees, rather than have the employee respond to the government's demand on their income.

Another obvious area is border control. Data collection requirements and security costs in this area increasingly fall to the corporations running airports, and the airlines bringing in the passengers. The cost of returning illegal passengers fall onto the shoulders of the airlines. This article from 2008 provides an example of my point:

Airlines operating to and from the UK will soon be tasked with collecting comprehensive data from every passenger entering or leaving the country under a new government programme called e-Borders, which is expected to cost carriers £450 million ($669.2 million) in the first 10 years.

SOPA goes as far as requiring search engine companies, such as Google, to remove links to suspect sites:

(B) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINES- A provider of an Internet search engine shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent the foreign infringing site that is subject to the order, or a portion of such site specified in the order, from being served as a direct hypertext link.

Again, the cost of enforcing the law is placed on businesses, with the way open to make them pay a fine for not doing the government's dirty work. It's an interesting concept, and one that will certainly change the behaviour of businesses (for the worse) if it becomes more common. It's like moving from requiring seat belts in cars, to fining Toyota if they allow a drunk driver to get behind the wheel of a Toyota. But what is more sinister is that rather than bind up the rights and obligations of an internet user in a "terms of use" clause, or requiring definite proof of illegal activity, it's a move to allow anyone to report a suspect drunk driver of a Toyota to the Toyota head office, and they push a button to turn off the car, and then wait for the owner to walk into town to register a complaint that it was uncalled for.

Clearly, there needs to be a fair and reasonable way of protecting copyright and intellectual property, and balance that with "fair use" policies. My understanding is that SOPA doesn't strike that balance, and relies on setting up the internet to be easily controlled, so that the same techniques that protect copyright could be too easily adapted to censor free speech. Such changes then require much public discussion. What also needs discussion is how far the government can go requiring businesses to effectively become a law enforcement agency for big government.

Why men do what they do, from 60 years ago

2012-01-18T15:30:00.000+13:00

Good can come out of evil. After the last few days of being vilified and misrepresented by the misogynists* of A Voice for Men, in researching them I found this wonderful blog, called The Thinking Housewife. Last year she posted a review of a 1950's British movie on aviation which gave a small insight into the mind of the man who took risks of over sixty years ago.

The film, released as Decision Against Time in America and directed by Charles Crichton, is interesting for its portrayal of the almost entirely male world of commercial aviation and for its aerial cinematography, but also for its sensitive exploration of the psychology of the male provider. Though made less than 60 years ago, this is a world in which a female commercial pilot is unimaginable.

At the beginning of the story, Mitchell realizes he is unable to afford a better house for his family and that his company faces bankruptcy if its newest freight plane doesn’t sell. Mitchell takes the plane for a test flight with a potential buyer and virtually everything goes wrong. A fire breaks out in one of the engines. The passengers bail out of the plane. Mitchell refuses to ditch the aircraft in the Irish Sea at the radioed instructions of the company president.

In a brilliant scene, Mitchell later reacts to his wife Mary’s charge that he has thoughtlessly risked his life. Mary has witnessed her husband’s harrowing flight and becomes upset and angry. She accuses him of caring for his job, not his family. The wife is played magnificently by Elizabeth Sellars. Mitchell’s response to his wife, as played by Hawkins and written by the screenwriter William Rose, is breathtaking and utterly true to life. Watch its prelude and the actual scene starting at minute 1:05 here. The actor said it was one of the best performances of his career:

“I then had a six-minute speech, which was really the justification why a man does a job – any job – which was brilliantly written by Bill Rose, one of the finest screenwriters, and a man who wrote perfectly for me. This speech attracted a lot of attention, and for an actor no feeling exceeds the satisfaction when people come up afterwards and say that the character you played was splendid, and you were the right person to play it.”

The You-Tube link is to the actual movie which is over an hour long, so don't click on it unless you are ready to watch it.

Related link: “Man in the Sky” ~ The Thinking Housewife

* Misogynist is not a word I would normally use, but given this post of that site, I feel completely justified.

The WW2 Historical perspective challenge - Answers

2012-01-18T13:00:00.018+13:00

The anwers for yesterdays challenge (as I see them) are below the fold

What was interesting but not entirely surprising was the universal misidentification of Jean de Lattre de Tassigny as being Charles de Gaulle. They are pictured together on the left.

A mistake no Frenchman would make I'd posit.

The other interesting thing was the placement of Lake Ladoga in Finland rather than Russia. The Northern part of the lake is encompassed by Ladoga Karelia, a then disputed region of Karelia which was held by the Finns from 1920 to 1940 and again contested from 1941 to 1944 during the Continuation War after which it was ceded to the Soviet Union. Today it is included in the Republic of Karelia, a constituent part of the Russian Federation.

Does this answer represent a cold war reading of age old European tribal and ethnic politics, I wonder?

When it comes down to it the Finns found themselves fighting on the side of the Axis, not because of any ideological agreement with the Nazis but because of an ongoing border dispute that had existed since Finland gained its independence from Russia - and in their historical accounts it is not called World War 2 but is written as three separate but related conflicts

The post was always about how we might perceive history through a national lens when it comes down to it.

James Stephenson - scored 12

Grantavius Kennarius - scored 14 and is the winner of the challenge

Homepaddock - scored 2 plus a bonus for attempting it

Couldn't really give PM a score but an interesting response never the less, that made some very salient points.

Question 1: Can you name these allied commanders above?

From left to right: Bernard Montgomery (Great Britain), Dwight D. Eisenhower (US), Georgy Zhukov (Soviet Union) and Jean de Lattre de Tassigny (France)

Question 2: Where was the Battle of Kasserine Pass fought? Name two notable features about it?

Tunisa in February 1943. It was the first battle in which the American Army encountered German forces and they were soundly beaten. In the long run this defeat may have been a good thing since it lead to a review of command structures and better co-ordination of forces between the British and Americans, heads rolled and General Patton was placed in command of II Corps with the explicit charge of bringing them up to fighting fitness. The rest is history.

Question 3: Where was the Battle of Khalkhin Gol fought and when? Who were the combatants? Extra point for explaining the significance of this battle to the Second World War.

Mongolia in 1939, Soviet troops with some Mongolian troops against Japan.
Before War broke out in Europe the biggest threat the Soviet Union faced was from the Japanese who were empire building in the Far East. The Japanese had two schools of thought as to where to strike next - into Siberia or South into SE Asia and the Pacific. The proponants of the former option were probing the Siberian Border from 1938 . In 1939 preparatory to a potential strike into Siberia they began attacks on the Mongolian Border.

A mere month before war broke out in Europe the Japanese assembled an Army in an attempt to drive the Soviets from the Mongolian Border. The Japanese suffered as major defeat as a result and lost an army. The shock from this led them to pursue the SE Asian/Pacific option and to sign a non aggression pact with the Soviet Union.

Thus the Soviets didn't fight a two front war and after Japan engaged with the Americans were then able to take forces from Siberia trained and equipped for winter fighting and to use them against the Germans to great effect.

Question 4: Can you name the two American Generals to the left, both of who held the exalted rank of five star general though one of them not until after the war.

Left: Douglas McCarthur Right: Omar Bradley

Question 5: Which Nation's troops fought the German Army during the Battle of the Scheldt? Who was their commander?

This was primarily a Canadian Battle fought under the command of the Canadian Lieutenant General Guy Simmons with attached British, Polish,Belgian and Dutch units.

It resulted from the failure of British forces to secure the Scheldt estuary after capturing Antwerp - an ommision quickly spotted by Gerd von Rundstedt who realized that he could deny the Allies the use of Antwerp's port facilities by occupying the Scheldt and that the Allies had major logistical problems because they didn't have operational port facilities on the Continent at that time.

The clearing of the Scheldt came at great cost to the Canadians but opened the port Antwerp for use and resolved many of the Allies logistical difficulties. Important to Canadians and highly significant in the ultimate defeat of Germany but virtually unknown eleswhere.

Question 6: Where is Lake Ladoga and what significancant role did it play during the years 1941-1944?

Lake Ladoga's importance was the "Road of Life" cynically called "the Road of Death" by those who used it. It was a road created across the frozen surface of the lake and used to bring supplies into Leningrad during the blockade and to evacuate civilians along with art works and vital manufacturing equipment.

Over one million people, mostly women and children, were evacuated from the city in this manner (1.5 million died during the blockade). The Soviets even laid railway tracks across the ice to ensure the city held and survived. Large numbers of German troops were diverted from other theatres to maintain the seige which lasted 29 months.

Mark Wahlberg Talks About His Catholic Faith

2012-01-18T12:18:00.000+13:00

Good to see some celebrities not afraid to come out and talk about their faith.

Infamy

2012-01-18T09:02:00.001+13:00

There are great tales of heroism at sea, of captains going down with their ship after ensuring all that could be done has been done.

But I guess this is not one of those stories: 'Get onboard, for f--k's sake!'

The WW2 Historical perspective challenge

2012-01-17T13:21:00.009+13:00

So - World War 2 was a while ago now. For my kids the Battles of El Alamein and Kursk might just as well be the Battle of Thermopylae. So it goes, things get forgotten as newer events take priority - my youngest studied the 1981 Springbok tour last year - like that's important when compared to El Alamein in Kiwi national consciousness. Kiwis fought and died at El Alamein - what's a minor civil disorder compared with that?

Got me thinking though - El Alamein is more on Kiwi's radar than Kursk despite Kursk being fought on a scale that dwarfed El Alamein. At Kursk German casualties alone well outnumbered the total number of men the Germans had on the field at El Alamein. They may have exceeded 500,000 according to some sources. Kursk was a super battle fought on a super scale.

But since there were probably no New Zealanders on the field at Kursk and a great many at El Alamein it is only natural as well as right and proper that the latter battle has a higher profile here

This quiz is about people who were major players in those years and events that were highly significant to the eventual outcome - but depending on where you come from they may be people and events you never even heard of. Some will be easy enough but not most.

Are you willing to take the challenge and learn something about perspective along the way. Who can get the highest score? Will it be that which has been covered in Hollywood movies that will predominate in what you know?

Question 1: Can you name these allied commanders above? Four points, one for each name.

Question 2: Where was the Battle of Kasserine Pass fought? Name two notable features about it? Four points, two for the country in which it was fought, or one if only the theatre is answered.

Question 3: Where was the Battle of Khalkhin Gol fought and when? Who were the combatants? Extra point for explaining the significance of this battle to the Second World War. Six points.

Question 4: Can you name the two American Generals to the left, both of whom held the exalted rank of five star general though one of them not until after the war. A point for each

Question 5: Which Nation's troops fought the German Army during the Battle of the Scheldt? Who was their commander? Two points.

Question 6: Where is Lake Ladoga and what significancant role did it play during the years 1941-1944? Two points

Headline of the day

2012-01-17T08:34:00.002+13:00

Greece default fears grow

Actually this has been the headline of the day every day for the past nine months, Christmas day excepted.

It's not only Greece, below a two day old Romanian picture - though Romania's problems are not on our radar yet.

I am a man, so my opinion counts [UPDATED]

2012-01-16T23:55:00.000+13:00

Lucia Maria did a post a few days ago (True Grown Ups...) that certainly upset an author called "John the other" on the blog/website of "A voice for men": Real Men are Disposable, so says Maria.

Only problem is, I think his interpretation of her post is a little off, and the subsequent extrapolations made by him and others on that thread about what they think she meant are way off the planet. And I'm not talking Earth or Mars. They could be right out by Pluto or coming out of Uranus. Lucia may be from Venus, but they think she's from Planet Man-eater! (I use "they" in the sense I lump most of the commenters in with John's post. Those comments though do not necessarily represent John's opinion. Just read the whole thread and take what you will from it.)

John starts off:

Lucia Maria recently explained in her January 13 article that grown-up men should quit trying to have human rights, and go back to dying for her convenience.

I don't know how John got that interpretation from what she wrote, but she is not making that argument at all. I use the evidence of around 1000 other posts she has done on this blog, and never noticed a single one on that nature. It's a ridiculous thing to say, I think. Do such people seriously think that mothers enjoy losing their husbands in war? Do they think Lucia would want to lose her sons? Generally, do parents, brothers and sisters think their brother/father/son is disposable? We can all imagine how the stereotyped femi-nazi might think of men, but it is dangerous to start extending this belief towards all women, as seemed to be the trend of comments back at the Voice for men site.

John goes on to interpret Lucia's post:

According to Maria, men arguing for the non-disposability of males are the equivalent of children

She does not say this directly in her post, and it's a bit of a long bow to draw that men are disposable. For a start, Lucia talks about the differences between children (not just boys) and adults (not just men) and how you tell that they have "grown up". That definition, in essence: thinking about more than just yourself. That applies to men and women and in the context of men, can be demonstrated (ie ONE example) by those men that go to war to protect their families.

That does not mean that she is arguing that men are disposable. Any regular reader of this blog should understand John's interpretation just doesn't stack up. All she is doing is recognising a great sacrifice, one to be honoured, not spat upon, and not, ever, ever, considered "disposable". On the other hand, any mention of self-sacrifice as a virtue seems to be shunned by many of the commenters on that blog, possibly having decided that is a terrible idea to promote in society. Fine, they are entitled to that opinion, but that still doesn't mean that they can draw the inference that Lucia thinks men are disposable.

A key to their vitriol would have to be in Lucia's definition of "grown-up". Her definition immediately excludes people that act solely in their own self-interest. A quick scan of his site, and I can see why that would get John going, but we need to look deeper before deciding Lucia thinks men are disposable.

Lucia provided this definition:

A grown up is a person who does not put their needs, wants and desires first. They are more interested in looking after those they are responsible for than looking after themselves, even to self-sacrifice. In short, they die to themselves so that others might live.”

and John's response:

I think Lucia Maria has it backwards; an adult is an individual who takes responsibility for themselves.

John's counter-definition has value, but I think he has set up a false choice (it isn't a case of one or the other) in critiquing Lucia's definition. I'd argue that his definition is a good foundation to describe adulthood, but falls short when considering the bigger picture of family. Lucia's posts often focus on the fundamental importance of the family unit, and it is in that context she speaks of fathers that look after their wives and children; of mothers that look after their husbands and children; of children that grow up to look after their aged parents. To Lucia, the commitments and responsibilities created by becoming a family (a joint decision for the man and women) then requires a "step up" by both parties.

I don't know about John's background, but for me, I'd buy his definition of adulthood for when I was single. When I married, I still largely thought that way too, and it wasn't completely wrong (just limiting IMHO). However, when children came along, I think I finally "grew up" as per the definition Lucia provides. My life become much bigger than being just about me. I needed his foundation definition, but I'd be a selfish bastard if I didn't at least put some serious thinking about Lucia's proposition.

The thing is, I don't think these two definitions need to be seen in competition with each other. Some may take that "responsibility of self" John mentions to automatically include concepts like "honouring commitments"; like love being something bigger than a feeling; and to borrow a popular motto, "to protect and serve" as a natural outcome of a morally sound individual who becomes a father.

So John might not get where Lucia is coming from, and people don't necessarily have to buy into the importance placed on the family unit as something bigger than the individual, but it doesn't need to be mocked or attacked either. The responsibilities fathers inherit are seen by the Lucia's of this world as a recognition of the sacrifices a man might make compared to when he was single. Fidelity, faithfulness, committment from the man are actually being appreciated by Lucia. Men that commit to the family are seen as real men. Men who walk out are wimps, or selfish. Equally, you'll find posts from Lucia condemning the types of feminists that demean men, that have the attitude that husbands are optional in a family. There may be a war of the sexes going on, but Lucia isn't part of it. She's part of the war to preserve the family unit, and that takes a husband and a wife.

However, I should note that I am choosing a generous interpretation of John's definition. The danger of focusing on pure self-interest, as argued along the lines of libertarian thought, is that selfishness can become a virtue that then opposes the more traditional virtues. This is the essence of Lucia's criticisms on such definitions - that they lose their gloss when they are not built on a moral foundation, and self-interest can all too quickly give way to selfishness, which in turn diminishes the individual as much as it destroys social cohesion. See the first principle of conservatism.

Lucia did accuse the blog of not being "grown-up", and that led to return fire, but whilst they used shock and awe tactics and a bunker buster or two, they missed the target I think. Being accused of being childish did not logically flow to making the argument that she thinks men are disposable. That's a different species of woman/feminist they want to argue with.

John said:

The author doesn’t leave much room for doubt about who are deemed lesser human beings in her rhetoric, or in the accompanying illustrations. In her article, an included drawing titled “the weaker sex” depicts four women poking a finger-sized man with a knitting needle.

Boy, he really missed the point with that whole part of the post. The author wasn't expressing her opinion, the author was showing that the "war between the sexes", in one form or another was also expressing itself back in the early 1900s, as it is today. She cited an example. That doesn't mean she supports it - she was noting that propaganda was at play even back then, and changed markedly during the war.

Readers need to reconcile phrases Lucia made like below, against John's interpretation of Lucia's post:

Men obviously don't go out to fight in wars because women are poking them with knitting needles, they go out to fight because they love us and their families and will do what it takes to protect us and what they value.

Lucia thinks wives and children are loved by those men. That is not saying they are disposable, it is seeing a noble purpose in that action of violence. John might want to assure her that not all men care enough about their families to fight a war, or that there are other ways of caring for the family than volunteering to fight, but I think we will find she gets that there are not blanket rules for everything, and that this is not a post about the disposability of men.

That is partly why she says later:

Considering that both men and women working together is what makes a strong culture, this cultivation of a war between the sexes seeking to show how one dominates the other from the past was most disturbing.

Let's read that again: "Men and women WORKING TOGETHER is what makes a strong culture." and "This CULTIVATION of a WAR BETWEEN THE SEXES...was most disturbing." [emphasis mine]

From where I stand, I see radical feminism as a swing too far on the pendulum, but John's apparently hasty and over-zealous interpretation of Lucia's comments as being about the disposability of men, and some of the rather virulent and misogynistic comments it has spawned on that thread, looks a bit like the mirror image of those radical feminists they rail against. Radical menists. Well, great, all power to them and their cause. They just don't need to come across as women-haters to win their rights.

One comment on John's thread (from "Stu") kind of sums up my point about a misogynistic sentiment running through the thread. The comment was in response to the sinking yesterday of a cruise ship off Greece:

So orders were given that it was to be women and children first……typical. I would kill anybody without a seconds thought that tried to stop my progress getting off a sinking ship for the sake of protecting some bitch or her womb turds that I don’t even know.

A fine a comment as any of the femi-nazi comments I've ever read.

[Update - Accidentally published my draft copy at 11pm. The version after 12 is hopefully good to go]
[Update 10am - Moved one paragraph.

You know when things have gone truly off the rails

2012-01-16T11:19:00.000+13:00

This should be considered an absurdity but in our litigious times it is par for the course I'm afraid: Dr Jeffrey John: senior Gay cleric plans legal action after bishop role snub

He's entitled to be a Bishop?

He's willing to inflict further damage on the Anglican Church to make his point?

It is darned hard to bring up our children in the Faith that was handed down to us and this sort of circus does not make it any easier.

Old newsreel on Poles finding refuge in Persia during WWII

2012-01-16T10:00:00.000+13:00

An old newsreel on Poles finding refuge in Persia (now Iran) during WWII. Just one minor error that I noticed in what the commentator was saying - the Poles were not pushed out of the Soviet Union by the Nazis - they were released by the Soviets, as they had been prisoners in the Soviet Union right up until the Soviets were attacked by their ally, Nazi Germany. This then necessitated agreements with their new allies, whom they'd been formerly attacking and imprisoning. It seems during WWII, any mention of this embarrassing fact was omitted.

Anyway, I was quite excited to find this newsreel on YouTube. My Dad was one of those who made it to Persia as a 14 year old. Actually, he was probably a little younger, but saying he was 14 got him into the Cadets, which didn't make him old enough to fight in the war, but did mean he got vocational training as a welder.

For more about my father's family's story, see my experiences of motherhood and conservatism, where I explain how thinking about the way my grandmother died during WWII helped push me from liberalism to conservatism.

The long cold summer

2012-01-15T16:06:00.013+13:00

Ele lives on a farm so the weather, rain or lack of thereof and so forth is a matter of deep concern to her.

Which is why she often does weather related posts - like this one, which prompted me to look up the current weather for Yakutsk and mighty nasty it was there at the time I did it.

Today it has improved

The weather in our four main centers compared with Yaktutsk at 1500 today. Here are the latest available figures for comparison.

So if it is not nice where you are over the next few days you can see how others elsewhere are faring with regard to their weather.

Disconnect

2012-01-15T08:15:00.002+13:00

The accused's mother has said that he had been portrayed as a monster by the media and angry locals had abused her family.

Beating a sleeping five year old girl to a pulp and raping her in her own bed are the actions of a monster.

I think we all agree.

Source: Judge's words horrify victim's parents

Amazing video of autistic girl able to communicate via computer

2012-01-14T17:00:00.001+13:00

And here's Carly's Blog: Carly's Voice

In a world without YouTube

2012-01-14T15:04:00.004+13:00

This is worse

The images of war took much longer to appear but appear they did.

Los desastres de la guerra - Francisco Goya

A very good picture

2012-01-14T08:59:00.001+13:00

KG sent me this - he saw it on Powerline.

I think it may have originated here.

True Grown-ups and a little on male emasculation [UPDATE]

2012-01-13T20:00:00.000+13:00

A few days ago Crusader Rabbit linked to two articles related to the website A Voice for Men titled Feminazi "journalist" gets her ass kicked. Big time. One was an attack on the material contained on the site and the other was an attack on the female journalist who dared to attack the site. They think the Voice for Men author is winning the argument with the female journalist, however it is early days as she has said that she will go through the assertions she's made in her opening article in more detail in the near future, and therefore there is not a lot of substance to what she's said. Yet. I'm sure it will come.

I've been thinking about the issues that were brought up by both articles over the last several days. As there is a bit of a cross-over in the material that I've been reading and this subculture of men who feel disadvantaged and discriminated against by just being men, I thought I'd broaden the perspective a little.

In a 1903 illustration ironically titled "The Weaker Sex", a tiny, pleading man was examined, under glass, by four beauties who poked at him with a knitting needle.

As a result of my research over the last couple of days, I found that in the United States more than one hundred years ago, this idea of men being emasculated by women was being promoted in the media. There were many images published, such as the illustration above, of tiny men being toyed with by giant women. It all changed again during the WWI era when women suddenly became images of liberty and nurturers again. Men obviously don't go out to fight in wars because women are poking them with knitting needles, they go out to fight because they love us and their families and will do what it takes to protect us and what they value.

The symbolic meaning of the big female-little male characters in J. C. Leyendecker's "Weapons for Liberty" poster was doubled through costuming. In this allegorical scene, the crowned, flag-wrapped woman was Liberty, while the kneeling little boy protected Liberty through preparation. The smaller figure provided the action of the picture. What's more, dressed as a Boy Scout, he represented an organization that strove to protect future men from "feminizing" influences.

I found it very interesting on how the images of women during the pre-WWI era acted as propaganda, seeking to subtly influence the culture's view of women. Considering that both men and women working together is what makes a strong culture, this cultivation of a war between the sexes seeking to show how one dominates the other from the past was most disturbing.

And so back to Voice for Men. One of the articles I read there was Feminists: demented, stunned or cultists, whereby the author concludes that radical, feminist women consider that women are like children, and finishes off by stating that~~, "Women need to grow up"~~ these women need to grow up*. Which got me thinking about what it actually means to be a grown up, which was the original purpose of this post, until I got distracted with explaining the background.

My definition of a Grown Up

A grown up is a person who does not put their needs, wants and desires first. They are more interested in looking after those they are responsible for than looking after themselves, even to self-sacrifice. In short, they die to themselves so that others might live.

The young child is the very opposite of this. They need to be trained to think of others, encouraged to share and to feel empathy for those they might hurt. As they get older, they need to be taught that they are not always right, that when they do wrong, they need to apologise and take responsibility for their actions. And they need to see this way of being modelled by their parents.

It's a long, hard battle with every child, and sadly, many never make it to true adulthood, which is not really tested until that person becomes a parent. At that point, some will realise that their sole purpose in life is not just self-gratification. Expectations from society do play a part, but on the whole it comes down to character and what was taught by parents. If parents don't teach their children by word and example and don't know how to counter all the false messaging from society and the media, then it's hit and miss as to whether their children will ever grow up.

Getting to my final point - how do you tell if a person has really reached adulthood? Simple, my standard is that they know it's not all about them. And from my reading of the Voice For Men website, that's not the position they appear take.

UPDATE ( 16 Jan 2012, 9:43am)
* This was a mistake. I started off writing this post after thinking of the phrase, "Women need to grow up", as a concept. It was put into the post very early on. It took me a while to find the article that I thought it was from. Writing this post, I altered it very drastically a number of times, trying to make it less attacking and more charitable, over a couple of days. I do remember looking at the phrase, thinking about how to make it not look like a quote, but then I forgot when I posted it. I'm going to leave the phrase in there using the strike out, just so it can be seen what people have been reacting to when criticising this post.

Bystander Apathy

2012-01-13T18:07:00.000+13:00

The Herald is hand wringing: Attack highlights 'bystander apathy'

Meanwhile the BBC reports on the fate of a man who came to the aid of a train conductor: 'Big Man' charged over train eviction

21^st century disconnect.

Hail in Summer

2012-01-13T18:00:00.000+13:00

Just before 5pm today, while I was sitting at the computer writing one of the few posts appearing on this blog today, and trying to maintain a comfortable environment on my lap for the cat, it hailed outside. It's summer time here in New Zealand! Isn't it? Where did this hail come from? Any thing more like this could wreck my tomatoes, of which only one has ripened so far. Normally I have heaps of tomatoes by Christmas, but not this season.

Movie: The Way

2012-01-13T17:00:00.000+13:00

“The Way” is the story of Tom (Sheen), a widower, sometime Catholic and a Malibu dentist, whose son, Daniel (Estevez), decides to leave his doctorate behind and see the world.

As Tom drives Daniel to the airport, he scolds him for not taking his place in the world. Daniel answers that he needs to find what that place is and gently suggests that his dad might do the same.

Not long after, Tom’s golf game is interrupted by a call with the news that Daniel has died in a small town in the French Pyrenees. Tom leaves immediately to bring his son’s body home. But once there, a kind police detective informs him that in this remote town his son was about to leave on a spiritual pilgrimage to the medieval shrine of Santiago de Compostela, where many believe the relics of St. James the Apostle are interred.

Tom has Daniel’s remains cremated and then decides that the two of them together will make this journey, which is also called pilgrimage, the way, or camino. People make this camino for different reasons but Tom has little idea of what he is in for or where he is going. He packs the tin with Daniel’s ashes in the rucksack the young man had prepared, and starts off.

On the first or second morning, after a terrible night’s sleep in a hostel, Tom drops the knapsack in a river and becomes thoroughly drenched fighting the current to retrieve it. It’s a cleansing, a rebirth, a humbling baptism for Tom as he begins his journey.

Along the way he collects three people, or characters, that hook their destiny to his: Joost (Yorick van Wageningen), a jovial Dutchman who travels with recreational pharmaceuticals and wants to lose weight so his wife won’t reject him; Sarah (Deborah Kara Unger), a Canadian who says she is on the camino to stop smoking; and Jack (James Nesbitt), a chatty Irish novelist who has lost his creative spark. Tom avoids them when he can but after he has a spectacular meltdown in public and Jack puts up his bail, they continue together.

It looks like an amazing movie, I hope it makes it to New Zealand. If it doesn't, I'll be buying it from Amazon.

Interview: On 'The Way' with Martin Sheen.
A highlight of this interview is that he talks about the part he played in Apocalypse Now was himself and how he's changed from that person.

Rotorua leaves a bad smell in the air

2012-01-13T14:25:00.001+13:00

Vicious attack on pregnant women with "crowd of bystanders" able to take photos.

And a couple of people caught shoplifting, and they try to explain that there has been a misunderstanding, and are actually entitled to take the goods. The video goes viral.

Degrading people for our pleasure and amusement

2012-01-13T10:31:00.000+13:00

A lot of outrage over tourists giving food to this woman and her fellow tribes people to dance for their cameras.

Yes - it is demeaning.

And yet such things go on all over the world. There is no country in the world where this doesn't occur in some form or another - and in many cases far more repulsive and degrading than this is.

And no one alive in the western world is innocent of participation in such things however vicariously - reality TV is not particularly decorous now is it?

Here is a tourist attraction in Amsterdam

And that is positively benign when compared to what might be produced in the San Fernando valley in the good old USA - be warned!

We are fallen creatures in a wicked world.

An idyllic Indonesian childhood

2012-01-13T08:05:00.002+13:00

Kids scratching through the garbage looking for anything of value that they can use to obtain the essentials of daily life. We are not talking I-pads here, we are talking "their daily bread".

And yet the New Zealand Herald is more concerned about - Ethical shopping: Shop right and protect the orang-utans' forests

The reason why our most desperate poor are not anywhere near as desperate as these children is because the dynamic forefathers of this country cleared bush and drained swamps to create pasture for dairy cows thus creating the wealth that provides the education and opportunities that our children enjoy today.

Ethical shopping might include buying Indonesian Toilet paper thus providing Indonesia with a little hard currency to help improve the lot of the Indonesian poor?

What do you think?

21st Century relationships in the wasteland

2012-01-12T18:36:00.005+13:00

This is just so confusing - well not confusing, it's wrong!

Multiple trips to fertility doctors, three miscarriages and $60-$70,000 out of pocket, Tanya was left with little choice: if she was going to become a mother, she would need a free sperm donor.
But for the 39-year-old, the formal process of searching for a suitable candidate on the Free Sperm Donor Register turned into something far from expected - a blossoming new romance.
And, despite the relationship, Tanya is determined to be the only legal parent if she does eventually have a baby.

There was one important 21^st century ritual to be undergone before they could proceed though.

They exchanged STD results before consummating the relationship.

Sounds so romantic.

How much time do we have left now the ruling elite have gone bonkers?

2012-01-12T11:09:00.002+13:00

More Alice in Wonderland absurdity from the land of the free.

When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.

But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.

That's really really clever, pass a law that it is impossible to comply with then penalize the law breakers.

An idea worthy of the Red Queen herself.

Taking a bite of the Apple

2012-01-12T10:00:00.000+13:00

The new CEO of Apple, Tim Cook is to receive a US$378M dollar pay packet. This consists largely of shares, but it's still ridiculously huge, and totally unwarranted, IMHO. Particularly when you hear the logic:

The compensation is warranted because investors expect Cook to continue releasing the kinds of products that made Apple the world’s most valuable technology company, said Kevin Dede, an analyst at Brigantine Advisors in New York.

Do you put down a $378M non-refundable deposit based on expectations that some-one is going to cook up new products? What happened to risk and reward? This really is over-the-top and unnecessary.

Almost makes me think all Apple employees need to get a million in stock each to ensure they work harder and smarter.

Long finned eels

2012-01-12T06:00:00.000+13:00

Longfin eels breed only once, at the end of their life. When they are ready to breed, they leave New Zealand and swim 5000 kilometres up into the tropical Pacific to spawn, probably in deep ocean trenches somewhere near Tonga.

When they reach their destination, the females lay millions of eggs that are fertilised by the male. The larvae are called leptocephalus and look nothing like an eel - they are transparent, flat, and leaf-shaped. The larvae reach New Zealand by drifting on ocean currents [which can take 1 to 2 years].

Before entering fresh water, the leptocephalus change into a more familiar eel shape, although they remain transparent for up to a week after leaving the sea. These tiny "glass" eels enter fresh water between July and November each year, often in very large numbers.

Eels take many years to grow and it could be decades before an individual is ready to undertake the long migration back to the tropics to breed. The average age at which a longfin eel migrates is 23 years for a male and 34 for a female. The adults never return as they die after spawning.

Some may live to 80 years or so before trying to breed.

Longfin eels are fished commercially, and it's no wonder that over fishing is leading to their extinction. When they can only breed once, somewhere off Tonga, once every 30 years or so, it's not surprising to see that recovery of eel numbers would be difficult to achieve.

Reference: About the NZ Longfin Eel

Bittersweet

2012-01-11T16:27:00.001+13:00

Make sure you have some tissues handy

You can watch the video and then .....

Discover the background

Let the mocking begin

2012-01-11T13:20:00.002+13:00

Pope: Gay marriage a 'threat to humanity'

Pope Benedict says gay marriage is one of several threats to the traditional family that undermines "the future of humanity itself".

The pope made some of his strongest comments against gay marriage in a new year address to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Vatican in which he touched on some economic and social issues facing the world today.

He told diplomats from nearly 180 countries that the education of children needed proper "settings" and that "pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman''.

Raw meat tossed to enlightened 21st century types who think that babies come from the cabbage patch or something. And from whence they may be distributed to "parents" who want them regardless of gender and/or sexual identity.

Still rather than discuss the issues raised by the Pope in an adult manner the easiest thing to do is to change the subject.

Update: Thanks to a link provided by Zen in a comment I have read the Popes speech which talks of many substantive things.

It does not mention Gay Marriage at all!

In a section discussing education the Pope says

(Education) thus represents a task of primary importance in this difficult and demanding time. In addition to a clear goal, that of leading young people to a full knowledge of reality and thus of truth, education needs settings. Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself. The family unit is fundamental for the educational process and for the development both of individuals and States; hence there is a need for policies which promote the family and aid social cohesion and dialogue.

The fact that the Pope needs to clarify the genders involved in marriage is a sign of the times. Until the turn of the 21^st century, a mere 11 years ago now when discussing a marriage it would have been assumed that it was of a man and a woman and not something that needed to be stated explicitly.

Bones in the paddock

2012-01-11T10:30:00.000+13:00

Homepaddock reports on a dinosaur find in Auckland. I don't recall seeing a satire tag, so it could be true: Paleontologists flock to study dinosaurs.

Greenism a symptom of the intellectual decline of the west

2012-01-11T09:07:00.001+13:00

People have got to eat.

To eat they either have to grow food or do something useful which they can exchange for food.

Squid is good food so some people go and catch squid and exchange it for the things they need to survive and prosper in this sorry world.

Some people think catching squid is bad because it impacts on the sealions or something and therefore the Government shouldn't let people catch squid.

The people who think other people shouldn't catch squid are very often people who are prospering, they are often employed in secure jobs and paid from taxes extracted from the people who do useful things, things like catching squid funnily enough. Squid that can be consumed in fancy eateries where University lecturers can dine upon dishes like calamari green salad and seafood chowder while lamenting with their colleagues how "greedy humans" are raping the planet. And killing the sea lions and polar bears in order to "line their pockets".

Really of course the people catch squid do it so they do not end up with swollen bellyed malnourished children - a common enough sight in parts of the world where people do not catch enough squid.

Victory!!!

2012-01-10T21:32:00.003+13:00

Google have rolled back their changes automatically changing blogspot URLs from .com to .co.nz to all New Zealand users of Blogger.

Did our posts here and on the Blogger support forum and the Alexa support forum have any effect? Maybe.

In the meantime, I will claim, Victory!

For more information, see Google have stuffed up New Zealand Blogger and Has Blogger changed our Domain Name?

Google have stuffed up NZ Blogger domains (Update 2)

2012-01-10T19:00:00.000+13:00

This morning, without any obvious warning, Google decided to implement new region based domain names for all NZ and Australian Blogger accounts. Our post: Has Blogger Changed Our Domain Name?

So our assigned URL went from nzconservative.blogspot.com to nzconservative.co.nz for people accessing the .com address in NZ.

However, if you live in Australia, you'd instead see nzconservative.com.au.

If you happened to be in the USA and accessed our blog directly, it would presumably resolve to the .com address, but one commenter from Texas has noted that by going via a link on an Australian blog, they also get the .com.au address. This change has also affected other NZ blogs such as Contra Celsum, No Minister, Liberty Scott, Oswald Bastable's Ranting and so on.

In general terms, this should have no direct impact to our blog. Sure, it makes it easier for the government to apply filters to shut down our blog in NZ, but to complain about that here might get our blog shut down, so I'll save it to another post.

Google, in a document provided by the Blogger Support, assure us there is really no big deal, but they don't cover all options. Perhaps they felt that the Australian and NZ market is small enough to act as guinea pigs, and they'll smile and wave and assure us things are good and work out how to fix it for the rest of the world. We'll see. In the meantime, there are some immediate consequences in the area of blog rankings.

UPDATE 8:30PM:
Blogger have just rolled back the changes. Fantastic.

This will give us more time to assess our options.

Andrei looked at the site counter statistics and it looks like the Google ones might be OK, as they go off a different time zone starting point. So I've removed that part of the discussion.

The Alexa counter though will not cope with these (eventual?) Blogger changes. The nzconservative.blogspot.co.nz is not recognised AT ALL as a valid website, because Alexa doesn't currently treat the blog names specified as a sub domain as a distinct blog address. They've done this specifically for the sub domains under blogger.com and I don't know how or when they will account for the blogspot.co.nz sub domains, but I'll presume that if blogger provide better advance notice, other parties will be able to test and alter their tools to accommodate the new approach.

I'm still considering registering a separate domain and pointing all traffic to the new domain. Only problem is that Google may simply be slightly ahead of the curve and we can expect regional domains to fall under the new controls the governments of the world seem to be very keen to impose. In that regard, Google providing a way of keeping the pages up in countries outside of the one requesting the block may be a good move. I look forward to more conversation on this topic.

UPDATE 2 AT 8:51PM:
I just tested nzconservative.blogspot.co.nz and it still works, the only difference being it only takes me there if I explicitly type that address. If I use my old bookmarks, I am not redirected to the .co.nz. I don't know if this is a leftover from the change this morning, or it always worked that way. Interesting.

More from the cultural desert of academia

2012-01-10T17:30:00.012+13:00

A sociologist in England has come up with this

(M)onogamy has ostracised men from doing what they most want to do.

He writes in his new book The Monogamy Gap: Men, Love, and the Reality of Cheating, that cheating is the norm, not the exception to it, and it’s high time that people start embracing ‘sexually open relationships that coexist without hierarchy or hegemony.’

He's done a study

In the study, Mr Anderson surveyed 120 undergraduate men – both gay and straight. He found that 78 per cent of those with partners cheated, ‘even though they said that they loved and intended to stay with their partner.’

In this world there are lots of things I'd like to do - it doesn't make them right.

And if everybody did what they wanted to do whenever they wanted to do it - well our civil society wouldn't last very long, now would it?⁽¹⁾

People who do what they like regardless of the effect on other people are called er what's the word?

Psychopaths, that's it, psychopaths.

Source: Why men will ALWAYS cheat (even if they love their partners and don't want to leave them)

(1) There is a profound reason why adultery is a serious business and one of the ten commandments is a proscription on doing it.

It's all about paternity and ensuring the father of a child takes responsibility for it and doesn't hand it on to someone else.

Mind you our enlightened moderns think sex is entirely about making your genitals feel good anyway you choose and reproduction of the species is for other people to do.

Except for some idolent rich who fancy a child are more than happy to pay somebody else to carry it for them.

But, but it is his own private business surely

2012-01-10T11:36:00.001+13:00

Husband admits having two wives.

I know why this is wrong and why it is an offense under New Zealand statutes, and English and American ones for that matter.

But what harm does it do for this man to marry another woman without divorcing his first wife?

Nobody is hurt are they?

It is his own private affair and nobody's business but his own?

Surely in this modern day and age it is archaic to restrict a man to one wife at a time regardless of whether they all cohabit or not?

He wouldn't have committed an offense if he had just shacked up with wife one despite having two children with her now would have he.

So what does that piece of paper really mean?

Has Blogger (Google) changed our domain name?

2012-01-10T10:48:00.001+13:00

I am alarmed to see our assigned NZ conservative domain name changed from a dot com (xxx.blogspot.com) address to a dot co dot nz xxx.blogspot.co.nz) address.

At this stage, it seems to me that Google have arbitrarily changed our assigned domain name without any form of notification or warning. Even though there is a redirect on, I'm not sure if it is also the cause of several issues I've experienced with some browser utilities and have yet to see the impact on our Stat Counter tools. A quick look and it seems Alexa has picked up the change, with our page rank going from 322,000 or so to 16 million, supposedly as it is detecting a new blog.

Has anyone else noticed their NZ blogger domains changing?

Update: A "planned" event to make it easier to allow different countries to prevent blog sites from publishing content in their country. Read the details here: Why does my blog redirect to a country specific URL?

If you want to preserve your blog address you need to add a "no country redirect" (/ncr) following the blog address, thus: nzconservative.blogspot.com/ncr where ever you create links or leave your blog URL. Not sure of the advantages this would provide, unless your country decides to block the country specific blog sites. Update: According to Google: "Blog owners should not see any visible differences to their blog other than the URL redirecting to a ccTLD. URLs of custom domains will be unaffected."

Hah! Not so, it looks like it's going to play havoc with our (Alexa) site rankings. I'll do a post to explain how later.

Update: Google have rolled back the changes. More here: The post I said I'd do later.

Marriage Rates falling in the USA

2012-01-10T10:15:00.000+13:00

I've said before that marriage is something only Christians and Gays are interested in, and the latest statistics seem to prove it. Marriage protects families, but the notion of even the nuclear family is suffering a meltdown. One comment on marriage from a woman, who I'm guessing doesn't yet have children:

"Women don't necessarily need a husband to make ends meet or to raise children. They can do a lot of these things on their own.

And apparently if you commit your time to someone, and start a family, you can walk out without any downsides as compared to the pain of divorce on the lives of the children:

"Seth comes from a family of divorce and has seen how it's affected his life and his family.

"He says he couldn't imagine even thinking about marriage until we had been together for 10 years and I said as long as we are happy together we will stay together," says Miss Romaine.

Yes Seth, you've been the child in a family of a divorce and you think breaking the marriage committment by getting a divorce is the thing that caused the pain, as opposed to, what, having some weird kind of expectation you can walk out on your family if you don't happen to feel happy?

Crazy.

Link: Marriage Rates falling in the USA

Christians murdered in Nigeria

2012-01-10T09:24:00.001+13:00

Nigeria: The number of Christians killed in an Islamic extremist attack here on Thursday (Jan. 5) has risen to nine (15 wounded including children), and over the weekend the same terrorist group killed at least 21 Christians in neighboring Adamawa state, sources said.

Members of the Boko Haram group that seeks to impose sharia (Islamic law) on Nigeria emerged from a mosque near the Deeper Life Bible Church in the Boso area of Gombe, capital of Gombe state, at about 7:30 p.m. and shot Christians attending a weekly meeting known as “The Hour of Revival,” area sources said.

Dave Armstrong uses the word "breeders"

2012-01-09T14:30:00.000+13:00

I was disgusted to see that in today's Dominion Post opinion item, Dave Armstrong used the word "breeders" when referring to parents of children. As I have said before, this is an offensive term with negative connotation, equating the procreation of human beings to that of animals. This word should not be used in polite company, and should certainly not be used by a reputable newspaper.

Here is what Armstrong said in What's in a Kiwi name? A lack of imagination:

I think the latest names show a distinct lack of imagination on the part of our breeders.

Thus linking back to his title and the point of his article.

Recently I also discovered that "breeders" is homosexual slang for parents. Just like the word "poofter" is derogatory towards homosexuals, so is "breeders" derogatory towards heteroseuxals. Here is the definition of "breeder" from the Urban Dictionary:

1: slang term used by some childfree people for one who has a child and/or has many after that, refuses to discipline the child/ren, thinks the sun rises and sets for their child/ren, look down upon people who do not have children, and are in general very selfish and greedy when it comes to their whims and those of their child/ren, especially if they can use their parenthood status or their children as an excuse to get their way. A female breeder is commonly called a moo, and a male breeder a duh.
2: slang term used by people of homosexual persuasion to refer to heterosexual couples, who have a significantly higher risk of contributing to the population increase than the homosexuals do.
"Can you believe the nerve of those breeders? They come in to a nice restaurant and proceed to sit by and watch while their progeny shriek and run all over the place, and then let the children make a huge mess and do not even tip the waitstaff. Disgusting..."

I have left the following message in the comments for the article. I wonder if the moderator will let it through?

The word "breeders" is a derogatory term typically used by homosexuals towards heterosexual parents. It implies that parents are animals. I am surprised and disgusted that there is now an attempt to mainstream this word through the paper.

There will be those who think this post is an extreme reaction to a seemingly minor word. However, if you see my previous post on this subject, you'll see the words people use affect how they think about certain things. Just as in Sweden the word that was used for housewife changed the Swedes view of women who stayed home to look after their families from something that was considered a positive and honourable thing to do to something that was not so positive - just by changing one itty bitty word!

If it becomes common practice to refer to parents as "breeders", then the idea of becoming parents will be considered to be something that is less than desirable. I mean, who wants to be a "breeder"? That's what you do with rabbits or dogs, not human beings. And therefore in a world in which it is already difficult to raise children successfully, those who are more likely to be able to do so well will be less inclined than they are now. Leaving our future more and more in the hands of the feral underclass who use their children as meal tickets and don't care what any one thinks of them.

Related link: Why are baby names so boring (renamed from What's in a Kiwi name? A lack of imagination

Previous blog post on the word "breeders": Human Breeders

Santorum not banning contraception

2012-01-09T09:56:00.000+13:00

I opened the world section of the Dom Post and there was a whole article dedicated to bagging Rick Santorum. It started with his supposed wish to ban contraception. Everything he says is twisted and misconstrued, because the progressives and liberals in the media do not like any challenge to their ideas. Multi-culturalism and diversty for them actually relies on everyone adopting their values whilst wearing their ethnic clothes and cooking their ethnic meals.

The article went on to make several other sweeping statements, taking the negative angle and reporting nothing about him that would weaken their argument. One sided media sensationlism, and the Dom Post just copies and regurgitates.

Here's a link (don't know how long it will be up) where he explicitly states that contracpetion would not be outlawed, that it is a personal issue, and personally, he thinks easy access to contraception leads to more abortions, more single parent families and more STDs. Well, it probably does, but never warn a liberal about consequences, they'll spend all their time figuring that if they can make you a hypocrite it somehow negates the truth of the statement.

Santorum says contraception would not be outlawed

This will scare the liberals

2012-01-08T19:29:00.000+13:00

Teenagers in New Zealand are conservative about sex education and abortion. How could this be? After all the sexualisation they have been exposed to, all the State endorsed sex-ed - and they're turning out to be conservative!! Oh, the horror!

And David Farrar's polling company did the research.

This is hope, people. The young are not lost!

Teenagers conservative about sex/abortion – Poll ~ Investigate Daily

Unsurprising news in a society that has lost its marbles

2012-01-08T09:28:00.000+13:00

Capital scores in gay union stakes.

Civil Unions are probably unknown in the heartland where the work is done that earns the money that keep this country going.

They are a symptom of a cultural malaise in the ruling classes who feel entitled to have their every whim pandered to.

Marriage is about creating a stable environment for the raising of children by their biological parents - that is its purpose!

For the vast majority the raising of the next generation is the most important thing they will ever do.

For some bizarre reason we no longer value children - so for example we see this: Human rights spat as family barred from flat. An apartment building where the residents object to children sharing their space.

A world without children?

Is this why we murder so many of the unborn? Because we don't value them?

Is this why the cultural elite is pushing for sterile unions of people?

Don't they want a future for us?

Because unless people step up to the plate and have children, raising them well there is no future.

Bombardirovshchiki

2012-01-07T17:07:00.001+13:00

A World War 2 classic that is the genesis of the English phrase "on a wing and a prayer". A big hit way back in the dark dark days of 1943.

It was sung by Ry Cooder many moons ago and it is from his version this one has been derived I'd guess.

This might be a Runglish version I suppose you could say

Christmas Day OS

2012-01-07T11:34:00.002+13:00

It might seem weird to some as they go about their regular Saturday business but for many Christians today is Christmas day.

Here is Patriarch Kirill's Christmas message (with translation).

Contraception Factoid

2012-01-06T22:38:00.000+13:00

Until 1930, EVERY Christian church taught that contraception was wrong. There were no exceptions. I point this out because today only some Christians agree with Catholics that contraception use is un-Biblical and un-Christian. Not using contraception and welcoming every life that came from the unhindered marital embrace was a major point of difference between pagans and Christians. Until 1930 that is, when the Anglicans cracked open the door ...

Read more: Contraception: Why Not? ~ Janet Smith, Catholic Education Resource Centre

Impressive

2012-01-06T17:35:00.001+13:00

College Campus, New Hampshire. Traditionalist Catholic presidential hopeful faces off students and gets asked the inevitable question.

Disorder doesn't result.

I heard claps but this reporter heard boos

By Rick Santorum’s own admission, the Concord, New Hampshire, crowd he was addressing probably wasn’t going to be receptive to his conservative view on social issues.
“I’m surprised I got a gay marriage question at a college crowd; really that’s a shock to me,” he joked.
For the most part, his audience was booing, not laughing.
The issue sparked what was, at several points over the course of an almost hour-long question and answer session, a contentious back and forth between Santorum and New Hampshire college students on social issues.

Epiphany in the ice

2012-01-06T09:55:00.000+13:00

Today is Epiphany one of the most important Christian Feast days - but most people are unaware of this. Christmas has overshadowed it and wiped it from our consciousness.

In Russia tomorrow is Christmas day and Epiphany is thirteen days away but when it comes this is how it will be celebrated.

It's a great day to celebrate winter or summer. You go to the nearest water, river, lake or ocean and the waters are blessed.

Non-Catholics on Catholics

2012-01-06T07:00:00.000+13:00

An ancient blog post talked about protesters who planned to disrupt the Catholic World Youth Event in Sydney in 2008. They want to hand out condoms to Catholic youth and children to promote their own personal unholy trinity: condoms, promiscuity and abortion.

This stems from many non-Catholics taking offense over the Catholic Church's stance on contraception, and the use of condoms. In some ways, it's a strange attitude.

I say this because when people protest against the Church's stance on contraception they conveniently ignore that this is part of a bigger message. At the very least, we could mention four things, not one:

1. Contraception is bad
2. Sex outside (before) marriage is bad.
3. Adultery is bad.
4. Divorce is bad.

In reality non-Catholic people don't give a toss what the Catholic Church's position is on these points, and they generally don't know or care to know the reasoning behind these points.

Sure, they get offended at the Pope expressing an opinion, but they wouldn't stop for a second and think "what would the Pope say about my behaviour?"

These messages ultimately only apply to Catholics. No-one else listens, except to scoff, protest or act offended.

And for Catholics, the contraception message is not meant to be taken in isolation; the kinds of Catholics that reject the first message are just as likely to reject reject the second, and are just as prone to failing on the third and fourth items as non-Catholics.

Why would a Catholic think "The Church is against sex before marriage, but I'm doing it anyway" and then in the same thought say: "Gee, I wish I could use a condom, but the Pope said no." ?

For married Catholic couples, in a committed and loving relationship with no thoughts of infidelity, the only issue for them is the one of contraception - and I urge them to read up on Pope JPII's "Theology of the Body".

There seems to be a fear factor (or hate factor) in play by liberals (and some other groups) on all matters to do with the Catholic Church.

The Pope may be able to change the hearts and minds of Catholics, who in turn have some small influence in our democracy and in representing Catholic values. In a democracy, you convince enough people of an idea, and they can change the rules. We see it all the time with various interest groups tugging society in different directions. Scary!

Non-Catholics don't listen to the Pope, but they fight every word.

What is their greatest fear? That Catholics will listen to the Pope? Unfortunately, not that many do.

And does the world see any signs of liberal policies becoming less liberal?

I suspect we'd see laws imprisoning Catholics for their "outdated" beliefs before we'd see a law banning sex before marriage, the use of contraceptives, and even adultery is no longer a big deal.

(A rehash of a previous post in 2008)

Related Link: Catholic Youth to be targetted

A different way at looking at contraception

2012-01-05T23:00:00.000+13:00

There is a different way at looking at contraception, and it is articulated well in Pope John Paul II's work called "The Theology of the Body". I found a blog post that makes a few good points around this topic that is worth reading, if only to understand the spiritual dimension to this subject. And a quick scan through our blog tag of "Contraception" indicates we've discussed this before in different ways.

[Contraception] changes the thinking about children as gifts from God and truly belonging to God, to something we can control and get for ourselves, like commodities, so that in some manner we even think about our children selfishly.

It changes the image of the marriage from God-centered, because God is literally centered in and active in the midst of the marriage due to the openness of the couple to Him in their most intimate acts of union, to exclusionary self-centered and human-centered. It closes off the unitive act to the presence of God - spiritually deadening the sex act by closing it off to Divine life and action.

This is not to say that Catholics believe that every sexual act must result in the creation of a new child. For Catholic couples who for good reason need to limit or space the birth of children, the Church offers Natural Family Planning (much more than just the rhythm method), which teaches couples to live and love with respect for the natural cycles of female fertility.

Couples who have transitioned from artificial birth control to NFP testify that it has dramatically improved the quality of their marriage relationship, as they are now constantly communicating with and respecting each other. I heard a man, a married deacon, speak recently about how transitioning to NFP completely changed the way he thought of and related to his wife, and helped him become a much more sensitive and loving husband.

It also changes, for the better, the way couples think about their children, about the meaning of their marriage, and about God, fostering a much more selfless, open, and loving attitude toward all of life in general.

NFP has proven to be more effective than the birth control pill, and has zero adverse health effects. Incidentally, it has been observed that the divorce rate among contracepting Christian couples is as high as the general populace, over 50%. The divorce rate among couples who practice Natural Family Planning, however, is only 2%.

Full article here: Contraception and Theology of the Body

I was amazed at the claim on the low divorce rates, and a quick search found an article on that study, but it still sounds incredible. It would provide very compelling support for the idea that contraception can get in the way of a deeper relationship, (not saying this is a blanket rule) so I will probably dig around further to see if I can get access to the full study or other studies looking at this.

So a pretty bad week then?

2012-01-05T20:30:00.000+13:00

Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband's funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.

On New Year's Eve Martin returned with another man, Dustin Stewart, and this time was armed with a 12-inch hunting knife. The two soon began trying to break into McKinley's home.

As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.

Sarah then spent 21 minutes on the phone talking to the emergency services operator. When one of the men finally managed to kick the door in, the Police still had not arrived. She decided to shoot the intruder, and the other ran off.

That would have capped off a pretty tough period, and I can't help think that the man got his just desserts and saved this women from a trial and fear that he might be back for revenge. Although having to shoot some-one in your own home whilst coping with the recent death of your husband is not going to be an easy thing.

Self Defence

Hat tip: Whale Oil Beef Hooked thinks that the American Self Defence Law is a good law. I'm inclined to agree with that.

The approaching night

2012-01-05T18:15:00.001+13:00

My co blogger Lucia Maria has come in for a bit of stick for this comment

Contraception should be outlawed. It turns women into sexual playthings that can be discarded when something younger and prettier comes along. It takes away women's power to withhold sex unless the man says "I do". And it allows men to stay at a level of stunted development where they never have to grow up.

Apart from the banning aspect I agree with it, more or less.

Fifty years ago the oral contraceptive was approved for general use - and this unleashed a cultural revolution. The genie is out of the bottle. we can't put it back.

The problem is that the first generation who could control their fertility in this manner are approaching retirement age - which means that there are shortly to be large numbers of elderly folks and not enough young working age folks to support them because these people did not have enough children in their prime years and nor have the children they did have produced them in sufficient numbers.

The problem has been swept under the carpet in Northern Europe, and Australasia to some extent by immigration but the crunch is coming.

This is the true source of today's problems in Greece and Italy. It is also recognized as a major issue in Japan, Korea and Russia.

But we are still in a state of denial.

In the short term it's been a hell of a party for some - in the long term it is a civilization ender.

A Father's Tale

2012-01-05T15:00:00.000+13:00

I've been reading A Father's Tale by Michael D. O'Brien on my Kindle, and now several days after I have finished, I feel ready to say something about the story. It's funny how after reading some books, I experience a sort of grief over the book ending, as if the world that I've been inhabiting for a week or so has gone. And so it is with this one, when it was over I was kind of lost.

The book is about a man who converted part of his house into a bookshop. His wife has died, his two boys have left home and he feels like a man whose life is over and he's just hanging around waiting to die as well. He's very reclusive and introverted, preferring to spend time with his books rather than with people. But God has other plans for him, starting with a startling rescue of two children from a freezing cold river that almost kills him. However that was just a warm up for the major journey he has to undertake to rescue one of his sons from a cult, which takes him to England, Sweden and eventually, Russia. Suffice to say, this man who was waiting to die finds his life again.

It's an amazing story, and woven through it, Michael D. O'Brien writes of the metaphysical problems that both East and West face in our current time period. His wisdom is evident through evocative writing. I highly recommend it to anyone needing more than just a standard story.

Leadership in a crisis

2012-01-05T11:15:00.000+13:00

Christchurch Council CEO Tony Marryatt has defended his pay rise using the typical reasons, and I don't disagree with them, although I'm sure many of his staff would meet the same criteria and not getting the same level of increase, especially when one of his justifications is that he has "never worked as hard in my life".

However, part of the job of a good CEO is to provide leadership. Leadership in a crisis situation, more so.

Refusing the pay rise during this time was a leadership opportunity, and now many people do not think of him as a leader. The respect they could have had for him is diminished. For a CEO looking for a long career, that may ultimately have been worth more than $68,000.

Well, that ship has sailed

2012-01-04T22:52:00.001+13:00

Ports of Auckland has lost Fonterra to Tauranga and Napier - representing 27M of trade a week (which is not the same as the Port fees received for moving that stock). Nevertheless, that's still a substantial volume of business that has just sailed out of the harbour.

I'm not sure that Tauranga wasn't simultaneously aiming to win Fonterra over, but Ports of Auckland blame the current strike, and it surely must have had some impact on such decisions?

Reading the news article, the Port looks to be the good guys in this, with what seems to be the 9th offer on the table in the last 5 months and still suffering ongoing strike action in the face of economically dangerous times. What exactly are the union after? Shares in the business so they can pay their workers bonuses based on the actual financial performance of the port? Probably not.

If they are not careful, they'll be looking for new jobs. I hear Tauranga has a good life style, what with views of the reef and a growing Port side business.

Gibson said the port was willing to continue mediation - 'but only when we receive a formal response to our latest offer, the ninth since negotiations began in August.'

Gibson said the latest offer was the port's best and final offer.

"It includes a generous 10 per cent rise on hourly rates, performance bonuses of up to 20 per cent on hourly rates, and the retention of existing benefits and entitlements in return for a new roster system that will provide increased operational flexibility while allowing workers to plan their rosters a month in advance.

Diversity and Discrimination

2012-01-04T14:30:00.000+13:00

I came across a blog recommended by Chuck Bird: What Does The Research Really Say? by Dale O'Leary. It seems to focus on gender and sexuality issues, from a conservative viewpoint. It seems well thought out and not afraid to cite studies and references to support their argument. I've added Dale to our sidebar. The latest post covers the topic of diversity and discrimination. Like, if we are going to allow diversity of opinions and beliefs, then that should also include the beliefs of social conservatives!

We are currently in the midst of a culture war. On one side we have the Sexual Left – Radical Feminists, Sexual Revolutionaries, followers of Alfred Kinsey and Margaret Sanger, and members of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered and Queer coalition (sometimes labeled as sexual minorities). On the other side we have Social Conservatives — those who belong to faith traditions which hold that life begins at conception and sexual activity belongs in marriage and that marriage is defined as the union between one man and one woman. Those who hold this view believe that the evidence supports their contention that society is best served when life is protected and marriage affirmed.

Because these two views are so divergent and because they involve such intimate aspects of a person’s life, it is important that the freedom of the individual seeking psychological counseling or medical care be protected. It is also important that the rights of medical professionals and hospitals to not provide services they feel are immoral or contrary to the best interests of patients be protected.

Worth a read. Check it out.

Dale O'Leary: Diversity

Is the White house a Glass house?

2012-01-04T08:45:00.000+13:00

The current administration has been busy casting stones a Vladimir Putin's Russia - a stone comes back - the irony's delicious.

Wouldn't most people do what Rick Santorum did?

2012-01-03T17:30:00.006+13:00

The video below is, well to my mind bizarre, it has caused a fluster and so it should.

But what I don't get is why anybody should think taking a dead child home before giving him, in this case, a funeral is in anyway strange.

Aren't babies people too? Shouldn't they be mourned?

The baby's name was Gabriel Santorum.

Never too young

2012-01-03T15:00:00.000+13:00

I was reading an article about how on the program "Dexter" about a serial killer who kills the bad guys. The article discussed bringing kids into the storyline, and Dexter is morphing from a cold, hard killer to a person that can alternate between being a loving Dad and then a cold hard killer. "Dark in a new way" boasts the article.

With kids on the set, some observations are made:

It's a strange thing for any child in their development years to spend time on a film set, says Dexter's altar-ego, actor Michael C Hall of his young co-stars.

"They are not really privy to the darker elements - they're kept from that. But they are also little sponges and they absorb energy. There could be a scene where nothing explicitly is being said, but there's a great deal of violent thoughts or tension between the characters and we'll start the scene and the actors will give over to whatever that pretending is and [Luke or Evan] will totally burst into tears."

So not really privy to the darker elements then? It just goes to show that what you put into your head leaks out, and it is so important for parents to feed both ones children and ourselves good quality mental diets. Dump programs like this and feed yourself soul food.

Libra "Transgender" Blow Up

2012-01-03T14:35:00.000+13:00

Another storm has erupted (so soon in the New Year?) over a Libra ad for a women's hygiene product (see ad above). The Herald has a story on it, and it's being called 'Transphobic' by some (yes, another made up word), who claim that it is discriminatory to transgender 'women', because if they don't have a period then they can't really be women. The Hand Mirror has gotten into the fray and said that Libra doesn't get it, and that the ad is offensive to cis-women (read 'normal women') and transgenders, both.

I posted a response on their blog, but it got removed for "transphobic" reasons, so, I'm posting it again below.

-----

I don't mean to offend the transgender community either, but dressing up as a woman does not make you female. A huge part of what it means to be female is the ability to bear and nurture offspring. That is one of the things that make male and female different and which is reflected in the anatomy of the female, and yes, having a period is a sign or symptom of same. It's part of the identity of being female.

It doesn't make women better or worse than men, but they are different: men cannot bear children, and having surgery to change your 'parts' will not give you a womb or ovaries. Perhaps one of the reasons that the ad caused offence is that it pokes fun at the differences that are real, and perhaps it's something that the transgendered feel touchy about - the fact they they can never identify fully as being female, nor experience being female past the surface veneer of the look and body parts. You can remove a cold water faucet and replace it with one that says 'Hot', but behind the wall the plumbing is the same and you'll still only get cold water when you turn on the tap.

Public Relations over Ethics

2012-01-03T10:30:00.000+13:00

Home Paddock pointed me to an article in Scoop listing the Top 30 PR disasters of 2011. It is an interesting list, and mainly because I would reclassify some of these not as PR disasters, but as examples of ethical and moral failures. On that basis, even to label them a mere PR failure highlights that many actions are often weighed up according to how much PR damage they may do, and not what the right thing to do is.

18. Human Rights Commission Adviser Marama Davidson publicly apologises to Ngapuhi elder David Rankin for insulting him on Facebook. However, she then sends him a private email withdrawing her apology thinking no-one else will find out about it and states: “In my personal capacity, I completely withdraw in full the apology that I have made to you in public...you are not worthy of an apology from me...”

Assuming the summary is true, this one is interesting. The HRC adviser decides to issue a public apology, but didn't mean it. Therefore, they decided it was more expedient to be seen to be "nice" and less important to say what they mean. And I'd be interested to find out if the hatred that this person inspires in the HRC adviser.

4. Darren Hughes. In early March the police receive a complaint from an 18-year-old male [who ran from his house naked and distressed in the early hours of the morning]. Although Labour Leader Phil Goff knows about the police complaint for two weeks he takes no action and his office tells the media that no Labour MP is involved in any such complaint to Police...After being grilled by the media Phil Goff then admits Darren Hughes is at the centre of the Police investigation...He then refuses to accept Darren Hugh’s resignation (but changes his mind later on). Labour Party President Andrew Little only finds out about the matter when it hits the news headlines.

We see again the strong human reaction to believe the best in people, to think this is a misunderstanding, and therefore not act. The requirement to act was thrust upon Goff, and thus leaves people wondering.

16. Greens vandalism of billboards. Greens Party member Jolyon White and Anne Heins (the secretary of Green Party Co-Leader Russell Norman) admit to being involved in the vandalism of over 500 National Party billboards.

This was just poor form all around. Some of the justifications and excuses that came following this was not in keeping with the standards the Greens like to place on others.

19. Valley Animal Research Centre. Margaret Harkema of the Valley Animal Research Centre in Himitangi says no dogs have been dumped or disposed of on the property. A Campbell Live story shows that is clearly not the case. The media investigation followed complaints from people who purchased Beagles on Trade Me and then found out they were from the research centre and had all types of ailments (with some dying within weeks of being with their new owners).

Caught lying, and the damage is just to their reputation. Not nearly enough. Still on their website: "NONE of these projects has involved harm or death to any dogs. Under constant veterinary supervision the care of our animals is foremost." This might need updating. I've also written to the RNZSCPA National Office asking them what they are doing about it, since they appointed a representative to the Valley Animal Research Centre Ethics Committee, and I want to see which end of the dog the Ethics Committee operate from.

21. Hutt Valley High School. An Ombudsman Report finds that Hutt Valley High School failed to take violent bullying seriously including the torture and sexual abuse of students on the school grounds.

PR Disaster? You reckon?

25. Ruth Dyson. Labour MP Ruth Dyson uses tax payer’s money for a private trip for her and her husband to Ethiopia. She then agrees to refund the $16,000 once the media question her about it – stating she planned to refund the money all along.

Labour feature well in the list. This one is typical in that there have been so many examples recently of MPs being caught out over this, with ex-Labour MP Chris Carter leading the way and yet they still don't learn.

You can read through the list and decide for yourselves how many others stem from major ethical or moral failures. Again, my point is to view these actions only as PR failures becomes yet another failure in the way we look at ethical behaviour in our society.

Link: Top 30 PR Failures of 2011

End of Year Paperwork

2012-01-02T23:45:00.000+13:00

Thanks to all our visitors last year. Open Parachute has compiled a listing of some of the other NZ blogs out there: 2012 Blog Rankings.

Single? Alone? Voted National in the Last Election?

2012-01-02T15:15:00.000+13:00

Single?

Alone?

Voted National in the last election?

Dial 0800-National and hook up with real people that are interested in YOU.

We have operators standing by that understand your voting decisions. They can empathise and share, and even talk dirty when dirty talk is required:

Press 1 - Let's sell Mighty River Power. Amanda will talk you through how good life will be once 49% of this State Owned Enterprise is rented out to Mums and Dads investors and part of your KiwiSaver portfolio. National must be right wing if they plan to sell the silver!

Press 2 - Talk through with Julie how floating more of Air NZ will completely transform NZ Tourism and yield undreamed of profits. If you are seeking work in a service industry at minimum wage, talking to Julie will really inspire you.

Press 3 - Speak with a reformed Labour voter who is happy voting National. Bill and Gerry will chat on a party line, and soon you will discover have all have so much in common. Finally, a Blue party with more red cred than Andrew Little.

Press 4 - Find out what was really said over a cup of tea. To the slurp of Earl Grey hear "I can't believe Brash is still around" and "What's in that small bag on the table?". Find out John Key's plan to completely save the NZ economy, but why he's decided it needs to be a secret until the next election.

Press 5 - We know, you voted National because you thought all of the alternatives were worse. So try not to worry that National are committed to working with all of the alternatives. Susie will talk about how a new alliance with the Greens will pave the way for transforming our rural economy into a solar powered, vegan, cycling nirvana awash with food stamps and state-supplied milk.

Press 6 - The new Auckland Council Super City has so much proven history behind it now, with over 390 days of operations that we can now start talking about consolidating the remaining 70 or so councils into 3 or 4 super Councils. Just think of the savings we will make setting the rates for Invercargill from the Red Zone in Christchurch. Why, it's exciting enough to consider privatising water.

Press 7 - If you were the 88% that voted against the smacking bill, then we want to acknowledge your important contribution to democracy. Dial 7 and hear John Key saying "Thank you very much for voting National, thank you very much, thank you very very much. Thank you very much for your kind donation, thank you very very much. " You see, your votes do make a difference!

Press 8 - Let's talk National Standards. It's really important that the Government increases control over the education system. This is to protect us from left wing teachers. To this end we've used left wing bureaucrats to set policies and come up with a whole pile of ridiculous standards that will get left arguing with the right whilst missing the point - statism is important and whether you are left or right, your children are ours. Talk to Sonya and be soothed by words of authority and certainty. National Standards are good. These National Standards are good. Those other standards are bad. Unions are bad, therefore Standards are good. ($4.95 per minute, entire loop 8 minutes)

No hobbits were harmed or taken offshore in the making of this advertisement

How many psychologists did it take to turn the prairies into fields of wheat?

2012-01-02T11:40:00.001+13:00

My head is spinning after reading this on Oprah.com: The 6-Step Financial Reality Check for Newlyweds.

I know this is not real - though the people and their concerns probably are, alas.

Married last June, Maria and Victor Martin* are bubbling with plans. Within the next five years, they want to have two kids and upgrade from their recently purchased two-bedroom condo in Chicago. And Maria, 33, an assistant psychology professor, and Victor, 37, who is finishing his doctorate in clinical psychology, are eager to add to the $60,000 they already have in retirement savings.

Thirty seven years old and not yet embarked on his life career? And Maria, her most fertile years already behind her, although she does have about 10 years of fertility left the main bread winner for now.

It gets worse

When Victor graduates in 2013, he expects to make about $60,000, nearly quadrupling his monthly take-home pay to around $3,500. Yet he'll also have about $150,000 in student loans. Victor can consolidate these federal loans into one with a fixed interest rate that should be below 7.5 percent. The hard part will be choosing a payment plan. If he pays $1,100 a month, he'll be making payments for 30 years. I just don't think it's smart to be paying off your own loans when your kids are in college. If Maria and Victor commit to $1,800 a month-setting aside money from his new job and expenses they've trimmed-the loans will be paid off in ten years.

Got that - if over half of what Victor earns when he finally starts his career goes into paying off his debt, it will be paid off when he is 48 years old!

And you know what - Clinical psychologists are a luxury item, they don't actually grow anything or make anything. When times get hard they are disposable.

After all it is the grain farmers of Minnesota who provide the wherewithal to feed the Victors and Marias of this world with the surplus being used to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed.

And I suspect that most of them started tilling the fields long before they were 38.

Night of the living dead

2012-01-02T10:00:00.001+13:00

Whenever I've opened the paper recently, there have been brutal attacks, often seemingly random. Violence for violence's sake.

The Wellington based Radio NZ bulletins editor, Phillip Cottrell, walking home at 5:30am in December was bludgeoned to death.

The tragic story of the 5 year old girl sexually and physically attacked at a Turangi camp.

Then a man clubbed in Tauranga a few nights ago, fighting for his life now.

And today, a man stabbed in Napier, now on life support.

I know of a couple of random beatings in our neighbourhood too. There are also less fatal incidents, which in a way are as serious, which don't always make it to the papers.

Are there more vampires and zombies roaming the streets? Can we assume so, making the carrying of a firearm (with silver bullets) an understandable precaution?

It is beyond the capacity of the Police to protect - indeed, some police were set upon and beaten when responding to a domestic incident recently. They can barely protect themselves. The deterrence of being caught and arrested seems to have faded, and part of this is the reluctance of judges to put people in jail even for serious crimes. When they do go to jail, they often serve the minimum possible time before being released.

The time is coming when we will see an increase in community organised vigilante groups.

Corporate Welfare

2012-01-01T22:00:00.000+13:00

There are a lot of areas to discuss when talking about building a more equitable system. And when I say equitable, I don't mean equal, I mean "just". So my opening assumption is that the system isn't just. There are weaknesses and discrepancies. There are things that the market doesn't necessarily "correct" itself for in a way that is good for the people of NZ as a whole, especially as we are but a small part of an increasingly globalised economy.

My first topic for 2012 is a musing about Corporate Welfare and Corporate Contribution to the NZ Economy. Whilst such figures as I'm about to discuss might be on the balance sheets somewhere, I'm interested in a quick way of understanding what the key figures are. I'm looking to understand:

How much net GST did they pass on to the Government?
How much corporate income tax did they pay in their last complete financial year?
What their total average income tax payments have been since inception in NZ?
How much PAYE did they hand over to the government on behalf of their employees
How much money did they donate or spend on the community?
What their total export revenue was, less their overseas expenditure?
Were they in receipt of any government money: %Government Sales; Grants; Funding; Huge Tax Write-offs

Now this information might be available nicely collated across companies, or perhaps industries - I have no idea. So any help pointing me in the right direction would be appreciated. If it isn't nicely collated or is not clearly disclosed on financial reports, then maybe this information should be!

Who out there agrees with me and is curious to understand these figures? It's one thing to talk about various people being paid too much or too little, or tax rates, or even tax dodgers. But lets start with the big money. Which companies are contributing to NZ and which just pretend to, but send all their profits overseas and minimise costs within the country?

All of the above metrics would indicate opportunities to contribute at some level. For example, if a 100 million dollar company pays little in the way of corporate tax, it might still hire full NZ staff rather than running sweat shops in Indonesia, and every staff member gets paid a salary and in turn contributes PAYE back into the government coffers. Better our government coffers than Isle of Man's or Maryland's, say I.

Thoughts, comments, stories?

Note: Graphic stolen from Tumeke, where they rabbit on about American Corporate Welfare, and throw in a few NZ examples mixed up with Government misspending (which can be a topic for my next post perhaps).

Happy New Year 2012

2012-01-01T00:00:00.000+13:00

Happy New Year to our readers.

Have a good year. Help others.

Do some great things with your life, and remember that great things can be small things.

Melissa Johnson and Easy Money

2011-12-31T22:37:00.000+13:00

Melissa Johnson from Paraparaumu never thought that she would work online, until curiosity got the best of her and she filled out a simple online form. Before she knew it, she discovered her secret to beating the recession, and being able to provide for her family while at home with her three children.I read Melissa's blog last month and decided to feature her story in our weekly consumer report. In our phone interview she told me her amazing story. "I actually make about NZD $8,000-$9,000 a month working from home. It's enough to comfortably replace my old jobs' income, especially considering I only work about 15-18 hours a week from home.

Melissa Johnson is a very common name I suppose, so it might be hard to verify if the story is actually real or not. The advert even has a bunch of selected comments saying how wonderful and genuine the offer is, but you scroll down to the end and get to see that "comments are closed" now that the required comments have been entered. Furthermore, the website purports to be a company called "Career Journal Australia" which does not come up when I search the Australian Company Name Search hosted by ASIC. The webpage is designed to look like an independent review, but all page elements click through to the sign-up page.

It seems like a total con to me, so any subsequent offer of money would also be treated with suspicion. I've seen the advert appearing off reputable sites - such as the Sydney Morning Herald, which offers "AUD 8,000 a month" using a NZ testimonial, but a little snooping quickly uncovered another Melissa Johnson advertisement, but who works and lives in New York and who also makes the same amount of money as Melissa from Paraparaumu. And they both receive the same "check" from Wells Fargo Bank. Not that you could easily deposit such a cheque, sorry, check, in New Zealand. The clincher though is that these two cheques are both made out to Melissa a year apart and yet have the same "Check Number" and the greyed out address block looks to be in USA format, not NZ format.

Maybe the scheme is legit, but using faked testimonials speaks of a company with no ethics.

Caveat Emptor.

Update at 10 January 2012: Melissa now lives in Karori! Good on her. She's obviously made so much money she could move to a better place, although every year she loses her job: Melissa Johnson from Karori is a regular mum who lost her job last year, and after an unsuccessful job hunt, she started working online. I interviewed her about her amazing story and she revealed her steps for success.

The Advert: Work From Home Special Report

Another site [Email and Internet Scams] that seems to have correlated further evidence of doctored testimonials: Is Melissa Johnson real? Look through the whole site to see the endless variety of patently obvious scams are thrust upon unsuspecting people.

Word of the Day

2011-12-30T20:37:00.002+13:00

Agape - I'm not going to define it, you can see it for yourself in the video below

Green is another word for immature

2011-12-30T19:30:00.000+13:00

If you can Vote When You're Senile...

That was the title of a recent Green Blog post about the need to grant the vote to 16 year olds.

I have explored the general arguments made about lowering the vote in a previous post - "Emancipating Youth". As I said then, this can be seen as a push by parties of the left to perform gerrymandering by demographics rather than geography. I also said this issue would continue to be pushed by the left every few years until it finally takes hold. Thus, time to fisk this recent Green Vote post to say much the same things in a different way.

If I wanted to suggest that maybe a lack of maturity was one of the reasons for denying the vote to 16 year olds, then I'd have to look no further than the title of the post: "If you can vote when you're senile...".

It also gives me permission to be equally as flippant in my response post. Yes, totally uncalled for, but it is meant in the spirit of "talking at the same level" and making a blog post slightly more interesting than this topic might otherwise be.

So, here we go:

Our communities tell young people that they need to "take responsibility", that they need to "get involved", that they have unfulfilled civic responsibilities towards their schools, their cities and their country. Those same communities then go on to insist that youth cannot be trusted to vote, that such a right can only be afforded to "full members" of society - that us young people just aren't up to the task. Clearly, something is messed up.

What if the communities are not telling, but "inviting" young people to get involved? And do those communities really go on to insist youth cannot be trusted? It's overly emotive to make this an issue of trust. It might simply be that the age of majority is considered to be 18, just like it is 18 to borrow money from a bank, buy a lottery ticket, own an airgun and be appointed a company director. But 18 isn't a one-stop shop age. The age of consensual sex is 16, as is leaving school and applying for a name change. But at 10 you can take out insurance in your own name. Driving a tractor on a farm can happen at 12 and you need to be 14 to legally babysit others. Age 14 also gets you into youth court for most crimes. It's not really about trust.

The Young Greens believe that the current disenfranchisement of 16 and 17 year old young adults is wrong: we see a society that irrationally discriminates against its most vulnerable as fundamentally flawed. The current system insults the legitimacy of our democracy, marginalises young people, and leads to a systematic political bias against youth. That's why, since 2010, we've consistently advocated to lower the voting age to 16.

Irrationally discriminates against it's most vulnerable? Cry me a river. The most irrational discrimination we face in this society is over the unborn. The most vulnerable after that would have to be babies and toddlers. The so-called discrimination is not irrational, it's based on the premise of maturity. If you are going to claim this is irrational, explain why it is rational to discriminate against 15 year olds? Or 14 year olds? Or 9 year olds? Or 3 year olds? We'll soon find a line that you will rationalize, but that would only prove my point - the 18 year old line in the sand is not irrational. Please, come up with a stronger argument.

Let's face it - the current ban on youth voting is a little bit odd. It just doesn't seem to be consistent with the way we approach democracy: if someone wants to air their opinion in a ballot box, we normally say 'good on 'em' - whether you're intellectually disabled or a PhD, current law considers your right to the vote as equal. And that's great: we recognise that previous attempts to dictate a class' capacity to vote - such as restricting the franchise to people of a certain wealth, ethnicity of gender - were discriminatory, a biased shambles of democracy. In that light, though, there seems no reason to ban 16 and 17 year olds from voting; it's clear that the status quo is blatantly discriminatory. As someone who is proud of New Zealand's history of democracy - someone who is proud of our giving women the vote, of proportional representation and of our fundamentally accountable government - I find this aberration upon our democracy humiliating.

Well, the ban on drinking for 16 year olds must be a little bit odd too. The ban on joining the police force at 16 must also be a case worthy of the Human Rights Tribunal. "Come back in a few years" must be humiliating in the extreme. I'm left wondering if the current ban on letting 18 year olds have sex with 14 year olds is considered odd? This rampant agism must not have boundaries, surely? But perhaps I'm being too harsh here. I actually agree that having to wait until 18 for the vote is discriminatory. But you use the word "discriminatory" as if its mere pronouncement makes such an act evil. Here's the thing: discrimination is sometimes a good thing. The next time some-one offers you a plate of rotten fruit or a plate of fresh fruit, I'll leave it up to you to discriminate without fear of punishment.

We're telling young people that we do not consider their opinion worthy, and they're listening. Currently, of those young people who are allowed to vote, only three in four are even enrolled to be able to do so. When we encourage the myth that voting is a vital duty only to those who have reached a certain age, we discourage youth from engaging in democracy. Young people don't feel that the political system is a forum in which their grievances have any legitimacy, youth often see politics as solely something that old people do. By dropping the voting age, we'd be opening our arms to young people, insisting to them that their opinions are valuable.

Whose this "we" white man? Again, the overly emotive argument without any real basis of fact or the offering of any evidence. The only facts you can summon point to a low enrollment rate of eligible young voters. And you seem to blame that on active discouragement from older people! Your attitude reveals your politics. Blame others, winge about the apathy of your co-revolutionaries, cry a little and vote Green.

If the opinions and input of youth weren't welcome, there wouldn't be youth factions in political parties; The Inconvenient Truth wouldn't be mass distributed to schools and the left wouldn't assume they could manipulate youthful passion and convert them to votes. Come on, the signs are there that others are keen to exploit the youth vote is there if only you care to look.

The missed opportunity here is even more tragic given the opportunity high school provides to involve and educate young people about the democratic process. Lowering the voting age would allow 6th and 7th formers to vote when they're in school, providing an exceptional chance to make democracy real. The start of a life-long triennial habit would begin accompanied by education, encouragement, and an understanding of politics elsewhere unprovided. If we care about the long-term health of our political culture, then lowering the voting age is clearly a good thing.

Tragic is a car crash where people die. Not voting whilst in school is not a tragedy. Vote for the class leader or something. Things can be real without having to directly experience them. Are you going to arrange elections every two years to make sure that every 6th and 7th former gets to experience an election? Are you going to ban people from leaving school before they have voted? And habits are not formed by doing something once every three years. Weak. (come back in three years and I'll say it again)

So, a voting age of 18 is wrong, in that it insults both us, young people, and our democracy as a whole. But the current voting age has a more pernicious harm - it systematically biases our government, and so our society, in such a way that young people's welfare is ignored. It's obviously the case that young people have been continually disregarded by subsequent Governments; almost every area of policy - from climate change, to superannuation, to abortion law, to transport - bears semblance of this embarrassing truth. It's not hard to see why this is the case: when politicians know that they risk no electoral punishment in disregarding young adults' needs, yet know that a bias towards older voters would win electoral support, they cannot be trusted to do the right thing; government discrimination away from those with the greatest need and towards those with votes is inevitable. Lowering the voting age would be a step towards a more sustainable political system, one in which politicians must confront those who are suffering the burden from their policies, one in which politicians are empowered by a regard for the long-term.

This is a convoluted piece of thinking that again relies on emotive statements without any factual or logical supporting arguments. That governments "risk no electoral punishment" when they ignore the vote of 16 year olds?? I've often wondered about 16 and 17 year old's turning 18 and forget everything they know and care about and vote differently - but I've never met any, and of course, I've always been the age I am now. This really clears up the confusion I had about this point.

And the political system becomes sustainable by franchising 16 year olds? Are we at "peak democracy" then? In 2020 do we need to allow 14 year olds the vote to keep things stable? Obviously, one day we'll just run out of young people. But I blamed abortion - seems it was the vote.

The Young Greens' support for a drop to the voting age is inspired by a vision: Aotearoa New Zealand can be a country in which young people are respected and listened to; our society can be one in which the needs of us youth are taken into account. Our current tangent - a future in which young people continue to be side-lined by those currently with votes - is not a predetermined thing: New Zealand's voting age has been lowered before and it can been lowered again. Working to lower the voting age, the Young Greens are making progress towards a more equitable future.

Is respect only gained by having the vote? Your title argues the opposite. The elderly have the vote and your write them off as senile. Maybe everything you say is true, and therefore, letting the youth vote on euthanasia policies could be fatal to anyone over 50! And yes, the voting age has been lowered twice before - once from age 21 to 20, and then from 20 to 18. It doesn't therefore follow though that we are obliged to lower it every 40 years. Maybe it's time to raise it again. People live longer, and therefore vote more. Let's keep it sustainable, don't want to use up all your votes by age 60 and then find you live another 20 years. /same logic (none)

Listen, if you really care about democracy, hold John Key accountable for ignoring the anti-smacking referendum results. That piece of legislation the Greens pushed through the parliament was soundly rejected by 88% of the voters in a referendum organised in response to parliament ignoring the voice of the (voting) people and is a good example of an insult to democracy.

In general, please get involved, but don't expect rights before you also accept the responsibilities. Value your vote by preparing well before you exercise it. Don't write pieces like above where you articulate only your entitlements without speaking more of duties. Stop speaking as if your voice can only be heard if you have a vote, and don't imply older people don't vote broadly for more than just their self-interest, that they don't vote in consideration of their children and in general for the benefit of NZ. But most of all, put forward better arguments. They can be made, and people do listen.

Ages of Consent for various things in NZ

Emancipating Youth - A more serious discussion

Liberal Fanaticism

2011-12-30T13:42:00.002+13:00

Every now and then the secular blogs like to pick up a generic story highlighting the evils of religious fundamentalism and open the chat threads for a bit of religion bashing. Kiwiblog has one going at the moment (Religious Fanaticism), and the Standard kicked one off recently that kind of backfired: Peter Jackson - Satan's Little Helper. By pointing out how some presumably extremist religious group had identified Sir Peter Jackson's upcoming Hobbit movie as a sell out to the deep and distinctly Christian themes running through the original Tolkien LOTR books, it should have been fair game. But being a left wing blog, Christian bashing had to take a back seat to Jackson's supposed capitalist, anti-union, commercial sell-out motivations.

Kiwiblog, on the other hand, has used a story of ultra orthodox Jews acting like the Taleban with regard to the treatment of an 8 year old girl for dressing "immodestly". This has provided an entree for atheists to declare how equal all religions are, how bad the one in question is, and then by a process of deduction, how they are therefore all equally bad. Whilst there is a little bit of Jew bashing on the side, for the most part they stay on topic.

It's tempting therefore to wonder if our own society, increasingly secular and increasingly atheist, bears some responsibility for the increase in sexual violence from youth. In a kind of reverse Taleban, is Liberal Fanaticism an equal kind of danger? Perhaps the steady diet of soft porn on TV, the easy access to hard core porn via the internet and the general objectification of women through advertising, the destruction of the family and general liberalization is generating a new form of Liberal Fanaticism that requires everything else to be blamed, but itself? Is it Fanatical Liberalism that is pushing resolutely onwards for greater freedom with less responsibility?

No such introspection allowed on that kind of thread though. When I pushed the point:

So is your theory that the Turangi Terror is a fundamental orthodox Jew then? This response:

More likely a half baked christian of some description who hasn’t quite shaken off the heathen savagery of pagan Pasifika, inclusive of Maori, beliefs.

I guess many in NZ are looking to understand the reasons behind the attack on the 5 year old girl in Turangi. Some expect there is an understandable explanation - like the person themselves were abused. Some assume drugs and alcohol were to blame. What I worry about is that there is no clear reason, and that it really is a natural byproduct of our increasingly amoral and immoral society. Western societies do not want the kind of quasi-religious/authoritarian fanaticism displayed by Taleban-like fundamentalists, but they also don't appear to understand that the pendulum swings both ways. The Turangi case may simply be an aberration, rather than a litmus test. Time will tell.