Cardinal George Pell, Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, quoted in Barney Zwartz ‘No Communion for pro-abortion Catholic politicians: Pell’, Melbourne Sunday Age, 28 May 2006:

[If politicians identify themselves as Catholic but] on every significant public issue they don’t line up with us … they should go quiet on the Catholic labelling.

[Lockstep formation, thanks boys and girls. 'Informed conscience'? Never heard of it.]

Peter Stokes, Salt Shakers, email newsletter, 1 Jun. 2006, regarding a Marrickville NSW childcare centre teaching young children that same-sex parenting is normal:

These children should not know what sex is …

[!!!]

(more…)

Filed in: Their Own Mouths

I was surprised to read such ill-informed comments at the end of Scott Murray’s review of ‘The Passion of the Christ’ … One could refer him to Josephus and Tacitus (Jewish and Roman historians of the time that Jesus lived) among others and he might find that there is more historical evidence for Jesus having lived than Julius Caesar. Reviewers should find out their facts before moving out of the realm of just commenting on the movie production.

Mignon Goswell, Box Hill North (Melbourne Age Green Guide, 20 Apr. 2006)

I suppose I read a letter like this in the media every month or so. I used to grind my teeth and churn out two-page replies that rarely made it into print. When I finally grasped the principle that responses should be very concise – certainly no longer than the initial letter – I found myself with other concerns. In particular, I began to undervalue the significance of always challenging ignorant viewpoints like this one. Goswell’s argument is riddled with flaws and we owe it to the public to point these out, briefly but clearly.

(more…)

Filed in: Biblical criticism

Just before lunch [last Thursday], the Leader of the House, Tony Abbott, sought to axe debate on former deputy prime minister John Anderson’s [Australian Wheat Board] share dealings. ‘I move that the snivelling grub over there be not further heard’, he said, referring to … Labor public accountability spokesman Kelvin Thompson. Cue uproar. Pressed to retract the insult …, Abbott ventured an apology worthy of an unrepentant toddler. ‘If I have offended grubs, I withdraw’, he said. (Misha Schubert ‘Can grubs snivel?’, Melbourne Age, 26 May 2006)

Now, how much castigation do you think Abbott will receive from the Religious Right over this tawdry little episode? After all, backbiters won’t be entering the kingdom of heaven. And what was Jesus supposed to have said about loving your neighbour? And turning the other cheek?

But I was forgetting. Tony is anti-abortion, which means that he is a walking saint, which means that he can do no wrong, which means that we can forget all about scathing editorials by Salt Shakers, New Life or anyone else in the club. Now if a nasty, godless Labor, Democrat or Green politician had said what dear Tony said, that would change everything.

Filed in: General

Most Christians in the US don’t believe they will experience a resurrection of their bodies when they die … 36% said ‘yes’ to the question, ‘Do you believe that, after you die, your physical body will be resurrected some day?’ Another 54% said they do not believe, and 10% were undecided. ‘This reflects the very low state of doctrinal preaching in our churches’, said Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary … The findings surprised many top theologians since it seems to put Americans in conflict with both the Nicene Creed and the Apostles’ Creed … (New Life, 18 May 2006)

How is God supposed to get all the dispersed molecules back together again? And what about the atoms that have become other living tissue e.g. part of someone else’s brain? Of course, if it was Al Mohler’s brain he probably wouldn’t notice if a bit of it suddenly flew out to become part of a resurrectee’s armpit, but I don’t think I’d like it.

Filed in: General

First prize of a kick in the crutch from Tony Abbott and 10,000 years in purgatory goes to Arnold Thomas of Boronia, Victoria:

To those who are upset by ‘The Da Vinci Code’, please, remember this. It is a novel, it is fiction, it is a made-up story – you know, a bit like your religion. (Age, 22 May 2006)

Filed in: General

Bill Muehlenberg parted company with the National Civic Council’s Australian Family Association (AFA) around the end of last year. He has since been writing freelance articles for a number of Religious Right outfits and has started a website of his own – www.billmuehlenberg.com.

Some people can handle editorial independence but I have my doubts about Bill. In a recent commentary, he assails Alistair Nicholson, former Chief Justice of the Family Court, for some remarks he made on the SBS Insight program on 16 May. Bill was particularly incensed by Nicholson’s ‘incredible claim that it is “an act of cruelty” to not recognise and legalise same-sex marriage and adoption rights.’

(more…)

Filed in: Christian Right, People, Sexuality

More on virginity pledges. The American Journal of Public Health twice questioned a group of 13,000 high school students, a year apart. In the first survey about 13 per cent said they had taken a pledge that they would remain virgins until married, but in the second survey more than half of that group said they had never taken such a pledge. Also, about one third of the students claimed in the first survey to have had sex, but about 10 per cent of these denied it a year later. (Chee Chee Leung ‘Becoming virgins again’, Melbourne Age Education Supplement, 15 May 2006)

Those who conducted the study observed that ’survey respondents typically reconcile their memories with their present beliefs’, suggesting that ‘we can’t always believe what teenagers tell surveys about their sexual activity’.

I’d go a lot further than that. We can’t always believe what anyone tells surveys about their sexual activity. I don’t care how ‘confidential’ they make the survey: there are some things I’m not telling anyone! How about you?

Filed in: Sexuality

I don’t like this. Senator Guy Barnett (Lib., Tas.) seems very confident that the Federal Government will shortly move to overturn the ACT Civil Unions Act. In a recent media release Barnett claims that the ACT legislation institutes ‘marriage by another name’ and hence should be struck down.

I don’t think that Barnett would be so optimistic about his chances here if a certain senior someone hadn’t tipped him the wink:

I predict there will be amending of the Federal [Marriage Act] to defend the institution of marriage as the community knows it … If the Howard Government did nothing there would be nothing to stop every State and Territory in our nation from passing a law similar to the ACT legislation. Along with others I will be lobbying my Government to introduce laws to strengthen, uphold and protect marriage, for which the Australian Government has proper constitutional authority.

Elsewhere in his diatribe, Barnett asserts that ‘marriage is a rock solid institution’. Why, then, does it require so much protection?

Filed in: Politics, Sexuality

‘I have the “meanest” mother in the world’, writes Judith Bond of Glen Alpine in NSW, a regular contributor of letters to the editor on Religious Right causes:

I had to eat breakfast every day and take homemade sandwiches to school …I had to wash and dry dishes, make my own bed and even keep my room neat and tidy … (Melbourne Sunday Age, 14 May 2006)

(more…)

Filed in: Christian Right

The LA Times reports that virginity pledges, in which young people vow to abstain from sex until marriage, don’t seem to work very well:

More than half the adolescents who make such signed, public promises give up on their pledges within a year, according to a Harvard study. (Elizabeth Mehren ‘Teens who pledge virginity have difficulty keeping it up’, Melbourne Age, 8 May 2006)

This follows a Columbia University investigation which surveyed 12,000 American teenagers and found that 88 per cent of those who pledged chastity reported having had sexual intercourse before they married. (‘Most teens fail chastity vow’, Age, 11 Mar. 2004)

I recall seeing a documentary set in an American church where a large group of teens took this virginity vow in public while their proud parents smiled and applauded. With a couple of wide-eyed exceptions I’ve never seen such a lugubrious-looking crowd of girls and boys in my life.

Religious Right groups claim on no authority whatsoever that the Harvard and Columbia studies are ‘wrong’ and ‘opposed to the trends we’ve been seeing’. Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?

Filed in: Sexuality