Rudd Abbott Wars – Episode XVVVV – Religion And The Education System Strikes Out?

posted by Paul Roberton on Friday, January 1st 2010

I am a teacher and was a practicing Anglican for many years.

I have taught in some very different schools, where a range of religious teachings are followed.
In Victoria, Religious Education is taught sensibly and sensitively. In primary schools it’s usually optional and non denominational.
In secondary schools the two main religious subjects offered to VCE (Year 11 & 12) students are Religion & Society and Text & Traditions.
They lend themselves well to a personal reflection on religion, comparative theology and the impact of religion on society.

There is a wide expanse of territory for study. Within Text and Traditions there are four recommended texts: Ezekial, the Gospels of Luke and John, and the Qu’ran.

Students may choose to study one of the four texts in isolation before comparing with others.
It has never been an issue.

Let’s be clear though, what I’m referring to are electives for senior students. Students, one would hope, who have a grasp of their own beliefs and some functional critical thinking.

We know religious beliefs are  deeply held and highly personal. Most of us let it sit quietly; some choose to evangelize.
Some go to war in it’s name, but it still extends the promise of a healthier, more tolerant community.

I find it ironic Mr Rudd  and Mr Abbott, two Christian politicians, are prepared to dance around each other on an issue that could actually bring them – all of us – together.

They could agree that universal messages of tolerance, compassion and forgiveness in senior classrooms are a good thing, or they could agree to both stay out of the debate.

They could agree diversity of faith makes us stronger and philosophical debate makes us wiser.

Instead, they’re eyeing each other off like feather-weight boxers, twitching and flinching each time the other makes a move.

Prime Minister Rudd used a back bencher, Senator Landy to question the merit of the Bible in the new National Curriculum. Opposition Leader Abbott immediately weighed in.

This threatens to degenerate into a circus.

We must send a clear message: We resent the exploitation of religious belief for political gain. It cheapens politics and demeans our beliefs.

If religion is to become nothing but a lever for politicians to pull,  we may have to pretend we’re all Jedi so they leave the matter alone.

May the Force be with you.

Paul Roberton

Your Civil Rights overruled by Police Convenience: Strip-Searching your ‘Designated Areas’ at Will and without Consequence.

posted by Paul Roberton on Thursday, December 17th 2009

Big Brother 2.0 ?

The amendments to the Summary Offences & Control of Weapons Act that enable police to strip-search citizens at will are deeply disturbing.

I share the deep repugnance of YACVIC, the Youth Affairs Council of Victoria, at the Brumby Labor Government’s bill. They are aghast and rightly so.

The legislation empowers police to search at will or ‘move on’ individuals who are likely to breach the peace or endanger the safety of others who haven’t otherwise desisted from an illegal act.

Can any of us take our freedoms so for granted that we let this slip idly by?

It’s one thing to give police proper authority to act and to trust their professionalism and training. They are magnificent at their job, but they remain police – not psychics.

Let’s be fair. We don’t want to impede their essential work, but a millennium of the Common Law is being overturned here:  surely they should form a reasonable suspicion first. This bill would no longer require it.

Should they really be empowered to stop someone, perhaps even a child, before they’ve formed a considered opinion of a person’s intent? The echoes of Police Union boss Greg Davies have scarcely faded on the presumption of guilt.

Before us is a Bill empowering police to search any individual – including children, for the legislation lists no age limit to these search powers.

What’s even more ghastly is that the state government sheepishly concedes the bill flies in the face of its own Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities”.

Well done to YACVIC for bringing our attention to this insidious weakening of our hard-earned civil rights, and shame on the government for its hypocrisy.

The YACVIC position can be viewed here.

Higgins voters aghast! Campaign Notes on Climate Change and Tony Abbott.

posted by David Collyer on Friday, December 4th 2009

Higgins is regarded as a conservative area.  It has always voted that way.  Its settled affluence, extremely high education levels and orderly dignity suggests Tory.

In moving around the electorate campaigning over the last few weeks, the error of such assumptions has been dramatically proven.

On climate change – seemingly, the cause of the Left – Higgins citizens have been highly outspoken, expressing to me their horror at the Liberal Party’s denial/sceptic line.

If I can synthesize the comments of many, they say such slogans might play well to the self-interest of blue collar conservatives, but here, where people know how to think for themselves, it is seen as the politics of shallow cads.

They welcome the prospect of a low-carbon and low-pollution future.  They always viewed air pollution as a wasteful and dangerous abuse, but never had the science to support their observations.

Electric cars?  Bring it on!

A number said they hold shares in major companies but saw no difficulty in sacrificing earnings and dividends for a few years to migrate to an environmentally sound economy.

Voters made it very clear to me they accept the need to alter course on climate change and expect government to act quickly and decisively.

The real eye-opener came on Monday, with the election of Tony Abbott as Liberal leader.

The genteel voters of Higgins do not like this man, and while maintaining their decorum, were very rude about him.

They regard him as an interloper from the DLP, with his intrusive moralizing about what other people should and shouldn’t do.

Higgins voters reject his reactionary opinions: the free and open society in which we live has been hard fought for; we do not want to go backward.

The women in particular loathe his anti-abortion views.  All seemed to have a niece – always a niece – whose life would have been ruined but for the help of an understanding surgeon.

I wonder whether their evident dissatisfaction will change their votes?  We shall see on Saturday.

To the many Higgins voters who were kind enough to spare a moment for the Australian Democrats candidate, many thanks for your frankness and patience.

Senate Rejects ETS – Would The Democrats Have Improved and Passed this Law?

posted by Scott Kane on Wednesday, December 2nd 2009

The dogs have been barking for some time – the Senate has now rejected the Rudd government ETS legislation.  This sets in place, should the Rudd government choose to take it, a double dissolution trigger.  Rudd can call a general election for the House of Representatives and all the Senate.  Pundits are calling this for early March, others for August.  In reality, it could be just six weeks away.

Liberal senators Sue Boyce and Judith Troeth voted with the government,  but this support was far short of a Senate majority.  The Mad Monk Tony Abbott, practicing as he does the “withdrawal method” when it comes to all things not conservative, forced the rest of the Liberals to vote NO despite minister Wong’s previous efforts to negotiate the bill’s passage.

The Greens voted NO – as is their custom on every piece of legislation before the house and the rest on the cross benches followed suit. Their eternal purity makes them politically irrelevant and a parliamentary menace.  But politics isn’t about holiness, it is about securing the best possible outcomes, something the Democrats never, never forgot.

But what would the Democrats have done?

The ETS is not an ideal piece of legislation.  The Democrats would have negotiated for improvements in line with our own policies.  Fairer more equitable solutions, while not appealing to major polluters,  would reduce the impact any climate change mitigation legislation would have on the overall economy and on the poor.  Our view differs from The Greens’ “Put the oxy torch to all industries emitting a kilogram of CO2, dude!” economic vandalism.

We would have worked, as we always have, with the elected government to secure the best deal possible for the Australian people with a bill that, while limited, is  a step forward.  A step the Rudd government, despite having a fresh and clear mandate for it, will not now take.

That was role of the  Democrat for 30 years in the Senate – negotiating.   Ensuring the elected government functions, keeps its word and doesn’t cave in to sectional interests.  That we are needed to do this line-by-line work is demonstrated by the failure of the ETS.  A serious piece of legislation about a serious subject, one that ensures Australia’s future – from economy to environment –  has been flagrantly reduced to petty party-based squabbling.  John Howard must be laughing behind his hand as he eggs on the newly-anointed High Priest of Climate Denial – Tony Abbott.

Bob Brown is likewise congratulating the troops on a job well screwed with the rest of the cross benches looking for a pat on the head – from somebody or anybody!

Well done all!  You’ve succeeded in reducing our federal Parliament to a circus.  A national joke; a joke on the heads of the Australian people.  Thanks a bunch!

I urge those entitled to vote in the Higgins by-election to send a message to Canberra.  Use your ballot paper and the preferential system to its fullest.  Vote 1 Australian Democrats – David Collyer, and if you’re a Liberal voter and feel so compelled then (and only then) send your second preference to those who have failed you: the Liberal Party of Australia.

Scott Kane

ETS Lynchin? Better Ask Minchin!

posted by Scott Kane on Thursday, November 19th 2009

The temperature is rising across Australia this week.

The barometer and the thermometer are peaking out to red.  The forecast – FAIL.

Suburban Melbourne faces the first SEVERE fire weather warning on Thursday under the new system.  We follow the Weather Bureau’s predictions with our hearts in our mouths.

From Canberra, the news is even more serious.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Australian Greens are campaigning on Climate Change in the Higgins by-election while steadfastly refusing to negotiate with the Federal government in or out of the Senate chamber.
  Five (5) Australian Greens Senators in the Senate.  Five!
  Negotiation?  Discussion?  Nil, Nix, Nada, Zero, Zilch.
  What a waste of activist energy and tax payers money The Greens experiment is proving to be!

EPIC FAIL!

• The federal Labor government knows if they don’t get the Liberal/National Coalition on side their ETS bill will earn a “Catastrophic” forecast too.  The ETS faces the same future as PM Rudd’s Grocery Watch scheme.  Will we once again have politicians hiding behind “core” and “non core” election promises – as famously coined by John Howard?  “Not happy Jan!”

EPIC FAIL!

• The Liberal/National Coalition, currently undergoing the worst ignominy a conservative political party can endure – opposition – are  lurking in dark party corners with razor sharp knives for the ritual Seppuku of their leader Malcolm Turnbull.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Coalition opposition are flipping and flopping with contradictory statements of victory in respect of negotiating amendments to the ETS while simultaneously trying to torpedo it.

Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan has reportedly said:

“…the exclusion of agriculture from the ETS shows negotiations between the government and the opposition have been productive.”

He’s kidding right?  Has Heffernan  a future career as a stand up comic at the Melbourne Comedy Festival?  He must, because on the same day Senator Nick Minchin states:

“…the exclusion of agriculture alone would not be sufficient grounds for the coalition to back the ETS.”

“We’ll take significantly more concessions from the government before the coalition party room, I think, would be prepared to consider supporting this bill,” Senator Minchin told ABC Radio on Monday, adding that Labor needs to consider a “whole range” of other coalition amendments.”

A  “whole range of other coalition amendments”?  Reads like “Our way or the highway” to me.  This is not a process of negotiation – it is politcal castration being performed by an absurd and out-to-lunch far left (The Australian Greens) and a medley of Climate Change deniers within the Liberal/National Coalition.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Labor government’s Senator Wong meanwhile takes the fine art of saying nothing while implying new heights, when asked if the Federal government would be “willing to dump other sectors from the ETS to appease the coalition.”

“This is about getting majority support through the parliament for a piece of legislation that is in Australia’s national interest.”

Is that a yes, a maybe or are you just being contrite Senator?

EPIC FAIL!

And it’s not even Summer yet.

Scott Kane

Warning Graphic Images. Australian Liberal Party’s Nuclear Agenda; dirty politics = radioactive environment

posted by Scott Kane on Tuesday, November 17th 2009

The CPRS legislation is before the Senate and the  Liberal/National coalition, with the predictability of a summer bushfire, have heaved out their old files supporting nuclear power.

They are in a bind, with 10 coalition MPs steadfastly and publicly opposed to the carbon pollution reduction scheme.  So Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop has dusted off the nuclear power issue and brought it forward with the justification that “19 of the G20 countries already relied on nuclear power…”

One can only assume that if 19 of the G20 countries announced they were going to jump off a cliff into the ocean tomorrow Julia Bishop would don a new bikini (no pun intended) and join in.

We’ve got big problems with carbon based power.  The science condemning it is beyond question and the need to act is urgent.

But nuclear?

Consider the images above.   These are “survivors” of Chernobyl.  These are people.  The only difference between them and us is we wear hats with corks to keep away the flies, play cricket and Australian Rules or Rugby and prefer beer to vodka.

I could write paragraphs about the half life of various nuclear isotopes.  The centuries upon centuries it takes for them to be rendered inert.  But why?  The images  of the “survivors” of Chernobyl speak louder than words…

Warning Graphic Images Click to Zoom In.

Scott Kane