Notes: Tuesday, March 8-Tuesday, March 15, 2011 (part 1 of 2)

1. A couple of recent developments regarding euthanasia

1.1 "TASMANIA is poised to become the first state to legalise voluntary euthanasia"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/state-to-push-for-mercy-killing/story-e6frg6nf-1226017319925

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=25378

Labels: euthanasia, Tasmania

1.2 "SUPPORT for voluntary euthanasia in NSW is running at 83 per cent, with only 10 per cent of people implacably opposed"

http://www.smh.com.au/national/state-election-2011/support-for-voluntary-euthanasia-at-85-20110310-1bpsm.html?skin=text-only

Labels: euthanasia

2. An amusing example of gay outrage

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a-channel-ten-newsreader-has-apologised-after-calling-mardi-gras-disgusting-on-air/story-e6freuy9-1226017840089

When I blogged in late 2008 on the revelation that the N.S.W. State government was directly to fund the Sodomites' Parade, a commenter asked jokingly

But, Pole, it's so *colourful* - how could you possibly object?
[http://cardinalpole.blogspot.com/2008/10/taxpayers-to-fund-sodomites-parade.html?showComment=1223032140000#c296515895030110427]

Luckily I didn't say the following, or I might have been reported to some Anti-Discrimination Commissar:

“With respect, there’s a difference between colourful and disgusting in some cases.”

Mr. Tim Dick wrote about the fiasco in a column in Saturday's Herald:

... on Monday, Channel Ten's Ron Wilson suggested elements of the parade crossed the line from ''colourful'' to ''disgusting'' during an interview with the organisation's co-chairman, Pete Urmson. He batted the suggestion away without too much difficulty, and at the end of the discussion, Wilson congratulated him on the success of the festival and parade.

But it prompted a brief bit of predictable ''outrage'' nonetheless. He was homophobic, he was ignorant, he was narrow-minded. His prejudice was the disgusting thing. Something must be done, and someone inevitably threatened an anti-discrimination complaint.

Wilson was duly back the next morning to apologise for any offence caused, and for good measure threw in some support for the gay marriage campaign.

I wish he hadn't. The over-apology was an over-reaction to an over-reaction.

Journalists are supposed to ask difficult questions, and despite Wilson using a clanger of a word, it was one reference in a longer interview generally positive towards Mardi Gras. ...
[http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/whats-there-to-hide-its-a-sin-to-omit-the-emitters-20110311-1br71.html?skin=text-only]

Labels: G.L.B.T., Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, Ron Wilson

3. "Catholica no longer appears on the [Australian Catholic Bishops Conference] list of links"

http://beyondpews.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/quietly-removed/

Labels: A.C.B.C., Catholica Australia

4. Launch of a proposal for a N.S.W. Bill of Rights

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/shes-baaaackkk-20110309-1bnaq.html?skin=text-only

Labels: Bill of Rights, N.S.W.

5. Two "openly gay" N.S.W. Liberal election candidates "support ... removing exemptions to the Anti-Discrimination Act"

http://www.smh.com.au/national/state-election-2011/liberals-challenge-greens-for-the-gay-vote-20110311-1br84.html?skin=text-only

Labels: Adrian Bartels, Bruce Notley-Smith, discrimination, G.L.B.T., Liberal Party, N.S.W.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
15.III.2011

Notes: Friday, October 29, 2010

For future reference: Prof. Bagaric on his moral philosophy

... I regularly make wide-ranging comments that conflict with policies of the Left and Right. I'm apolitical; the policies of Labor and Liberal are so similar to make the debate almost irrelevant. Most of my writing is informed by one underlying principle. It's called utilitarianism. It is the theory that when you are faced with a moral or political choice you should make the decision that will maximise human flourishing, where each person's interest counts equally.

The Left doesn't like me because I'm a fan of tough counter-terrorism laws and harsher sentences for sex and violent offenders. I also oppose euthanasia, abortion and dispute the desperate need for a reduction in greenhouse gases. I often upset the Right because I push for gay marriages, animal rights, no tax for the poor and mega taxes for the rich, multiculturalism and tolerance towards Muslim values.
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/mutant-rebels-need-some-causes/story-e6frg6zo-1225944885437]

"Salazar and Catholic Social Teaching"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34429

Excerpt of most interest to me:

Salazar was above all things a Christian and a Catholic. Yet, for the revival of religion or the restoration of the Church he had done so little positively that some foreign observers had even taken scandal thereat. General Franco, who in so many ways resembled him, had done much more in 12. Why this? Some had attributed it to timidity. But Salazar was not timid. His personal influence had been exerted to its utmost for religion.

If then, he had moved so slowly there must have been grave reason. Salazar felt that State patronage exercised against the present disposition of important sections of opinion, would not help to anchor the Church in the hearts of the people.

He thought it wiser to give the Church freedom and let it rebuild from the base upwards upon new and better foundations than could be laid by any statesman setting it up as a department of the new State. In giving the Church liberty and equality before the law he had already done much.

"Qld pro-abortion MPs would face 12% against them, says survey"

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=23973

"Tasmanian Labor-Green Coalition Government has released a discussion paper on a Human Rights bill"

http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/10/secularist-attacks.html
http://www.media.tas.gov.au/release.php?id=30717

Interesting comment by Mr. Schütz:

Yes, and I am not rejecting that centuries old tradition and synthesis in any way. The problem comes when this synthesis is read back into the exegesis of the scriptural passages, thus missing an important element in the understanding of the passage (nb. I am not saying that the passage cannot be legitimately understood in other ways, but that we must have appreciation for how it sounded to the first readers). When it comes to the Lutheran Catholic dialogue, it is quite appropriate to argue about “infused grace” or “imparted righteousness” over against “imputed righteousness” and “forensic justification”, as long as we understand that this was not Paul’s argument. And that is important, because the Lutheran argument is that Catholic doctrine is “unscriptural”, not “untrue”. The fact is that Lutheran doctrine is “unscriptural” too, because the scriptures they quote to support their position doesn’t address their position any more than it addresses the Catholic position.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/taking-your-greek-bible-to-church/#comment-17856]

H.H. The Pope on, among other things, "the depenalisation of abortion [and] euthanasia"

Excerpts from an item from today's edition of the Vatican Information Service daily e-mail bulletin:

BRAZIL: CHURCH TEACHES MAN HIS DIGNITY AS CHILD OF GOD

VATICAN CITY, 28 OCT 2010 (VIS) - Prelates from the National Conference of Bishops of Brazil (Northeast region 5) who have just complete their five-yearly "ad limina" visit were received this morning by the Holy Father. [...]

"First, the duty of direct action to ensure a just ordering of society falls to the lay faithful who, as free and responsible citizens, strive to contribute to the just configuration of social life, while respecting legitimate autonomy and natural moral law", the Holy Father explained. "Your duty as bishops, together with your clergy, is indirect because you must contribute to the purification of reason, and to the moral awakening of the forces necessary to build a just and fraternal society. Nonetheless, when required by the fundamental rights of the person or the salvation of souls, pastors have the binding duty to emit moral judgments, even on political themes".

"When forming these judgements, pastors must bear in mind the absolute value of those ... precepts which make it morally unacceptable to chose a particular action which is intrinsically evil and incompatible with human dignity. This decision cannot be justified by the merit of some specific goal, intention, consequence or circumstance, Thus it would be completely false and illusory to defend, political, economic or social rights which do not comprehend a vigorous defence of the right to life from conception to natural end. When it comes to defending the weakest, who is more defenceless than an unborn child or a patient in a vegetative or comatose state?"

"When political projects openly or covertly contemplate the depenalisation of abortion or euthanasia, the democratic ideal (which is truly democratic when it recognises and protects the dignity of all human beings) is betrayed at its very foundations. For this reason, dear brothers in the episcopate, when defending life we must not fear hostility or unpopularity, rejecting all compromise and ambiguity which would conform us to the mentality of this world". [...]
AL/ VIS 20101028 (630)
[my square-bracketed interpolations]

Blog comments by me

Just this one:

Cardinal Pole
October 29, 2010 at 2:52 am

Here’s the rectified link:

http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/search/label/Fr%20Crothers
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/our-st-mary-more-likely-to-pray-for-vocations-than-to-challenge-for-women-priests/#comment-17874]

Reginaldvs Cantvar

29.X.2010

Notes: Thursday, September 30, 2010

An interesting fact about the application of the Statute of Westminster to Australia

Second paragraph of this letter in today's Herald:

It took a while …

Lewis Hewertson (Letters, September 29) fails to see how Australians could be compelled to fight ''for England'', since Australia received self-governance in 1901. This overlooks the fact that Australia's foreign policy (and that of Canada, New Zealand and South Africa) was controlled and directed by London by law.

The Statute of Westminster of 1931 awarded full independence to the British dominions, including in foreign policy, but the Australian government of the day did not ratify it.

Robert Menzies, declaring war on Germany in 1939, stated that Australia was at war because Britain was, ipso facto. The statute was only ratified by the Curtin government in 1942, marking the point where British and Australian interests diverged.

Hugh Sturgess Balmain
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/we-dont-need-an-englishman-lording-it-over-us-20100929-15x9q.html?skin=text-only]

Some figures on the prospects for children from broken homes

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/broken-homes-can-disadvantage-kids-for-life-study-finds/story-e6frg6nf-1225932001780

The latest developments regarding so-called gay marriage ...

1. "Bandt attacks [The Australian]'s coverage of [The Greens' "legislative timetable"]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bandt-attacks-newspapers-coverage/story-fn59niix-1225931993399

See also the editorial and the "Cut & Paste" section of today's edition of The Australian.

2. From the first link in item 1:

Yesterday, on the first full day of the new parliament, the Greens reintroduced a bill into the Senate legalising gay marriage.

3. "Gillard says no conscience vote on gay marriage"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/29/3024870.htm

4. "Tasmania to recognise same-sex marriage"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/29/3025417.htm?section=justin

Second paragraph of that news item:

An amendment to Tasmania's Relationship Act was passed unopposed in the state's Upper House, meaning marriages performed in countries where it's legal will now be recognised in Tasmania.

(Thanks to Terra for highlighting those last two news stories, which I didn't see covered at http://www.smh.com.au/text or http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ today.)

... and euthanasia

"Church responds to renewed euthanasia efforts"
http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=23507

First paragraph of the body of the CathNews item:

Catholic Health Australia is co-ordinating a national response to the renewed nationwide promotion of euthanasia, while the country's bishops have re-issued a submission previously made on the rights of the terminally ill.

Mr. Brent on the history, merits, and demerits of compulsory voting and compulsory voting enrolment

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/mumble/index.php/theaustralian/comments/lets_make_voting_voluntary/

"Joshua" on "The Legend of the Leonine Prayers"

http://psallitesapienter.blogspot.com/2010/09/legend-of-leonine-prayers.html

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Jerome, Priest, Confessor, Doctor of the Church, A.D. 2010

Notes: Wednesday, September 1, 2010

"MPs to debate same-sex adoption bill"

In today's Herald:

Debate on Clover Moore's same-sex adoption bill has been rushed forward to begin today, as supporters and critics ramped up their lobbying ahead of a conscience vote in the NSW Legislative Assembly which could take place this week.

[...] Ms Moore, the independent MP for Sydney, will reintroduce the bill today - one day earlier than initially planned - to include an amendment that allows faith-based adoption agencies to refuse to provide services to gay and lesbian couples without breaching anti-discrimination laws.

[... The Hon. David Clarke M.L.C.] accused the Premier, Kristina Keneally, who supports the bill, of allowing Ms Moore ''the fast track to get this through in the dying days of this Parliament before the next election''.
[http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/mps-to-debate-samesex-adoption-bill-20100831-14fn1.html?skin=text-only]

See also today's Tele:

At a rally against the Bill yesterday, Liberal Party powerbroker David Clarke and Christian Democrat Fred Nile warned abortions would increase if gay couples were allowed to adopt.

"Any mother putting up her baby for adoption would never imagine that their babywould be brought up by two male homosexuals or two female lesbians," Mr Nile said.

[...] Ms Keneally's former leadership rival Frank Sartor is trying to amend the Bill to ensure people who offer children for adoption will not face legal action under anti-discrimination laws if they refuse to let a gay couple adopt their child. ...
[http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/split-over-gay-adoption-widens/story-e6freuzi-1225912518855]

Some opinions on the merits and demerits of compulsory voting

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/self-serving-pollies-to-blame-for-forced-vote/story-fn558imw-1225912525711

"Tasmania recognises same-sex marriages"

Brought to my attention by Arabella at CathPews: Body of the A.B.C. article:

The Tasmanian Parliament has approved laws recognising same-sex marriages and civil unions registered in other states or countries.

Only three of the 25 Lower House MPs voted against the amendment to the Relationships Act - Liberal members Rene Hidding, Michael Ferguson and Jacqui Petrusma.

Attorney-General Lara Giddings says the changes will remove discrimination for same-sex couples in registered relationships.

"This is really a small step, but a significant and important step for those people who have registered or been through a civil union process elsewhere around the world and want us to recognise that relationship as indeed being in existence," she said.
[http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/31/2998900.htm?section=justin]

"Prelate laments Italy’s population decline"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33480

The AQ article contains a sad projection:

[Italy's] population is expected to decline by nearly 10% in the next four decades.

Msgr. Finn and Mr. Shea on the death penalty

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/this-will-bring-out-a-lot-of-diy-bishops?utm_source=NCRegister.com&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=b2fb596caa-RSS_DAILY_EMAIL

See also
http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33471

If I had time I'd do a full-length rebuttal of that piece, but unfortunately I don't.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Giles, Abbot, and of the Twelve Holy Brothers, Martyrs, A.D. 2010