Notes: Friday, November 19, 2010

1. Latest on so-called gay marriage in Australia

There's so much that I'll mainly just post links:

Articles:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/early-conference-to-end-forced-consensus-20101118-17zf2.html?skin=text-only
('Gay-marriage'-related motion passed the Federal Lower House 73-72--quite an achievement, given how difficult it tends to be for catamites to pass motions.)
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/conscience-vote-pms-best-option-20101118-17z7m.html?skin=text-only
("According to an Essential Research poll out this week, ... 53 per cent said people of the same sex should be allowed to marry. This included 57 per cent of Labor voters. Coalition supporters were equally divided (45 per cent each way); Greens overwhelmingly in favour (80 per cent).")
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/same-sex-unions-not-a-vote-changer/story-e6frg6nf-1225955971708
("Labor strategists dismissed suggestions the issue would damage the party's support among blue-collar workers, saying it was not a vote-changer. Citing the lack of reaction to recent NSW legislation allowing gay couples to adopt, a senior Labor source said: "People may not support it, but it will not be a vote-changer. And a lot of people in the front bar would say fair enough to gay marriage."")
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/its-the-vibe-is-not-a-valid-argument-against-gay-rights/
("Around 25% of lesbian couples in Australia are currently raising children and many more are now planning families together." No source is provided for that figure, however.

One other thing about that last article: Dr. Phelps writes that

Over 60% of Australians support marriage equality. Not some watered-down euphemism like “civil union”, but marriage equality.

I've been thinking that isn't the fact that a marriage involves an husband and a wife, whereas a 'gay marriage' obviously can't, a good enough reason for dismissing the pro-'gay-marriage' insistence on marriage rather than a mere 'civil union' (not that I support 'civil unions', however--I can't see how a 'union' founded on sodomy can be regarded as 'civil')? They don't insist on calling one 'spouse' an husband and the other a wife, so why do they insist on calling their relationship a marriage?)

Editorials:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/allow-a-free-vote-on-gay-marriage-20101118-17z7d.html?skin=text-only
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/dont-get-hung-up-on-the-politics-of-same-sex-union/story-e6frg71x-1225955924810

Letters:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/lineage-has-no-relevance-other-than-to-snobs-20101118-17z7b.html?skin=text-only
(The first letter at the following web-page has apparently had its first sentence cut off; that sentence, judging by the main Letters page, is "WHAT a gutless position the Prime Minister has taken on same-sex marriage.")
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/gillard-fails-test-of-leadership-on-gay-marriage/story-fn558imw-1225955928584

2. "White Britons a minority by '66"

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3234028/Oxford-professor-issues-shock-population-warning-for-Great-Britain-by-2066.html#ixzz15bAcxfjK
(Brought to my attention by this AQ thread.)

3. "Terra" on, among other things, the activities, or lack thereof, of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference

http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/11/bishops-jump-to-right-and-blogosphere.html

4. "Maurice Pinay" on, among other things, the 'Noahide' movement

The following web-page contains many useful links:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2010/11/remnants-conspicuous-blind-spot.html

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, Widow, and of St. Pontianus, Pope, Martyr, A.D. 2010

Notes: Tuesday-Wednesday, November 2-3, 2010

1. Mr. MacIntyre on the history of Franco-British co-operation

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/britain-france-to-bury-the-hatchet-at-last/story-e6frg6ux-1225946879102

I was surprised to learn the following from that article:

David Cameron is not the first Tory leader to embrace closer military and political union with Britain's best enemy across the Channel. One of his predecessors once proposed an "indissoluble union" of Britain and France, suggesting that "the two governments declare that France and Great Britain shall no longer be two nations, but one Franco-British Union. Every citizen of France will enjoy immediately citizenship of Great Britain; every British subject will become a citizen of France."

The author of this proposal was none other than Winston Churchill. In 1940, with Nazi forces pouring into France, Churchill, backed by the war cabinet, proposed that the two countries become one, combining armies, parliaments and currencies. It was rejected by French collaborationists led by Marshal Petain, who insisted that Britain would soon "have her neck wrung like a chicken".

I think that I had heard of the following earlier, though:

French documents discovered two years ago reveal that, in 1956, French prime minister Guy Mollet proposed to Anthony Eden that France merge with Britain, with the Queen head of the amalgamated state. Eden turned down the idea, but was more enthusiastic about a suggestion that France join the Commonwealth.

2. Dr. Peters on the canonical obligation of clerical continence

http://www.canonlaw.info/a_deacons.htm
(Brought to my attention by this comment at AQ, to which I have responded with this comment.)

3. Blog comments by me

Just these two, both of which are quite short and hence not worth copying-and-pasting, so I'll just give their respective links:

http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/thats-sooooo-20th-century/#comment-17950
http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/thats-sooooo-20th-century/#comment-17968

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of St. Martin de Porres, Confessor, A.D. 2010

Defender of Faith? Perhaps ‘Syncretismus Defensor’ didn’t have the right ring to it

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/charles-to-defend-faith-not-the-faith/2008/11/14/1226318936014.html

And if one wanted a bit more evidence of what a mess England has become since the end of the reign of Mary I, I see The Sydney Morning Herod on Saturday (and today’s CathNews) rehashing the old news of H.R.H. The Prince of Wales’s stated desire to be known as ‘Defender of Faith’, not ‘Defender of the Faith’. Who knows, perhaps His Royal Highness will even relinquish the (usurped) headship of the Church of England. But if H.M. The Queen lives to anything like the age of her late mother, and if Britain continues on its present course, then His Royal Highness might find that the only ‘faith’ left to defend under the throne to which he accedes is Islam (given, of course, that atheism is a non-faith).

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, Bishop, Confessor, 2008 A.D.