Bishop John

The latest ‘sexting’ news re children falling foul of the law, demonstrates once again that the law can condemn behaviours but it cannot grow healthy living.

CHILDREN sending and receiving sexually explicit images on mobile phones – or ”sexting” – are unwittingly falling foul of child pornography laws, a parliamentary hearing on child cyber-safety has heard.

Education researcher Paul Weldon told the hearing that ”laws designed to protect children from adults [were] now being used against children”.

Dr Weldon cited the case of a 14-year-old boy in Bunbury, Western Australia, who pleaded guilty last week to child pornography charges, after footage of a 14-year-old girl having sex with two other boys was downloaded onto his mobile phone. It is understood that the footage had been widely circulated among other schoolchildren.

A 2009 survey of 4770 students by the Association of Independent Schools of Victoria found that 7.3 per cent of children between school years 5 and 11 had been asked to send a naked picture of themselves.

The figure was at its highest among year 11 girls, jumping to 16.3 per cent.

Article, ‘Sexting’ teens breach child porn law.  Also, Legal and future perils of ‘sexting’ yourself: child pornography charges and the CV.

It’s a sad day in the land of Oz when we choose “a nice meal on a Saturday night” over a mate battling problem gambling.

THE poker machine reformers Senator Nick Xenophon and the independent MP Andrew Wilkie confronted 100 angry club supporters at the Narrabri Golf Club amid concerns that pokie curbs may hurt towns.

”It was quite a direct meeting, and its not over,” said Mark Coulton, the National MP for Parkes, who has 83 clubs in his electorate, the second-highest number in Australia.

Mr Coulton said the local country hotel often had the only ATM in town, and he is concerned the proposed reform would also see a $250 daily cash withdrawal limit imposed where poker machines were located on the premises. Small clubs also used poker machine revenue to cross-subsidise other community activities, he said.

”My concern is these reforms might make it difficult for a couple of problem gamblers, but if the local town loses its only facility where you can hold a function or get a nice meal on a Saturday night, the cost might be too great,” he said.

Article, Locals confront MPs over pokie plan.

MSPs have voted overwhelmingly today to reject in principle the legalization of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in Scotland recognizing that such a move would seriously endanger public safety. They have instead sent a ringing endorsement to making the very best palliative care widely available and accessible.

The key argument that decided this vote and the similar votes in the House of Lords in 2006 and 2009 is a simple one. The right to die can so easily become the duty to die. Vulnerable people who are sick, elderly or disabled can so easily feel pressure, whether real or imagined, to end their lives so as not to be a burden on others.

Parliament’s first responsibility is to protect the vulnerable and that is what they have voted to do today.’

 Detailed report at,  Scottish Parliament rejects MacDonald euthanasia bill

Stimulating article on ‘religion’. The 634 comments demonstrate the difficulty of attentive listening and constructive conversation.

Thus, if religion is a fluid category (that can encompass “secular” groups) – yet as Hitchens claims “religion” supposedly manifests a poisonous side to human beings – why not examine human nature (and human group dynamics) more closely, rather than just blame certain groupings of people we label “religious” for everything? This is a question that remains unanswered in the work of Hitchens and others, like Dawkins. Why? Because it would require a serious anthropological investigation of human beings; which itself would require them to give up some of their own dualistic beliefs. Hitchens and Dawkins each have their expertise and talents, but they are show amateurishness when it comes to mounting serious, academic arguments about religion and human nature.

This is not to say that one cannot argue for some naturally transcendent capacity of the human being, or that Christians or Muslims or others cause violence. It is clear that Christians and Muslims commit violent acts, but so do Americans and Australians, fathers and mothers, sporting clubs and gangs, and many other sorts of people.

What I am pointing out is how the category of religion has been and continues to be used and abused. Hitchens continues the lazy and politically-motivated terminology by claiming religion “poisons”, while not digging deeper. This leaves other people and institutions off the hook.

Hitchens is right to point out, though, that religion will continue to exist. It will remain while the liberal, secular discourse continues to label religion as “other” and “enemy”, which establishes a dualism to justify itself.

Joel Hodge is a lecturer in the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy at the Australian Catholic University’s St Patrick’s campus, Melbourne.  Article, The use and abuse of “religion”.

Don’t call it marriage – interesting comment from Northern Territory gay community,

 Darwin restaurateur John Spellman is one of the pioneers of the gay movement in the NT. During the 80s he made a name by running the popular gay nightspots known as Fannies and Dicks.

Mr Spellman is an advocate of equality for the Territory’s gay community.

However, he thinks a decision by the Northern Territory branch of the Labor Party to push the Federal Parliament to legalise gay marriage is wrong.

“I believe that the federal party’s attitude is better. The word marriage shouldn’t be used in any form of, how do we put it, cohabitation ceremony. If you want a commitment ceremony why not?” he said.

“But marriage is not the right word. It’s religious. It’s for a man and a woman to produce children. And I think you’d offend a lot of people by using the word marriage.

“Civil union, call it gay commitment ceremony, call it what you like. It’s a commitment between two couples. It’s a legal thing. If they want a legal thing – legislation – some other word but not marriage.”

Article, NT Labor urges action on gay marriage.  Also, Marriage: why not a threesome?  and  ‘marriage’: why corrupt it?