‘Common Sense’ Category Archives
Last week, Australian Senators voted on a motion for senators to receive no pay increases until a budget surplus is achieved.
It was moved by independent (ex-Liberal) Senator Cory Bernardi.
Sad to say, only 6 of our 75 senators voted for it.
The Coalition, Labor and the Greens senators all voted against.
Anyone moving a motion that’s rejected by all three of the above-mentioned parties is probably doing something right.
Senator Bernardi is a conscience politician.
We’ll be hearing a lot more from him.
Hopefully his movement will continue to propose common-sense policies which level-headed people will happily support.
On March 20, Herald Sun columnist Rita Panahi wrote that “as an atheist”:
“I don’t want the government to censor free speech (or) to dictate who can marry….”
She goes on about how good the joy that same-sex marriage may bring some couples….and how bad is mis-labelling some people as homophobes and bigots….
If she’s an atheist, the question of good and bad can’t arise — the difference between them being absolute only if there is an Absolute Being who judges between them.
Don’t forget, God is the only Absolute — the living difference between good and evil.
God exists because it’s his nature to exist.
We exist because he gives us our existence.
It’s not very complicated.
Rita has some thoughtful ethical instincts – but seemingly only by accident and by being inconsistent.
Is she a closet believer who may benefit by coming out as such?
by Arnold Jago in Australia, Common Sense, Multiculturalism, Persecution, Politics
In Australia it’s illegal to say, write or draw anything that offends anybody regarding their background.
We have bureaucrats paid to decide whether the offended-ness is justified — or if the expression of opinion was legitimate.
The bureaucratic decisions seem usually biased (towards the complainers).
Instead should we have panels of reasonable, typical, un-biased citizens — not bureaucrats — to decide?
Bondi tram passengers? Pub patrons?
But are not many pub-dwellers regular alcohol-drinkers? A possible worry, brain function-wise?
Tram-travellers could be a more reasonable cross-section.
Am I allowed to mention that people younger than 30 shouldn’t be eligible?
It’s well known that brain development is incomplete until at least one’s late twenties.
We could argue all day.
But it’s really not so complicated.
Best simply scrap Section 18C and deal with intimidation etc. under other already-existing legislation.
by Arnold Jago in Australia, Celebrities, Common Sense, Education, Faith, Family, Lifestyle, Media, Women
1. Australia’s “progressive” media are making a celebrity of a woman who calls Islam a “feminist” religion.
Don’t they know that in the countries where Islam is practiced most, women are stoned for alleged infidelity?
Didn’t an official Islamic spokesperson recently tell Australia’s Sky News that sometimes it’s OK to beat one’s wife?
Islam needs to “progressively” convert its own traditionalist adherents away from violence-prone fundamentalism.
2. Some Australians consider themselves “progressive” when Sydney streets are filled with persons promoting anal sex as normal.
Many Australians let their youngsters go to “progressive” schools which groom them to condone (if not to practise) that kind of thing, and to vilify anybody discouraging it?
Perhaps Australia needs to “progressively” eradicate those ideas.
Perhaps the Australians loudest in their claims to be progressive are progressing down the wrong track.
An Australian judge has refused to allow a Muslim woman to wear the niqab while testifying in court.
Too harsh? I don’t think so.
A judge must form opinions concerning witnesses’ truthfulness or otherwise. Body language, including facial expression, is part of that.
If we’re worried about harshness, consider the senior Muslim last week advocating beating women as “step three” in a process of dealing with relationship issues — after counselling, buying chocolates etc.
Joumanah El Matrah, of the Australian Muslim Women’s Human Rights Centre has testified that there are “significant problems” in how Islam was interpreted…and that Muslim women would be “extremely disadvantaged” by any form of sharia court… and that Islamic orthodox interpretative frameworks allocate women “an inferior status to men” rendering them “vulnerable to violence and abuse”.
Personally, I must say I admire some aspects of Muslim’s commitment to prayer, belief in modesty etc….
But there always seems something wrong — Allah seems to come over as un-loving.
When described as “merciful” it seems not to be “mercy” in the usual sense of the word.
The “Our Watch” organisation recently had an opinion piece in multiple regional newspapers including Ballarat Courier, Sunraysia Daily, Bendigo Advertiser etc.
The topic being “For Everyone’s Sake, let’s talk about Sex”.
It’s full of research statistics.
Surveys quoted show that many people hold the views that:
1. “if a young man wants to have sex with a young woman, it’s up to the woman to make it very clear she doesn’t want to….”
2. “the victim (is) at least partly responsible for the unwanted sex if she is drunk or affected by drugs…or wearing revealing clothing….”
“Our Watch” organisation is committed to talking people out of those two opinions.
The fact that they are both obviously true apparently doesn’t matter to them.