Dear Kiddies, Mr Abbott said yesterday that if he becomes Australia’s Prime Minister, families will receive $300 a year per child as part of reintroducing indexation for the child-care rebate.

Mrs Abbott was with him. She works in what they call an occasional child-care centre.

Dear Kiddies, the adults are getting this child-care issue all wrong.

*  Occasional child-care is a GOOD thing. It provides somewhere for us to be looked after if Mummy gets sick or for some reason suddenly needs a break.

*  Ordinary child-care (child-care-in-cold-blood, as you might say) is very different and is a BAD thing. It means Mummy not caring for us — not because something cropped up to make it impossible — but because she herself decided that instead of looking after us she would go out to work, leaving us with a paid carer.

* * *

Mr Swan, who belongs to the other party, criticised Mr Abbott’s family policies.

So he should, you say.

Not really, dear Lambkins, Mr Swan has no more idea of what we kiddies want than the other bloke.

His comments were about an alleged connection between Coalition policies and what Coles will charge for groceries.

Did Mr Swan mention that Mr Abbott’s child-care scheme is wrong because kids hate it?

Or because kids want their Mum at home?

Or because kids want all child-care centres bulldozed tomorrow (except perhaps the “occasional” type mentioned above)?

He did not.

* * *

Dear Kiddies, every time a clear-cut, black-and-white moral issue affecting us kids comes up, the adult experts start shouting at each other about money.

Is money all they are interested in?

What about more basic questions?

Like, what is a baby?

Is it — he or she – you or me –merely a lifestyle-accessory for the Mum?

These big people (big bodies, not necessarily big intelligences) think it’s normal to have a child and then start looking around for somebody else to care for it (preferably at taxpayers’ expense) while they toddle off and do something else.

Don’t they know that parenthood is the greatest privilege that God offers them?

A poll published this week reveals that 46 percent of Australian women — compared with 41 percent of men — report feeling “very stressed” in their everyday lives.

The poll, commissioned by Lifeline Australia, interviewed 1200 men and women.

Similar findings in American women were published in 2009 by authors Stevenson and Wolfers. They noted how recent declines in female happiness “have eroded a gender gap in happiness in which women in the 1970s reported higher subjective well-being than did men . . . a new gender gap is emerging—one with higher subjective well-being for men.”  (American Economic Journal: 2009 )

* * *

Did something happen just before the 1970s to affect women so as to reduce their happiness?

The Contraceptive Pill was introduced in the early 1960s. Women’s well-being has deteriorated ever since. Could that be cause and effect?

Why would the Pill make women less happy?

There are about 100 reasons. Here are a few:

* when busy in the home, looking after 3, 4, 5, or more children, pre-Pill women had plenty to do — too busy to ask themselves, how stressed am I today?

* they had the joy and happiness of knowing they were doing something they were cut out for. Their husband couldn’t give birth to a child, breast feed, or do the many things that come naturally to mothers.

* they didn’t feel the insecurity of a 50 percent chance of ending up divorced

* they felt less pressure to go out into the so-called “workforce” – being already busy with work to which they were ideally suited. No need to go out anywhere.

* not being in an office, factory or whatever, they escaped the stress of bosses and workmates eyeing them off and discussing whether they were “hot” or not.

* * *

So what about women going out to jobs?

Pope Pius XI discussed the so-called “emancipation” of working women, as long ago as 1930:

“This, however, is not the true emancipation of women, nor that rational and exalted liberty which belongs to the noble office of a Christian woman and wife; it is rather the debasing of the womanly character and the dignity of motherhood, and indeed of the whole family . . . .”  (Encyclical on Christian Marriage, Casti Connubii)

Some things don’t change.

Researchers worry that constant looking at screens – television, computer, mobiles – can create, or at least aggravate, attention disorder problems in children.

The old joke about ADD standing for “Absent Dad Disease” may be truer than we like to think.

Given an upbringing with no functional father plus wall-to-wall electronic brain stimulation – little wonder if a youngster never learns to apply himself to reality, to set priorities or to resist impulses.

* * *

Politicians and vested interests insist that the internet needs to be high-speed.  Anyone saying different would be considered a fruit loop.

But are not human beings, by and large, low-speed? And are not humans more important than the internet?

Really getting to know someone cannot be rushed. And it takes time learning to understand why a certain problem is dominating somebody’s life.

Yet don’t we all need — fairly often — to be understood and listened to?

Such help may be very scarce in a future with everybody’s minds high-speeded away from the wave-length of the human soul.

* * *

Some Catholics join the Third Order of the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth.

Members of this order NEVER watch television.

They must say certain prayers every day and make their Confession and receive Holy Communion frequently.

Also they are encouraged to spend one hour before the Blessed Sacrament at least once weekly — kneeling in silence before the Tabernacle on the altar in their church, motivated by their belief that in that tabernacle Christ is truly present, welcoming us to himself.

But is an hour too long? 

Well, doesn’t it take about 15 minutes merely to shake off the unspiritual distractions of the outside world? 

Perhaps another 15 minutes to tune our ears into listening for God’s unobtrusive presence. 

Finally, by God’s grace, one may enter into conversation with Our Lord . . . worldly things fade . . . at the end of the hour we’re reluctant to leave.

Having first found God in the Blessed Sacrament, then we can seek to find him in other people.

In 2008, more than 200 girls aged 15 and under had abortions in Victoria.

Some without the parents’ knowledge.

Some were aged 12.

One abortionist told reporters the biggest increase has been among 14-year-olds “copying what they see on television”.

* * *

When asked by abortionists, ‘Did you agree to this?’ such girls tend to say, ‘. . . I didn’t really want to, but I didn’t know how to say no’.

The spokeswoman for one abortion business commented, “One third had their first experience at age 14 years or younger, yet almost one in 10 say they have not been taught sex ed at school.”

One shudders to think what kind of sex education such a person thinks they ought to have.

Can you imagine what kind of message would be in sex education approved of by organisations specialising in aborting babies?

* * *

The Federal Government is said to be planning a new national sex education curriculum for primary and secondary schools, but the package is some years away.

With Julia Gillard in charge, we can only hope it never happens at all.

Recall how, when Tony Abbott said last January that women should not give away their virginity too easily, Gillard said, “These comments will confirm the worst fears of Australian women about Tony Abbott.”

How could any sane human being say such a thing?

Or any insane one, for that matter?

* * *

It is embarrassing to live in a country which has this person as Prime Minister.

It will be doubly so if, after her being dumped on us without our having any choice, we are gormless enough to vote her back in.

It’s a worry to think that one lives in a country where people with her views can get pre-selected.

And to think that she would get even one vote — let alone enough votes to be elected.

J Gillard doesn’t believe in God.

With such an ostrich-like view of the created world in general, how could she have a balanced opinion about anything?

(Source: Herald Sun, 21/11/2009)

In a speech yesterday at the Australian Institute of Family Studies annual conference, Professor Alan Hayes spoke of a “revolution” in Australian families.

The mothers of 34 percent of babies born in 2008 were unmarried, compared with 8 percent in 1970.

Now 78 percent of couples live together before marrying, compared with 23 percent pre-revolution.

The Professor said, “For many children it has been a good revolution, but it depends on the extent to which they are in safe and stable homes.”

Also that, “It is more important to focus on how a family functions than on its form”.

Was he was trying to say that marriage is irrelevant? 

If so, he is incorrect.

* * *

A 1998 government Inquiry by the Australian Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, entitled “To Have and to Hold”, concluded that:

“Marriage benefits the health and well-being of individuals, and, conversely, separation and divorce bring with them elevated risks for both former husbands and wives and their children.

The Committee concludes that marriage and relationship breakdown costs the Australian nation at least $3 billion each year. When all the indirect costs are included, the figure is possibly double. When the personal and emotional trauma involved is added to these figures, the cost to the nation is enormous.

“In comparison, the Committee notes that the Commonwealth Government spends just $3.5 million per annum on preventive marriage and relationship education programs, and $2.05 million on parenting skills training. This is a 1000-fold difference. The imbalance is manifest and the Committee believes it requires correction.”  (www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/laca/Inquiryinfam.htm)

* * *

Remember, the Family was invented by God who created us. Marriage was invented by God. Marriage is a Sacrament of God’s Church.

Through Catholic Marriage, as with all Catholic Sacraments, God offers grace.

Grace is a practical thing. The Sacramental grace conferred by Christian Marriage provides married couples with extra power, available by no other means, for dealing with life’s day-to-day problems.

Ask your neighbourhood policeman who regularly attends domestic fights. Do those shacked up unmarried behave more or less violently and irresponsibly than those who are married?

Last week, NSW Premier, Kristina Keneally, said that her personal religious views wouldn’t sway her support for a bill on same-sex adoption:

“My religious views do not play a part in the legislation that I, as leader of the Labor Party, bring before the government.”

“If I look at the gospel message, it is one of acceptance . . . Jesus sat with the sinners and the saints. He was not a man of judgment but rather a man of love.”

Well, she was wrong there. Catholics know that there will be a Day of Judgment and they know who the Judge will be.

Jesus himself said:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: but only he who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven . . . . 

“Many will say to me on that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not we prophesy in your name etc?’

“Then I shall tell them to their faces, ‘I never knew you: depart from me, you whose deeds are evil!’”

(Matthew’s gospel, chapter 7)

* * *

Anyway, next day, KK found herself trying to explain how she hadn’t meant to compare homosexuals to sinners.

This time she omitted the “sinners” bit altogether, saying instead, “Jesus loves all. He accepted all. For me, that is the strongest message that comes out of the gospel.”

With friends like her, the Catholic Church doesn’t need enemies.

* * *

Back-downs and wimp-outs by fake Catholics are now common, world-wide.

Six European countries now recognise same-sex “marriages”: Norway, Belgium, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden, and — since just the other day — Portugal.

The Portuguese bill was subject to presidential veto.

But did President Anibal Cavaco Silva, a “practising Catholic” veto it?  No, he ratified it.

Just a few days earlier, butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth, as he welcomed Pope Benedict on his Portugal visit.

Benedict spoke on that occasion about same-sex couplings, calling them “insidious and dangerous”.

Why not? He is the Pope. He proclaims Church teaching.

But what about those fortitude-less wonders, President Anibal and our Kristina?

On Judgement Day, will they try telling God they hadn’t really understood what the Church teaching was, and that it was all an innocent mistake?

God is not impressed by liars.

.