Following a recent Melbourne “children’s beauty pageant”, the risks of such contests have been debated.

Victoria’s Child Safety Commissioner, Bernie Geary, has issued a fence-sitting statement. He concedes that these affairs are based on “a perception of competitive beauty and personal appearance” – and that the entrants were wearing “heavy make-up and dresses of adult-like design”.

Despite that, Mr Geary says there was nothing “sinister, unsafe or degrading” about the event . . . .

* * *

But are not children who are “sexualised” when young at risk of developing eating disorders etc?

Are they not learning that the way to become the centre of attention is to make oneself sexually provocative?

A proposal to ban children under 16 from beauty pageants is a step in the right direction.

One group with some sensible ideas on this is “Pull the Pin from Beauty Pageants”.

Find them at www.pullthepin.com.au.

Journalist, Dylan Welch, (The Age, October 12, 2011) quoted an ASIO report suggesting that Australia harbours “a persistent but small sub-culture of racist and nationalist extremists”.

He went on to talk about Norwegian terrorist, Anders Breivik, being “a Christian who described himself as a ‘modern-day crusader’”.

In his manifesto, “2083 — A European Declaration of Independence”, Brievik did write:

“Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian . . . Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I’m not an excessively religious man.”

But Christianity (as taught by Christ himself) says that the first Commandment is to love God with all one’s heart and soul.

To be a Christian, one’s every political idea and act must be motivated by that relationship.

This key point was missed by Anders Breivik (and, perhaps, by Dylan Welch).

Iranian actress, Marzieh Vafamehr, has been sentenced to 90 lashes and a year in prison for acting in an Australia-produced film.

One of her “crimes” was to appear on screen without traditional head-covering.

Surely 90 lashes is too many – but does that mean she should go entirely unpunished?

Marzieh was using the media to undermine an aspect of her nation’s culture.

Letting her off entirely would, it might be argued, be turning a blind eye to the destruction of something precious.

We Anglo-Celts etc., who comprise the bulk of Australia’s population, don’t see female head-covering as something of critical importance . . . .

* * *

Let’s consider a different example.

Some months ago, a photographer, Bill Henson, displayed an exhibition of pictures of pubescent girls and boys naked and near naked.

He was condemned for using the notion of “art” as a cover for child porn.

I think he was never punished.

A few lashes — not 90 – might have been very appropriate to deter him and potential imitators from a repeat effort.

Is not the modesty of children and adolescents something to revere and vigorously protect?

* * *

Culture is what guides community members regarding what behaviour is acceptable.

A culture can be cruel or unjust and need change.

It can be right to challenge aspects of a culture — but it must be done with respect.

Those seeking change must constantly examine their own motives.

Ultimately our culture should be the practical means of  keeping ourselves focussed on God and his will.

Robert Jeffress, a supporter of would-be Republican candidate for the US Presidency, Rick Perry, has caused a stir.

He says that opposing candidate Mitt Romney — a Mormon– is “not a Christian”.

He labels Mormonism a “cult”.

Mr Jeffress is pastor of a Baptist 10,000-member “mega church”.

Question: are Baptist mega churches Christian?

Anyway, the Democrats are enjoying watching the Republicans undermining each others’ credibility.

And the secular media are bleating about more “separation of Church and State”.

And “keeping religion out of politics”.

* * *

Yes, there must be a degree of “separation of Church and State” – or we’ll end up with injustice.

Two examples:

(1) State-dominating-Church as in China: where the government interferes with the appointment of Catholic bishops.

(2) Church-dominating-State as in Egypt: where today and tomorrow people are shot to pieces or run over by tanks for being non-Muslims.

But “keeping religion out of politics” is something else.

Keeping religion out of politics is not possible.

Without true religion, how does one determine right from wrong?

Without true religion, those getting in your way merit no special respect, being simply animals/robots who, if inconvenient, can be thrust aside or disassembled.

* * *

Think about the practical questions of surrogate pregnancy, abortion, human cloning, euthanasia, same sex “marriage”, business fraud etc.

On issues like these, Mr Romney has been willing to flexibly adopt whatever stance seems politically expedient.

A Catholic cannot do that.

If he tries it, his bishop must discipline him — and, if necessary, excommunicate him.

If not, that bishop must, himself, be attended to by somebody acting for the Pope.

Jeff Kennett, head of Beyondblue, a charity devoted to fighting the epidemic of depressive illness in Australia, has made a tactical error.

He said something without prior approval from the media and the feminist/homosexual lobby.

He said that, “Clearly the best environment in which to bring a child into the world is a stable, loving environment in which a male and female are married to each other.”

A welcome bit of common sense.

* * *

Now, of course, he is being told to resign — blackmailed by past donors threatening to pull out unless he knuckles under.

His CEO has resigned without explanation.

Anyway, Mr Kennett has said he will neither apologise nor step down.

So far . . . .

* * *

There is a condition called “coprophagia”, which affects some unfortunate children. They eat their poo.

Few continue doing so into adult life. But coprophagia is said to be observed in small numbers of patients with schizophrenia, depression and autism.

It is normally treated using strategies aimed at reversing the underlying condition.

What is NOT done is tell them they’re doing the right thing — and to organise poo-eating Mardi Gras-type celebrations.

Some things are not just “diversity”, they are wrong, unhealthy and abnormal.

Mr Kennett didn’t say all that about homosexual practices, but his enemies may fear that one day he will.

Federal Member for Mildura, John Forrest, has told the media he will vote against homosexual “marriage” because his electorate is “very conservative” and “not ready for it”.

If the local paper’s poll (accessible only to people with the internet) manages to come up with a majority in favour of it, what will he say then?

He will have to say that he is going to vote against it because it is wrong and unnatural.

Which is what he should have said in the first place.

* * *

Very little clear thinking seems to go on about homosexuality.

It may help to compare it with alcohol abuse.

Both are traits that can cause powerful desires.

Both are bad for both individual health and for the health of the community.

Both can be resisted by means of will power plus support from friends, family or professional helpers.

Just as we have programs for rehabilitation of drunks, we might consider setting up rehab programs for those given to unhealthy sexual practices.

* * *

The two disorders are not exactly parallel, of course.

Homosexual practice is obviously worse from a moral point of view.

You can get drunk on your own.

To practice homosexuality, one must groom/seduce/recruit somebody to do it with.

This other person is harmed in a way that may well prove irreversible.