Manning should be allowed to enter NZ and speak. Southern and Molyneux should also have been allowed to enter NZ and speak. These things shouldnt be decided according to Left-wing sensitivities or Right-wing sensitivities. Free speech, as a principle, is non-partisan. Its important that we all make sure it is non-partisan in practice.
Thats all very good of you, but it doesnt follow that mispronunciation signifies disrespect. For consideration: - Pakeha âof a certain ageâ who poorly pronounce te reo MÄori place names might have been taught by other Pakeha. For all I know, they might all have been giving it their best shot.- Once formed, linguistic habits are hard to change.- Not everyone is equally good with languages, we dont all have a good ear for language - even vowels. Strange consonants etc can even be physically challenging.- And learning a language (even just pronunciation) is something a lot of people would find embarrassing, as you have to step out and be heard by the class. - I dont think Pakeha find it disrespectful when English is pronounced poorly by new arrivals. I dont think migrants are pressured to pay their respects in this way - functional English will do, and a lifelong accent (mispronunciation) is tolerable.- Young enthusiasts shouldnt expect to set the standard for everyone. Unrealistic. And a bit arrogant, even if not intentionally.
This is infuriating and pathetic, of course, but its also a very serious tragedy. Universities used to be places where inquisitiveness was thought to be a good thing. Even on matters of ideology. It used to be a place of discovery - God, atheism, whatever. Not any more, it seems.Now, its a place where you are ring-barked by the new feminist- and LGBTIQ-led Left Orthodoxy until you give your assent. Then, I suppose, its a place to feel good about having assented to the correct view of things. (Unless youre a young man who has just been told youre toxic.) To feel good until you start to feel people watching and listening, people who will denounce you to, say, the Department of Diversity. It will get creepier the longer you remain.You will emerge as a self-righteous but terrified ideological clone. Thats a tragedy.
Plenty of wealthy lefties around, and many of those that arent wealthy are still elitist. Dont make the mistake of believing the propaganda about being victims.I checked these speakers online - no sign of hatred.
The good news is that the feminist intelligentsia is obviously as tacky and crass as the men they despise. Were all in this mess together, and the sooner these denialists realise it, the better.Then theres the bad news: the Fems will assure us that it isnt tacky and crass because women are doing it. Verity, youre really laying the absurdity on with a trowel. Do you want feminism to appear sensible or not?
That means these speakers should be allowed to speak, because they dont incite hatred. Its actually undemocratic to deny citizens access to information they can use to make decisions about whats going on in their country.
Article is definitely fair comment, including the 5-year-old diagnosis. Pathetic behaviour from an alleged adult in a position of significant power and influence. The Left is far too closely wedded to petulance and histrionics. The PM should visibly discipline Hipkins and distance herself and the Govt from that kind of behaviour. So far, her behaviour is consistently dignified and adult.
I am utterly disinterested in another room full of men telling me how I should be feeling.And yet ....Yes, there is a place for men within Me Too. That place is as allies. That place is as listeners; as the audience.Its such a shame that a seemingly intelligent person like Duff completely misses the problem here.The problems between women and men involve women and men, will be solved by women and men, and should therefore be discussed now by women and men.
It seems that some journalists and a great number of people on social media could do with some larger thoughts. This is as interesting as daytime tv. Do get a life.
If men didnt treat women so poorly around this world .... Simplistic, one-size-fits-all statements like that really dont help. It is simply inaccurate when you put it that way because it implies that all men treat all women poorly and that no women treat men poorly.Ive never heard anyone say there are no things that need to improve - so, thats a non-starter and just more exaggeration. As for the great crime of being all defensive: being attacked relentlessly makes you defensive (as many women know).If you want to be taken seriously, say things that are 1 and sensible.
Well said. The word feminism seems to have died. I dont really mind because it has become so toxic and perverse, but its a serious shame for those real women who still face real oppression. All this crying Wolf by the feminists has burned up all the available sympathy and interest.
hard as she tries, there is a sector of society that will be watching and waiting for her to fail. If you mean hoping shell fail, I doubt that many people are in this category, as its just so indecent. But, I bet theres a very large number who believe that failure (either of job or parenting or both) is inevitable, and that Jacinda Ardern is being very irresponsible. I see it that way, anyhow. Perhaps she has allowed her guiding light status to go to her head: previously, she had been too sensible to allow this to happen.This article is nothing short of sycophantic. Alison, if you want to venerate Jacinda Ardern, light some incense sticks and do it on your own time. I dont need to witness something so private by reading an article about it. Its a bit icky.
Im not LGBT+, so my right to comment from outside may be limited. Still, this is in the mainstream press, so ......This may be a good initiative, but its not been an inclusive one, or a transparent one.Why sound so surprised? For a while now, the LGBT+ movement has been a juggernaut. Once upon a time, it may have been about justice, but its been about power for a while now. And extremely successful. If people can lose their jobs for disagreeing with you, you have power.People with power dont like sharing it by being inclusive and they dont like imperiling it by being transparent. The LBGT+ movement is a power-player, not a victim. And it acts like any other power-player - badly.
Israel Folau is one of the best rugby players in the world. It seems very likely that this is the only reason he has kept his job and livelihood, and that really concerns me. I expected disagreement with his moral opinion, because sympathy for LGBT+ is at a high level. And I expected our brave, edgy Christophobes to relish the opportunity to have another crack at the Christians. But, the hue and cry for Folau to lose his livelihood because his opinion is uncool means we have entered an era that is very dangerous.
frightening cases of overkill and heavy-handedness - a symptom of the totalitarian society we are becoming. I really dont know why the unpleasantness felt by people who hear something they dont like (not in the privacy of their home but out in public) has to be orchestrated into being a problem for everyone. It just seems very adolescent to me, maybe even puerile: it depends when we are supposed to grow out of the idea that My feelings matter more than anything else.
Its already hard enough for young people to work out who they are and where they stand. In this quest, they need as much solidity around them (not force, just solid ideas) as possible. For 99%, their obvious gender is a part of this solid environment. Its 1 and it works, and its harmful to take it away from them by lying to them about a fashionable but fictional gender spectrum.
I agree with commenters that we already have some corruption, but we are not inclined to tolerate it. The trouble with corruption in many other cultures is that its normal: life would not work without it. Its more than just tolerated.Its then only natural that people from those cultures will bring their habits with them. How could it be otherwise? This is why some people say its better to bring in people from comparable cultures with similar values. After all, not much effort is taken to induct newcomers into Kiwi values. I like the idea of multi-culturalism - the generous welcome and the diversity that results - but its really risky. Put it this way: the world is multi-cultural (diverse) and strife-ridden, so why think that compressing all that into one country, or one city in a country, will work smoothly? Its just not realistic. And, after a while, the word Kiwi just wont mean anything - which I think is very sad.
I dont agree that unborn child is emotive. Its just factual, isnt it? A fact that the pro-choice lobby are trying to avoid discussing.The proverbial My body, my decision sounds emotive to me.
I dont think its just the young who struggle in present-day NZ. Everyone but the seriously rich is struggling, I think, though no doubt some are struggling more than others.Until recently, NZ was part of an ascendant West, but is now part of the declining West. Theres just less gold in the coffer. This, along with climate change and some other unhappy developments, means the future is just not what it was.I think that how we react to this will be important. For example, if times are getting tougher, there is all the more reason for us to help each other out. The danger is that tough times often divide people. And we may have to learn to get by with less, and even be happy with those things that come free.
There are plenty of sad old men with hipster values - including being pro-choice. And there are plenty of entirely different people (including a lot of women) who are pro-life.Extremist feminists want to present this issue as part of the gender war they are constantly conjuring, but you dont have to fall for it.
Its very silly to say that abortion isnt a morality issue. Every decision by every human being is a morality issue. Saying abortion isnt a moral issue is just an attempt to avoid the risk and discomfort of guilt. Understandable (we all hate guilt), but hardly admirable or even grown-up. And the moral issue (and the attendant risk of guilt) will continue to exist regardless of the legislation - like the morality and guilt about, say, adultery, which of course is legal.Re-branding abortion as a womens health issue is similarly an attempt at concealment and disguise: its a way of avoiding all uncomfortable discussion about the human embryo. The new label is wildly inaccurate.The attempt to limit access to the public discussion, by heaping scorn on half the population, is also an attempt to bury the issue. This is all quite understandable: whenever I do something wrong, Id really prefer that it not be discussed or that it be discussed in pathological terms (why I did it) rather than moral terms. Guilt is a tremendous nuisance, but denialism and the muzzling of discussion are not the answer.
For some, apparently. A few weeks ago, during Round One of this bout, one journo article here said that diversity is rugbys primary value. Not skill, not endurance, not the ability to play as part of a team, not playing your heart out within the rules - diversity.
I agree with those who describe Andrew Little as compassionate, and also hard working. But, working hard at compassion just means you nurture and capitulate and hand out stuff. You cant run a country, or a household or anything else on compassion alone (no matter how hard you work at it). Compassion in its own just makes the Govt a soft touch. There are other virtues that compassion should share the stage with.As for Jacinda Ardern, I think shes extremely intelligent and good at problem-solving, and very good at persuading and bringing people along. Even so, its not at all clear to me how a PM who is a self-professed socialist will go about improving business confidence. I hope she does, though. I dont mind whos in power if they do a good job.
I sincerely hope that consideration for people who might need a seat will see younger, fitter people continue to give up their seats without compulsion. The current crop of youngsters is the most entitled in our history - not entirely their fault - so they are the least likely to do as you sincerely hope. True, an older generation with too much power can be stifling. That power is earned (at least, arguably) and short-lived. Were now trying a younger generation with too much power. This bus initiative is part of a mad batch of ideas: childrens rights in schools; a recent Dom. Post letter said kids should evaluate their teachers; a recent Stuff article seriously suggested asking a childs permission before changing its nappy; and, of course, 16-year olds should have the vote. The young havent earned power, so they wont respect it. Theyre too immature to wield it wisely. The current crop is already too narcissistic. This lionisation of the young is designed to overturn parental and other authority. Its part of the demolition of societal structures. Be careful.
Restructures are violent: they present an enormous risk of harm and are too often handled clumsily,lazily, even with indifference to their impact. We know the serious protections for employees (like protection against unfair dismissal) dont apply in a restructure. And these are the legitimate restructures. As far as Im aware, using arestructure to simply reduce the salary budget (not even to modernise, though the exercise will be dressed up with positive language) is old news - at least in Australia, where Im from. In fact,restructures create a smoke-screen behind which all sorts of things get done - eg to get rid of 1 or 2 people, because the employer cant be bothered going to the trouble of dealing with the real problem. Or when theyre not a problem at all, the employer just doesnt like them. Typically, when there is a restructure, the work continues and workers must work competitively against each other in the hope of securing one of the smaller number of jobs in the new structure, producing an atmosphere that is toxic and harmful. True, real restructures need better rules, to minimise harm. Phoney restructures are also a serious problem.
Well said. There are those who assume that all LGBT+ people, and all their supporters and advocates, are so flimsy and precious and vengeful that they cant bear to be disagreed with or disapproved of and, in this case, all want Folau to lose his job. I expect that, as with any group, members vary: some are flimsy and vengeful, some are sturdy and reasonable.
Yes, I am offended by those things and even more offended by people who mock me because of my faith. Yet, Im aware that the offended territory is occupied solely by the liberal Left. As you imply, its not okay to offend some, and it is more than okay to offend others. There is a presumptuous, unelected cultural government standing over us.
Not at all. The hue and cry for Folau to lose his livelihood is far more than the expression of opinion, its an active attempt to cause him and his family very tangible harm. Thats not just speech.
There are simply too many refugees, far more than the West can accommodate. The West is in economic decline, and is having increasing difficulty accommodating its own citizens. Yet, everyone still wants to come to the West because everywhere else is worse. No-ones rushing to get into China, or India, or Russia, or Iran or any country in Africa. Sure, our policies and procedures should be as ethical as we can make them, but were still being swamped. Many refugees and immigrants are from war-zones and other violent environments where your neighbours are your competitors for survival. Many others bring with them cultural attitudes and habits that are incompatible with equality, freedom and respect. Some even have contempt for the values of the country they seek to live in. Swedens Govt is already showing ads on TV telling Swedes that its no longer an issue of incoming Muslim immigrants assimilating with the Swedes, rather the Swedes will have to assimilate with immigrants. Critical mass has been reached there. Other European countries seem likely to follow. Hospitality is an extremely important value, but for it to be a sustainable value the household has to remain intact.
Strange comment. Scripture seems a pretty natural and obvious source for what Christianity is all about.You dont like punishment? Doing wrong should not have consequences? Thats very modern, and very ineffective. Jesus actually raised the bar higher than the Old Testament when he said Be perfect, as your Father in heaven perfect. And thats from the Sermon on the Mount, which the ill-informed think is all niceness. He raised the bar so high that all humanity gazes up at it from below: he put us all in the same boat, all guilty. Then, he offers to rescue the whole boat.
Richard Dawkins didnt have any difficulties with venue: he doesnt pull his punches about religion, but he mainly focuses on Christianity which is a softer target.I think we know now how heavily engineered the whole hate speech topic is. Disagreeing with the Left is hate speech. Actual hatred uttered by the Left is speaking truth to power. Theres not much honesty involved.
It troubles me that people can be punished outside the criminal law without the criminal laws checks and balances - proof beyond reasonable doubt and, usually, proof of an intention to cause the harm. Ignoring intent (or even knowledge of the victims sensibilities) and proving only the harm (and proving it to a low standard, on the balance of probabilities) may only need a convincing account by the victim, maybe corroborated by a counsellor who also bought their account. That's too easy. Maybe this was okay when the consequences were less serious, and the outcome was basically vindicating the victim so everyone can see the victim is a human being deserving of respect. But, this new system is about punishing, and punishing big-time. The criminal courts are sometimes lenient and hand out lower sentences - after all, some racists are worse than others - some hurt intentionally, some even hate, some hurt clumsily or stupidly. Now, one size fits all: this new system is as blunt as a bus, lacking both curiosity and mercy. Its dangerous. You dont solve problems by replacing them with worse ones. And thats before we get to the bias ............
No you wont. Whether you leave it alone or keep repressing it, it will survive. Youd have to take a Soviet or Mao approach to get rid of it.Whether or not God actually exists, atheism is just too dissatisfying for most people.
I am not a child killer. This depends on what was killed, doesnt it? It was alive, and now its dead. What was it? Not a cyst, not a tumour, not a virus or bacteria, not a puppy or a chimpanzee, but a human embryo, an embryonic human being. Until people with your point-of-view grapple more seriously with this issue - the issue of just what it is that is causing you all this inconvenience and has to be killed -there will be no peace on this terrible topic. It would be more honest if you were to say: Yes, its a human life, but my taking of that life is justified because ............. That would be a more realistic discussion. Denialism doesnt get us anywhere.
Please read my comment more carefully. I didnt say there was no brutality, I said the history preferred by many critics of the Church is incomplete and largely revisionist - and it is. For a start, only the negative history is referred to. Second, much history is actually incorrect, but is being corrected. The Spanish Inquisition is actually a good example: it is widely (and popularly) misunderstood to be an ecclesiastical institution that killed thousands. It was mainly a secular institution (wielded by the Crown) and the Church often intervened to ameliorate. Not many were killed at all. I know the Churchs hands arent clean, but nobodys are. Consider the atheist Communist slaughterhouses of the 20th century: ditching God didnt really do the trick at all, did it?
Of course, theres an ideological clash. And, although it might feel pleasant to call Christian belief a fantasy, you actually dont know this. The limitations you place on your ability to know things is a part of your ideology.
Im sure there are a lot of men who want to control women. However, there are also women who like to control men, and there are plenty of men around who have no interest in controlling women. This control issue of yours has nothing to do with the issue of abortion. Abortion is an extremely important moral issue. And its not victimless, thats why its a genuine community issue. Talk of control, and the popular re-branding of abortion as an issue of womens health, are just attempts to control and manipulate the topic.
one of the common criticisms of Agile is that “ a bit like a religion “ some of its incantations can be too prescriptiveWhy drag religion into it? Why use religion as a paradigm for over-prescription when we all know that political correctness is at least as prescriptive? Trivial bias in the wider scheme of things, but its still bias.
I talk tough, push my team hard. I physically restrain myself from saying sorry, for anything, even things that genuinely require the word. I try to drop my voice a little and stuff my emotions right down deep in my gut where apparently indigestion and searing headaches are made. ............. theres no way to manage anything that isnt kind of violent.So, what, is that a caricature of the male manager or your real belief about male managers? You must be extremely unobservant to believe this is actually 1. You would have to believe that all men are the same. We vary.Do you believe all women are the same, or do you vary?
I think speakers who know their words could inspire violence should go out of their way to disavow hatred and violence. As far as Im aware, Southern and Molyneux do this. In the case of Southern and Molyneux, the anticipated violence was actually going to be violence by the compassionate intelligentsia of the far Left! The far Left govern the discussion by governing the media: this allows them to define their violence as speaking truth to power and to define any statement they dislike as hate speech (even though its they who do the hating). I was going to say ironically, but this inconsistency is so normal now that it isnt ironic anymore. The far Left, to the extent that they are post-modern social constructionists, dont believe in logic or consistency (these are just constructs, to be dispensed with at will), so the charge of inconsistency doesnt concern them. What theyre doing, I believe, is desensitising us all to things like inconsistency: soon, well stop complaining about it and, soon after that, well stop noticing. Extremely dangerous.I hope the airing of this topic of free speech will have a positive effect.
Im not talking about Folaus employer, Im talking about the hue and cry, the lynch mob that is demanding that he lose his livelihood because he has the wrong opinion. The employer and sponsors will make a business decision.Mind you, I can see that the two are connected. The tantrum we have witnessed since Folau dared to speak his mind is an attempt to generate the disrepute that Folaus contract refers to. So, while for most its a tantrum, there are some reptilian brains behind it, coolly scheming.
I agree with you (Im speaking from a mainstream Christian perspective). A science class should stick to science - evidence and, say, plausible theories. Evidence of geology etc seems to make creationism implausible.
I understand why many people dont believe in God. Some of their reasons make sense. But, others dont - like their incomplete and largely revisionist view of Church history. Your post, for example.But, that wasnt the point I was making: I simply mean that non-believers seem to not understand what belief is like. Even those who used to be believers.
Good article, though I dont agree with the first paragraph under Conversation Starter. You and your headphones! If you dont want to engage with the planet and its human inhabitants, youre the one who should stay at home. Were killing any immediate sense of community when we refuse to see and hear those around us. Community is not just a political group or an abstract, its the actual humans at your elbow in the elevator.Whats with all the American vernacular?
Mark, if youre advocating for Bareman, you should say more about her. She may be great, but she needs a better promo. Im not at all excited by football being a nice, organic, wholesome product.
@Quimtitty: Theres nothing arbitrary about it. The difference is between expressing an opinion and lynching someone with words. Using speech to do harm to someone is not just speech, its a simple concept.
Oh dear, youll just have to do some more work. Reading the Old Testament literally like this will not prepare you for a conversation with Christians. We Christians are in a different era. We honour the Old Testament, and find much of it illuminating, relevant and helpful, but we look back at it through a Christ-lens. The issue of homosexuality is a core moral and behavioural issue. Tattoos are about the look being put together for the people of Israel, a people set apart.
Thats an extremely popular misrepresentation of the Galileo incident. The heliocentric nature of our system was known before Galileo got involved. It was known by science, which was fostered and supported by the Church. Dont believe everything said and written by atheist and anti-church advocates: they are not honest brokers, theyre selling.
Joel, surely you dont really believe that racists, bigots, and rednecks are the only people who flinch at humour at their expense. Have you not noticed how much discourse - serious and humorous - gets shut down by the other end of the spectrum? All the talk of phobias, for example?
I worry about the kids of a very old Dad because of the likelihood that theyll lose their Dad while theyre quite young, which is a big deal.That aside, I only see this kind of relationship as unusual, nothing worse.I believe the author when she says, The letters are overwhelmingly from women, and they are, without exception, intelligent, thoughtful and self-aware. Many of them have weighed the pros and cons and have decided whether their relationship is worth the risk. By contrast, just this week, we had an article rebuking older men who want to date young women, and implying that those young women were being taken in like fools. There is a rule, it seems, that women must not choose a much older man: and, if they do, they are not intelligent, thoughtful and self-aware. see: https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/love-sex/108528208/my-husband-is-70-im-35--and-ive-become-a-dear-abby-for-others-in-agegap-relationships Hopefully, it was an extreme feminist who had this view. It sounds arrogant to me.
The history of the Church includes corruption etc, but so does the history of every other human institution. The real barriers to reform are the Churchs age, its global nature, the depth of its members interest in it and the fact (alleged fact, I suppose) that its not free to do what it wants (or what a few liberal secular societies want) because it operates under Gods authority. The Church can only change its mind on issues if it thinks it has mistaken Gods intent.
Apart from your fragile, hair-trigger use of rant, you actually make the point very well. Chances are a multi-generational overstayer (every Pakeha, you mean?) has demonstrated either successful assimilation or successful takeover. Id say most new immigrants can be Kiwis, and I never said otherwise (look at my rant again). But, some cannot; some dont want to; some despise liberal culture, whether its Judeo-Christian or secular. Whatever theyll be, it wont be anything like what is currently understood to be Kiwis. I dont mean all of them, of course.
Lanthanide says you should be ready to accept others expressing their opinion in response to yours, but of course we know that you actually have to be ready to accept that a lot of people will demand that you be punished for your opinion - by loss of your job etc.
Sure, the energy and raw materials are pillaged from the mothers body. But thats all automated. Still, Im not talking about what it feels like, but about what it is. I know being pregnant is extremely dramatic. My concern for this writer is that exaggerating his wifes experience is one of the reasons he feels inferior (or whatever it is hes feeling).
There is an enormous gap between love and approval. The gap is filled by tolerance. Its the LGBT+ movement that has tried to redefine tolerance as agreement and approval. Tolerance is when you love someone despite the fact that you disagree of disapprove of their life. The churches have shown a lack of love for gays, I know, but forcing them to agree with the new order is not a good solution.
Why would an atheist care about that? Why do people matter so much? After all, atheists believe that humans are nothing more than the latest gorilla upgrade, the planets top predator, equally capable of good and bad. You may as well hate humans as love them, according to the evidence.
If we are the only species that is self-conscious,its no surprise that we consider ourselves exceptional. Especially as we are the planets top predator. The fact that this pride may be our downfall is another matter. The writer rebukes humans for being tribal, while accepting that tribalism was essential when it got underway. Theres no point rebuking us, though: if the writer is correct in saying there is no utopic final destination, then our survival doesnt really matter. After all, We really are not that important in the universe, he says: if this is 1, I guess its okay if we dont survive (and equally okay if we do). Our universal importance is a matter of opinion, however, not empirical observation. Atheists, who believe evolution is all there is to say about our pedigree, may be forced to agree with the writer but, as I believe in God as well as evolution, I will go on thinking that the human race is extremely valuable and that each human being is as well (as we are made in Gods image and likeness).
I agree about Unsworth, but Im not calling him a drama queen, Im saying that the way the media beats it up hell be expected to make a bigger fuss than he otherwise would. Its the media Im criticising.
One reason we get sex ed wrong is that we dont distinguish between sex itself (its epic evolutionary purpose) and physical intimacy. In the old-school, they went together and it was simpler to talk about sex as one whole topic.We now pretend that sex is not the act by which 2 human being procreate another one. This obvious fact is now concealed behind a wall of respect for those who cannot, or decide not to, participate in the human epic in this way. This is silly and even dishonest.We should get back to teaching about procreation and remind kids that this is what sex actually is.Then, as theres so much else going on involving all sorts of combinations of people, we should teach about the common rules of engagement for physical intimacy (consent etc). Weve allowed respect to muddy the waters.
Im a mainstream Christian, not a creationist. Ive never met a creationist. Although Ive met lots of atheists and they read the Book of Genesis in the same literal way creationists do. I dont think the Bible should be read this way, though I admire the humility that leads creationists to do so. To the creationists Id say approach the Bible with all your faculties, including your ingenuity (which can be guided by God and your faith in God). To the atheists, Id say the Bible is not a lab report, kindly engage both hemispheres: hardly any document is designed to be read literally, word for word.
Im saying every single human decision has a moral dimension - that there is always a right and wrong way to go, that morality is every suspended. The decision to terminate a pregnancy is not an exception.BTW, to say abortion is a morality issue is not to say abortion is wrong: that needs to be discussed. Some of us think its okay, some of us dont, so theres something to be figured out.What I think we shouldnt be doing is pretending that this decision is somehow separate from the rest of human behaviour (which always has a moral dimension). Personally, I think the reason pro-choice advocates now refer to health issue is that the moral argument for abortion is so shabby, and they know it. So, rather than deal with the moral argument, they use language that they think avoids the moral issue.Also, we all often find ourselves in a situation not of our choosing (eg injury, illness, loss of employment) and we continue to be moral subjects whose decisions have a moral dimension.
I agree. I particularly like take responsibility - so long as they only take responsibility for what they actually do and not for what feminism says theyve done.And, lets face it, someone has to take some responsibility: the feminists certainly wont, and they trying to convince the many excellent women in our country that they shouldnt either. Poison.
Im not sure whether it was the writers attention, but this article provides reasons to believe that gender is not a construct at all, but very real. The article demonstrates that the 2 genders have always been distinguished. Certainly, I reject the nihilism with which some people wish to replace gender.Im happy for roles to change, if its done democratically and with choice, but I believe sex/gender itself is binary.
I take your point about banter between friends, but some people are presumptuous about familiarity. I just dont see it as a serious accusation. Mind you, having just read the comment by @jantc2, I can see the seriousness. Im afraid I missed that aspect of the context.
I suppose you mean intellectually offensive?You make some fair points (and some unfair ones, I think) but anyway Im talking about present day articles which are consistently and stridently anti-Christian, and anti-Catholic in particular. Its the norm Im familar with, so I was pleasantly surprised to read something fairly neutral.And I do see Christians as being among the victims in the inverted oppression that is being established by the extreme Left. I believe were seeing simple (and understandable) retaliation dressed up as social progress.
Youre right. Science wont stop people from being curious beyond science. The yearning beyond science doesnt mean God exists, I know, but many people will resent atheists for telling them not to look.
How did you misunderstand my post so thoroughly? I dont crave authoritarianism, I just recognise authority when Im confronted by it. If I had what I craved, Id be a morally sovereign atheist, as far away from Gods intrusion as I can get. But, I believe God is really there, so thats what I have to work with.I support the Church because its Christs Church - my attachment to Christ makes me a member of it. As you might know, supporting an institution doesnt mean you support everything it does: different issue.As to kindness, I know the Church has been unkind, I said so, and I know this must change.Youre clearly extremely angry. I dont hold that against you in the least, but I suggest that your anger is preventing you from engaging with some comments reasonably.
Science doesnt deal with the nature of reality unless you assume (without proof) that the natural world/universe (that science can deal with) is all there is to reality.
Lets have a new control mechanism! Lets all get force-fed on secular identity politics: it worked in the Soviet Union, Maoist China and under Pol Pot, its working in North Korea - no lies and murder under atheist Communism - so it will work here too. And lets replace lies about God with exciting new truths about humanity: masculinity is toxic, children dont need a mother and father (especially not their own), disagreement is the same as hatred ........... And I suppose you think religious people are deluded.
Lennon also imagined - - no countries- no possessions.He was smart enough to know that the misbehaviour of religion is not the only problem in the world.
@Wing Free, Oglet and DJA113. I didnt say atheism is a way of life, I said Communism was and is atheistic. The point is that, if you ditch belief in God and set up a society based on a number of tenets including that disbelief, that society will still have oppression, injustice, strife ....... This is because humans and power are a dangerous mix. Any humans, even atheists.And it is manifestly 1 that atheist Communism is incomparably the most violent system that has ever existed. They even outperformed Nazi Germany in violence, and thats quite a feat.
Fair enough, it is. If it was an accusation, I would agree with you entirely, but I dont think every use of the word pedo is an accusation. Lots of strong banter involves words that have a strong meaning lurking behind them, and those words are used to spike or spice the banter, but that doesnt mean they are used seriously. Like bastard long ago, there was a time when it was often taken (and intended to be taken) literally. Sorry, pedo guy sounds pretty loose to me.I dont like the media using its influence to inflame situations, and I think that might be whats happening here.
@framu: Religion is man-made, 1. God isnt, though. Quite the contrary. I didnt mention the Bible, dont get ahead of yourself. The Bible hasnt changed very much - a bit, though. What has changed (increased) a lot is our understanding of the Bible, through Biblical scholarship. This is the main reason why Theology libraries are large - a lot of new learning, new critiquing etc.
Youre assuming that God is simply a part of the natural world that science can study. There is no reason to impose this limitation on our concept of reality. Anyway, even if we Christians are wrong about God, that doesnt stop us perceiving the natural world as atheists do, and being scientists.
Nessies undebunkable. You can disprove her all you like but shell endure. We much prefer our pretty stories to the dreary truth. Look at ghosts. Look at god.Joe, Im disappointed that you havent accepted the invitation to write a serious article promoting atheism and then enter the ensuing discussion. Instead, you prefer to be snide about. Disappointed, but also surprised: I thought there was more to you.Nessie and God are different situations, and its lazy (or worse) of you to conflate them. If Nessie exists, she exists in natural form in the natural world: she is amenable to empirical/scientific inquiry. God is altogether different - distinct from the natural world, supernatural - not amenable to empirical/scientific inquiry. This is why God survives scientific scrutiny. You think its because sheepish people like me are either bone-headed and obstinate or childishly needy, but its actually because science (for all its great merits) has nothing to say on the subject, one way or the other. Your derision needs to shape up or ship out.
I think Musk used pedo because Unsworth had told him to stick his submarine where it hurts. Especially if Unsworth is older than Musk. Sounds like male banter to me.I suppose that, in light of this kind of fuss, Unsworth will feel obliged to be highly offended by the remark. Whether hes really offended or not. It would be a pity if men started overreacting just because so many others do it to such good effect. I heard recently that, at some schools, boys are imitating girls in this way (not all girls, of course): unfortunately, being a drama queen seems to work.
One out of 10 Kiwi women will experience a miscarriage in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy while after 21 weeks, one in every 200 pregnancies ends in stillbirth. Thats a lot of sorrow to alleviate.True. As in Romanos case, the sorrow is felt by the father as well as the mother. So, One out of 10 Kiwi women will experience a miscarriage is an incomplete statement. Fathers suffer, men suffer, no-one has the monopoly on this, life is hazardous.
Fear mongering.Anyway, US Presidents are always loading the Supreme Court with their judges: Trump is no different. I dont mean its okay, the whole process of appointment is wrong, because its so easy to abuse in this way. This writer is only annoyed because the politics are not pleasing to her: next time a Democrat President appoints a leftie judge, she wont bat an eye.
Sure, lets not blame the gay basher. Lets play around with responsibility like pieces on a board. The gay basher is responsible for their actions. There are some exceptions, like inciting violence, and Im sure the LGBT+ juggernaut would have got Folau into court over this if they could, but it is clear he was not inciting anything.
Even if science explains how they occur - the mechanics and chemistry - it wont explain why they are good, why we should apply them or go for them. Science doesnt help with should. You need an authority for that.
Apart from creationism, the debate between science and religion is a con - it doesnt exist outside the agenda of those who want the two to be opposed. The history of Christianity is varied and vexed, but its full of science and the promotion and support of science. The view that it isnt (lets wheel out Galileo to prove it!) is just a Christophobic myth - that some peddle dishonestly and many swallow whole and uncritically.The good news is that science never stopped. Beginning with the Ancients, it was picked up by Rome and then Christianity. When Christianity split between East and West, the East kept it going (this is often overlooked by people who think Christianity is merely Western). When Islam conquered the East, it kept it going. As contact between Western Christianity and the East (Christian and Islamic) increased, Western Christianity also picked it up. Anyway, there is no reason why Christianity would suppress science. Christianity loves the world: it has to, because we believe God made it and loves it.
Its a fair question, but I think the situations are quite different. Those picketers werent invited to the funeral and asked what they think will happen to the deceased gay soldier. They have intruded at a time when saying such a thing in a deliberately focused way is designed to inflict maximum hurt. Whether or not what they say is 1, saying it that way is not something I can justify. I dont think anyone says there should be absolutely no limit on the freedom to speak. For example, telling lies might be called free speech but is not justified. Its just that the modern Left is imposing unreasonable and arbitrary limitations.
One believes in the supremacy of verifiable evidence as the basis of useful knowledge. Only useful knowledge of what exists and what happens in the natural world. This doesnt cover all of reality - not necessarily, anyway.The other believes that our beliefs need no rational explanation, no evidence, no logic Not 1, we (Christians) rely on logic as much as anyone else: theres no getting away from it. We even rely on evidence re supernature (experience, anecdote), just not the kind of evidence that is needed to prove facts in the natural world.
Its a great shame that you were taught in that fashion. The fact that many Christians have taught Christianity badly doesnt mean Christianity itself is 0, it means that the Christians (including me) are not the bees knees.In defence of this awful teaching, Id say it is largely motivated by panic - panic for the person being taught, that if they dont believe theyre in big trouble. A well-motivated attempt to save someone can accidentally do harm.
National wants Chelsea Manning barred from New Zealand
Manning should be allowed to enter NZ and speak. Southern and Molyneux should also have been allowed to enter NZ and speak. These things shouldnt be decided according to Left-wing sensitivities or Right-wing sensitivities. Free speech, as a principle, is non-partisan. Its important that we all make sure it is non-partisan in practice.
Getting MÄori place names right is all about respect
Thats all very good of you, but it doesnt follow that mispronunciation signifies disrespect. For consideration: - Pakeha âof a certain ageâ who poorly pronounce te reo MÄori place names might have been taught by other Pakeha. For all I know, they might all have been giving it their best shot.- Once formed, linguistic habits are hard to change.- Not everyone is equally good with languages, we dont all have a good ear for language - even vowels. Strange consonants etc can even be physically challenging.- And learning a language (even just pronunciation) is something a lot of people would find embarrassing, as you have to step out and be heard by the class. - I dont think Pakeha find it disrespectful when English is pronounced poorly by new arrivals. I dont think migrants are pressured to pay their respects in this way - functional English will do, and a lifelong accent (mispronunciation) is tolerable.- Young enthusiasts shouldnt expect to set the standard for everyone. Unrealistic. And a bit arrogant, even if not intentionally.
Massey University's suppression of free speech can't go uncontested
This is infuriating and pathetic, of course, but its also a very serious tragedy. Universities used to be places where inquisitiveness was thought to be a good thing. Even on matters of ideology. It used to be a place of discovery - God, atheism, whatever. Not any more, it seems.Now, its a place where you are ring-barked by the new feminist- and LGBTIQ-led Left Orthodoxy until you give your assent. Then, I suppose, its a place to feel good about having assented to the correct view of things. (Unless youre a young man who has just been told youre toxic.) To feel good until you start to feel people watching and listening, people who will denounce you to, say, the Department of Diversity. It will get creepier the longer you remain.You will emerge as a self-righteous but terrified ideological clone. Thats a tragedy.
Free speech group raises $50k to challenge Auckland Council over far-Right speaker ban
Plenty of wealthy lefties around, and many of those that arent wealthy are still elitist. Dont make the mistake of believing the propaganda about being victims.I checked these speakers online - no sign of hatred.
Verity Johnson: Why going to a male strip club is a feminist experience
The good news is that the feminist intelligentsia is obviously as tacky and crass as the men they despise. Were all in this mess together, and the sooner these denialists realise it, the better.Then theres the bad news: the Fems will assure us that it isnt tacky and crass because women are doing it. Verity, youre really laying the absurdity on with a trowel. Do you want feminism to appear sensible or not?
Free speech group raises $50k to challenge Auckland Council over far-Right speaker ban
That means these speakers should be allowed to speak, because they dont incite hatred. Its actually undemocratic to deny citizens access to information they can use to make decisions about whats going on in their country.
When the Minister of Education sets a low bar for rudeness
Article is definitely fair comment, including the 5-year-old diagnosis. Pathetic behaviour from an alleged adult in a position of significant power and influence. The Left is far too closely wedded to petulance and histrionics. The PM should visibly discipline Hipkins and distance herself and the Govt from that kind of behaviour. So far, her behaviour is consistently dignified and adult.
Michelle Duff: We don't need men telling us how to #MeToo
I am utterly disinterested in another room full of men telling me how I should be feeling.And yet ....Yes, there is a place for men within Me Too. That place is as allies. That place is as listeners; as the audience.Its such a shame that a seemingly intelligent person like Duff completely misses the problem here.The problems between women and men involve women and men, will be solved by women and men, and should therefore be discussed now by women and men.
Is the Ballantynes Christmas cover really what Kiwi families aspire to?
It seems that some journalists and a great number of people on social media could do with some larger thoughts. This is as interesting as daytime tv. Do get a life.
Michelle Duff: We don't need men telling us how to #MeToo
If men didnt treat women so poorly around this world .... Simplistic, one-size-fits-all statements like that really dont help. It is simply inaccurate when you put it that way because it implies that all men treat all women poorly and that no women treat men poorly.Ive never heard anyone say there are no things that need to improve - so, thats a non-starter and just more exaggeration. As for the great crime of being all defensive: being attacked relentlessly makes you defensive (as many women know).If you want to be taken seriously, say things that are 1 and sensible.
Verity Johnson: Why going to a male strip club is a feminist experience
Well said. The word feminism seems to have died. I dont really mind because it has become so toxic and perverse, but its a serious shame for those real women who still face real oppression. All this crying Wolf by the feminists has burned up all the available sympathy and interest.
Alison Mau: Nothing makes the hackles rise like someone having a go at your family
hard as she tries, there is a sector of society that will be watching and waiting for her to fail. If you mean hoping shell fail, I doubt that many people are in this category, as its just so indecent. But, I bet theres a very large number who believe that failure (either of job or parenting or both) is inevitable, and that Jacinda Ardern is being very irresponsible. I see it that way, anyhow. Perhaps she has allowed her guiding light status to go to her head: previously, she had been too sensible to allow this to happen.This article is nothing short of sycophantic. Alison, if you want to venerate Jacinda Ardern, light some incense sticks and do it on your own time. I dont need to witness something so private by reading an article about it. Its a bit icky.
Alison Mau: It's right questions are asked of LGBTI Awards
Im not LGBT+, so my right to comment from outside may be limited. Still, this is in the mainstream press, so ......This may be a good initiative, but its not been an inclusive one, or a transparent one.Why sound so surprised? For a while now, the LGBT+ movement has been a juggernaut. Once upon a time, it may have been about justice, but its been about power for a while now. And extremely successful. If people can lose their jobs for disagreeing with you, you have power.People with power dont like sharing it by being inclusive and they dont like imperiling it by being transparent. The LBGT+ movement is a power-player, not a victim. And it acts like any other power-player - badly.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Israel Folau is one of the best rugby players in the world. It seems very likely that this is the only reason he has kept his job and livelihood, and that really concerns me. I expected disagreement with his moral opinion, because sympathy for LGBT+ is at a high level. And I expected our brave, edgy Christophobes to relish the opportunity to have another crack at the Christians. But, the hue and cry for Folau to lose his livelihood because his opinion is uncool means we have entered an era that is very dangerous.
Too often so-called hate speech is simply distasteful or offensive
frightening cases of overkill and heavy-handedness - a symptom of the totalitarian society we are becoming. I really dont know why the unpleasantness felt by people who hear something they dont like (not in the privacy of their home but out in public) has to be orchestrated into being a problem for everyone. It just seems very adolescent to me, maybe even puerile: it depends when we are supposed to grow out of the idea that My feelings matter more than anything else.
It's time we let boys wear dresses: 'Gender doesn't matter anymore - it's 2018!'
Its already hard enough for young people to work out who they are and where they stand. In this quest, they need as much solidity around them (not force, just solid ideas) as possible. For 99%, their obvious gender is a part of this solid environment. Its 1 and it works, and its harmful to take it away from them by lying to them about a fashionable but fictional gender spectrum.
New Zealand is not vigilant enough about creeping corruption
I agree with commenters that we already have some corruption, but we are not inclined to tolerate it. The trouble with corruption in many other cultures is that its normal: life would not work without it. Its more than just tolerated.Its then only natural that people from those cultures will bring their habits with them. How could it be otherwise? This is why some people say its better to bring in people from comparable cultures with similar values. After all, not much effort is taken to induct newcomers into Kiwi values. I like the idea of multi-culturalism - the generous welcome and the diversity that results - but its really risky. Put it this way: the world is multi-cultural (diverse) and strife-ridden, so why think that compressing all that into one country, or one city in a country, will work smoothly? Its just not realistic. And, after a while, the word Kiwi just wont mean anything - which I think is very sad.
Lynda Hallinan: Men can talk abortion with the woman they impregnated; otherwise its none of their business
I dont agree that unborn child is emotive. Its just factual, isnt it? A fact that the pro-choice lobby are trying to avoid discussing.The proverbial My body, my decision sounds emotive to me.
New Zealand is great - but not for young people
I dont think its just the young who struggle in present-day NZ. Everyone but the seriously rich is struggling, I think, though no doubt some are struggling more than others.Until recently, NZ was part of an ascendant West, but is now part of the declining West. Theres just less gold in the coffer. This, along with climate change and some other unhappy developments, means the future is just not what it was.I think that how we react to this will be important. For example, if times are getting tougher, there is all the more reason for us to help each other out. The danger is that tough times often divide people. And we may have to learn to get by with less, and even be happy with those things that come free.
Lynda Hallinan: Men can talk abortion with the woman they impregnated; otherwise its none of their business
There are plenty of sad old men with hipster values - including being pro-choice. And there are plenty of entirely different people (including a lot of women) who are pro-life.Extremist feminists want to present this issue as part of the gender war they are constantly conjuring, but you dont have to fall for it.
Lynda Hallinan: Men can talk abortion with the woman they impregnated; otherwise its none of their business
Its very silly to say that abortion isnt a morality issue. Every decision by every human being is a morality issue. Saying abortion isnt a moral issue is just an attempt to avoid the risk and discomfort of guilt. Understandable (we all hate guilt), but hardly admirable or even grown-up. And the moral issue (and the attendant risk of guilt) will continue to exist regardless of the legislation - like the morality and guilt about, say, adultery, which of course is legal.Re-branding abortion as a womens health issue is similarly an attempt at concealment and disguise: its a way of avoiding all uncomfortable discussion about the human embryo. The new label is wildly inaccurate.The attempt to limit access to the public discussion, by heaping scorn on half the population, is also an attempt to bury the issue. This is all quite understandable: whenever I do something wrong, Id really prefer that it not be discussed or that it be discussed in pathological terms (why I did it) rather than moral terms. Guilt is a tremendous nuisance, but denialism and the muzzling of discussion are not the answer.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
For some, apparently. A few weeks ago, during Round One of this bout, one journo article here said that diversity is rugbys primary value. Not skill, not endurance, not the ability to play as part of a team, not playing your heart out within the rules - diversity.
Garner: All eyes on PM Jacinda Ardern, but Andrew Little deserves attention
I agree with those who describe Andrew Little as compassionate, and also hard working. But, working hard at compassion just means you nurture and capitulate and hand out stuff. You cant run a country, or a household or anything else on compassion alone (no matter how hard you work at it). Compassion in its own just makes the Govt a soft touch. There are other virtues that compassion should share the stage with.As for Jacinda Ardern, I think shes extremely intelligent and good at problem-solving, and very good at persuading and bringing people along. Even so, its not at all clear to me how a PM who is a self-professed socialist will go about improving business confidence. I hope she does, though. I dont mind whos in power if they do a good job.
Dave Armstrong: Lets stand up for decency on the buses
I sincerely hope that consideration for people who might need a seat will see younger, fitter people continue to give up their seats without compulsion. The current crop of youngsters is the most entitled in our history - not entirely their fault - so they are the least likely to do as you sincerely hope. True, an older generation with too much power can be stifling. That power is earned (at least, arguably) and short-lived. Were now trying a younger generation with too much power. This bus initiative is part of a mad batch of ideas: childrens rights in schools; a recent Dom. Post letter said kids should evaluate their teachers; a recent Stuff article seriously suggested asking a childs permission before changing its nappy; and, of course, 16-year olds should have the vote. The young havent earned power, so they wont respect it. Theyre too immature to wield it wisely. The current crop is already too narcissistic. This lionisation of the young is designed to overturn parental and other authority. Its part of the demolition of societal structures. Be careful.
French restructuring shows potentially deadly toll of poor management practices
Restructures are violent: they present an enormous risk of harm and are too often handled clumsily,lazily, even with indifference to their impact. We know the serious protections for employees (like protection against unfair dismissal) dont apply in a restructure. And these are the legitimate restructures. As far as Im aware, using arestructure to simply reduce the salary budget (not even to modernise, though the exercise will be dressed up with positive language) is old news - at least in Australia, where Im from. In fact,restructures create a smoke-screen behind which all sorts of things get done - eg to get rid of 1 or 2 people, because the employer cant be bothered going to the trouble of dealing with the real problem. Or when theyre not a problem at all, the employer just doesnt like them. Typically, when there is a restructure, the work continues and workers must work competitively against each other in the hope of securing one of the smaller number of jobs in the new structure, producing an atmosphere that is toxic and harmful. True, real restructures need better rules, to minimise harm. Phoney restructures are also a serious problem.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Well said. There are those who assume that all LGBT+ people, and all their supporters and advocates, are so flimsy and precious and vengeful that they cant bear to be disagreed with or disapproved of and, in this case, all want Folau to lose his job. I expect that, as with any group, members vary: some are flimsy and vengeful, some are sturdy and reasonable.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Yes, I am offended by those things and even more offended by people who mock me because of my faith. Yet, Im aware that the offended territory is occupied solely by the liberal Left. As you imply, its not okay to offend some, and it is more than okay to offend others. There is a presumptuous, unelected cultural government standing over us.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Not at all. The hue and cry for Folau to lose his livelihood is far more than the expression of opinion, its an active attempt to cause him and his family very tangible harm. Thats not just speech.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Because there are a lot of people around who would much prefer to blame the evangelical Christian, no matter what. For many, its that simple.
Danielle McLaughlin: Trump officials show little humanity at the US-Mexico border
There are simply too many refugees, far more than the West can accommodate. The West is in economic decline, and is having increasing difficulty accommodating its own citizens. Yet, everyone still wants to come to the West because everywhere else is worse. No-ones rushing to get into China, or India, or Russia, or Iran or any country in Africa. Sure, our policies and procedures should be as ethical as we can make them, but were still being swamped. Many refugees and immigrants are from war-zones and other violent environments where your neighbours are your competitors for survival. Many others bring with them cultural attitudes and habits that are incompatible with equality, freedom and respect. Some even have contempt for the values of the country they seek to live in. Swedens Govt is already showing ads on TV telling Swedes that its no longer an issue of incoming Muslim immigrants assimilating with the Swedes, rather the Swedes will have to assimilate with immigrants. Critical mass has been reached there. Other European countries seem likely to follow. Hospitality is an extremely important value, but for it to be a sustainable value the household has to remain intact.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Strange comment. Scripture seems a pretty natural and obvious source for what Christianity is all about.You dont like punishment? Doing wrong should not have consequences? Thats very modern, and very ineffective. Jesus actually raised the bar higher than the Old Testament when he said Be perfect, as your Father in heaven perfect. And thats from the Sermon on the Mount, which the ill-informed think is all niceness. He raised the bar so high that all humanity gazes up at it from below: he put us all in the same boat, all guilty. Then, he offers to rescue the whole boat.
Too often so-called hate speech is simply distasteful or offensive
Richard Dawkins didnt have any difficulties with venue: he doesnt pull his punches about religion, but he mainly focuses on Christianity which is a softer target.I think we know now how heavily engineered the whole hate speech topic is. Disagreeing with the Left is hate speech. Actual hatred uttered by the Left is speaking truth to power. Theres not much honesty involved.
Roseanne's lessons for Kiwi employers
It troubles me that people can be punished outside the criminal law without the criminal laws checks and balances - proof beyond reasonable doubt and, usually, proof of an intention to cause the harm. Ignoring intent (or even knowledge of the victims sensibilities) and proving only the harm (and proving it to a low standard, on the balance of probabilities) may only need a convincing account by the victim, maybe corroborated by a counsellor who also bought their account. That's too easy. Maybe this was okay when the consequences were less serious, and the outcome was basically vindicating the victim so everyone can see the victim is a human being deserving of respect. But, this new system is about punishing, and punishing big-time. The criminal courts are sometimes lenient and hand out lower sentences - after all, some racists are worse than others - some hurt intentionally, some even hate, some hurt clumsily or stupidly. Now, one size fits all: this new system is as blunt as a bus, lacking both curiosity and mercy. Its dangerous. You dont solve problems by replacing them with worse ones. And thats before we get to the bias ............
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
No you wont. Whether you leave it alone or keep repressing it, it will survive. Youd have to take a Soviet or Mao approach to get rid of it.Whether or not God actually exists, atheism is just too dissatisfying for most people.
Abortion: I've never regretted my decision
I am not a child killer. This depends on what was killed, doesnt it? It was alive, and now its dead. What was it? Not a cyst, not a tumour, not a virus or bacteria, not a puppy or a chimpanzee, but a human embryo, an embryonic human being. Until people with your point-of-view grapple more seriously with this issue - the issue of just what it is that is causing you all this inconvenience and has to be killed -there will be no peace on this terrible topic. It would be more honest if you were to say: Yes, its a human life, but my taking of that life is justified because ............. That would be a more realistic discussion. Denialism doesnt get us anywhere.
Free speech group raises $50k to challenge Auckland Council over far-Right speaker ban
I hadnt heard of Southern and Molyneux before the blockade, so I checked them online. No sign of hatred.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
Please read my comment more carefully. I didnt say there was no brutality, I said the history preferred by many critics of the Church is incomplete and largely revisionist - and it is. For a start, only the negative history is referred to. Second, much history is actually incorrect, but is being corrected. The Spanish Inquisition is actually a good example: it is widely (and popularly) misunderstood to be an ecclesiastical institution that killed thousands. It was mainly a secular institution (wielded by the Crown) and the Church often intervened to ameliorate. Not many were killed at all. I know the Churchs hands arent clean, but nobodys are. Consider the atheist Communist slaughterhouses of the 20th century: ditching God didnt really do the trick at all, did it?
No room for nuance in creation debate
I suspect that most religious schools dont teach creationism. Creationism is on the Christian fringe.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
That would be 1 for some, but Folau seems to be a far more straightforward character than that.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Of course, theres an ideological clash. And, although it might feel pleasant to call Christian belief a fantasy, you actually dont know this. The limitations you place on your ability to know things is a part of your ideology.
Lynda Hallinan: Men can talk abortion with the woman they impregnated; otherwise its none of their business
Im sure there are a lot of men who want to control women. However, there are also women who like to control men, and there are plenty of men around who have no interest in controlling women. This control issue of yours has nothing to do with the issue of abortion. Abortion is an extremely important moral issue. And its not victimless, thats why its a genuine community issue. Talk of control, and the popular re-branding of abortion as an issue of womens health, are just attempts to control and manipulate the topic.
Spark gets heavy about Agile
one of the common criticisms of Agile is that “ a bit like a religion “ some of its incantations can be too prescriptiveWhy drag religion into it? Why use religion as a paradigm for over-prescription when we all know that political correctness is at least as prescriptive? Trivial bias in the wider scheme of things, but its still bias.
I'm hoping for a Just Do That Then future
I talk tough, push my team hard. I physically restrain myself from saying sorry, for anything, even things that genuinely require the word. I try to drop my voice a little and stuff my emotions right down deep in my gut where apparently indigestion and searing headaches are made. ............. theres no way to manage anything that isnt kind of violent.So, what, is that a caricature of the male manager or your real belief about male managers? You must be extremely unobservant to believe this is actually 1. You would have to believe that all men are the same. We vary.Do you believe all women are the same, or do you vary?
Drawing the line between free speech and hate speech
I think speakers who know their words could inspire violence should go out of their way to disavow hatred and violence. As far as Im aware, Southern and Molyneux do this. In the case of Southern and Molyneux, the anticipated violence was actually going to be violence by the compassionate intelligentsia of the far Left! The far Left govern the discussion by governing the media: this allows them to define their violence as speaking truth to power and to define any statement they dislike as hate speech (even though its they who do the hating). I was going to say ironically, but this inconsistency is so normal now that it isnt ironic anymore. The far Left, to the extent that they are post-modern social constructionists, dont believe in logic or consistency (these are just constructs, to be dispensed with at will), so the charge of inconsistency doesnt concern them. What theyre doing, I believe, is desensitising us all to things like inconsistency: soon, well stop complaining about it and, soon after that, well stop noticing. Extremely dangerous.I hope the airing of this topic of free speech will have a positive effect.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Im not talking about Folaus employer, Im talking about the hue and cry, the lynch mob that is demanding that he lose his livelihood because he has the wrong opinion. The employer and sponsors will make a business decision.Mind you, I can see that the two are connected. The tantrum we have witnessed since Folau dared to speak his mind is an attempt to generate the disrepute that Folaus contract refers to. So, while for most its a tantrum, there are some reptilian brains behind it, coolly scheming.
No room for nuance in creation debate
I agree with you (Im speaking from a mainstream Christian perspective). A science class should stick to science - evidence and, say, plausible theories. Evidence of geology etc seems to make creationism implausible.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
I understand why many people dont believe in God. Some of their reasons make sense. But, others dont - like their incomplete and largely revisionist view of Church history. Your post, for example.But, that wasnt the point I was making: I simply mean that non-believers seem to not understand what belief is like. Even those who used to be believers.
What pushes my buttons: A guide to elevator etiquette
Good article, though I dont agree with the first paragraph under Conversation Starter. You and your headphones! If you dont want to engage with the planet and its human inhabitants, youre the one who should stay at home. Were killing any immediate sense of community when we refuse to see and hear those around us. Community is not just a political group or an abstract, its the actual humans at your elbow in the elevator.Whats with all the American vernacular?
Mark Reason: NZ Football needs a woman not a martian
Mark, if youre advocating for Bareman, you should say more about her. She may be great, but she needs a better promo. Im not at all excited by football being a nice, organic, wholesome product.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
@Quimtitty: Theres nothing arbitrary about it. The difference is between expressing an opinion and lynching someone with words. Using speech to do harm to someone is not just speech, its a simple concept.
Church suffering from same-sex motion sickness
Oh dear, youll just have to do some more work. Reading the Old Testament literally like this will not prepare you for a conversation with Christians. We Christians are in a different era. We honour the Old Testament, and find much of it illuminating, relevant and helpful, but we look back at it through a Christ-lens. The issue of homosexuality is a core moral and behavioural issue. Tattoos are about the look being put together for the people of Israel, a people set apart.
Church suffering from same-sex motion sickness
Thats an extremely popular misrepresentation of the Galileo incident. The heliocentric nature of our system was known before Galileo got involved. It was known by science, which was fostered and supported by the Church. Dont believe everything said and written by atheist and anti-church advocates: they are not honest brokers, theyre selling.
Time for some ribbing - but no meat
Joel, surely you dont really believe that racists, bigots, and rednecks are the only people who flinch at humour at their expense. Have you not noticed how much discourse - serious and humorous - gets shut down by the other end of the spectrum? All the talk of phobias, for example?
My husband is 70, Im 35 - and Ive become a Dear Abby for others in age-gap relationships
I worry about the kids of a very old Dad because of the likelihood that theyll lose their Dad while theyre quite young, which is a big deal.That aside, I only see this kind of relationship as unusual, nothing worse.I believe the author when she says, The letters are overwhelmingly from women, and they are, without exception, intelligent, thoughtful and self-aware. Many of them have weighed the pros and cons and have decided whether their relationship is worth the risk. By contrast, just this week, we had an article rebuking older men who want to date young women, and implying that those young women were being taken in like fools. There is a rule, it seems, that women must not choose a much older man: and, if they do, they are not intelligent, thoughtful and self-aware. see: https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/love-sex/108528208/my-husband-is-70-im-35--and-ive-become-a-dear-abby-for-others-in-agegap-relationships Hopefully, it was an extreme feminist who had this view. It sounds arrogant to me.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
The history of the Church includes corruption etc, but so does the history of every other human institution. The real barriers to reform are the Churchs age, its global nature, the depth of its members interest in it and the fact (alleged fact, I suppose) that its not free to do what it wants (or what a few liberal secular societies want) because it operates under Gods authority. The Church can only change its mind on issues if it thinks it has mistaken Gods intent.
New Zealand is not vigilant enough about creeping corruption
Apart from your fragile, hair-trigger use of rant, you actually make the point very well. Chances are a multi-generational overstayer (every Pakeha, you mean?) has demonstrated either successful assimilation or successful takeover. Id say most new immigrants can be Kiwis, and I never said otherwise (look at my rant again). But, some cannot; some dont want to; some despise liberal culture, whether its Judeo-Christian or secular. Whatever theyll be, it wont be anything like what is currently understood to be Kiwis. I dont mean all of them, of course.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Lanthanide says you should be ready to accept others expressing their opinion in response to yours, but of course we know that you actually have to be ready to accept that a lot of people will demand that you be punished for your opinion - by loss of your job etc.
My wife is pregnant and I don't know how to feel
Sure, the energy and raw materials are pillaged from the mothers body. But thats all automated. Still, Im not talking about what it feels like, but about what it is. I know being pregnant is extremely dramatic. My concern for this writer is that exaggerating his wifes experience is one of the reasons he feels inferior (or whatever it is hes feeling).
Church suffering from same-sex motion sickness
There is an enormous gap between love and approval. The gap is filled by tolerance. Its the LGBT+ movement that has tried to redefine tolerance as agreement and approval. Tolerance is when you love someone despite the fact that you disagree of disapprove of their life. The churches have shown a lack of love for gays, I know, but forcing them to agree with the new order is not a good solution.
Danielle McLaughlin: Trump officials show little humanity at the US-Mexico border
Part of second para of my post.
Danielle McLaughlin: Americans healing the partisan divide from within
Best idea in a long time. I think we should try it here, and wrack our brains for ways to overcome inevitable obstacles.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Why would an atheist care about that? Why do people matter so much? After all, atheists believe that humans are nothing more than the latest gorilla upgrade, the planets top predator, equally capable of good and bad. You may as well hate humans as love them, according to the evidence.
Our evolutionary tribalism imperils our species' survival
If we are the only species that is self-conscious,its no surprise that we consider ourselves exceptional. Especially as we are the planets top predator. The fact that this pride may be our downfall is another matter. The writer rebukes humans for being tribal, while accepting that tribalism was essential when it got underway. Theres no point rebuking us, though: if the writer is correct in saying there is no utopic final destination, then our survival doesnt really matter. After all, We really are not that important in the universe, he says: if this is 1, I guess its okay if we dont survive (and equally okay if we do). Our universal importance is a matter of opinion, however, not empirical observation. Atheists, who believe evolution is all there is to say about our pedigree, may be forced to agree with the writer but, as I believe in God as well as evolution, I will go on thinking that the human race is extremely valuable and that each human being is as well (as we are made in Gods image and likeness).
A shockingly below-the-belt counterpunch
I agree about Unsworth, but Im not calling him a drama queen, Im saying that the way the media beats it up hell be expected to make a bigger fuss than he otherwise would. Its the media Im criticising.
Why do we keep getting sexuality education in schools so wrong?
One reason we get sex ed wrong is that we dont distinguish between sex itself (its epic evolutionary purpose) and physical intimacy. In the old-school, they went together and it was simpler to talk about sex as one whole topic.We now pretend that sex is not the act by which 2 human being procreate another one. This obvious fact is now concealed behind a wall of respect for those who cannot, or decide not to, participate in the human epic in this way. This is silly and even dishonest.We should get back to teaching about procreation and remind kids that this is what sex actually is.Then, as theres so much else going on involving all sorts of combinations of people, we should teach about the common rules of engagement for physical intimacy (consent etc). Weve allowed respect to muddy the waters.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
Very good point. We humans will fight over anything.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Im a mainstream Christian, not a creationist. Ive never met a creationist. Although Ive met lots of atheists and they read the Book of Genesis in the same literal way creationists do. I dont think the Bible should be read this way, though I admire the humility that leads creationists to do so. To the creationists Id say approach the Bible with all your faculties, including your ingenuity (which can be guided by God and your faith in God). To the atheists, Id say the Bible is not a lab report, kindly engage both hemispheres: hardly any document is designed to be read literally, word for word.
Lynda Hallinan: Men can talk abortion with the woman they impregnated; otherwise its none of their business
Im saying every single human decision has a moral dimension - that there is always a right and wrong way to go, that morality is every suspended. The decision to terminate a pregnancy is not an exception.BTW, to say abortion is a morality issue is not to say abortion is wrong: that needs to be discussed. Some of us think its okay, some of us dont, so theres something to be figured out.What I think we shouldnt be doing is pretending that this decision is somehow separate from the rest of human behaviour (which always has a moral dimension). Personally, I think the reason pro-choice advocates now refer to health issue is that the moral argument for abortion is so shabby, and they know it. So, rather than deal with the moral argument, they use language that they think avoids the moral issue.Also, we all often find ourselves in a situation not of our choosing (eg injury, illness, loss of employment) and we continue to be moral subjects whose decisions have a moral dimension.
Pink is for everyone, not just Prime Ministers' daughters
I agree. I particularly like take responsibility - so long as they only take responsibility for what they actually do and not for what feminism says theyve done.And, lets face it, someone has to take some responsibility: the feminists certainly wont, and they trying to convince the many excellent women in our country that they shouldnt either. Poison.
Pink is for everyone, not just Prime Ministers' daughters
Im not sure whether it was the writers attention, but this article provides reasons to believe that gender is not a construct at all, but very real. The article demonstrates that the 2 genders have always been distinguished. Certainly, I reject the nihilism with which some people wish to replace gender.Im happy for roles to change, if its done democratically and with choice, but I believe sex/gender itself is binary.
Joe Bennett: Quetzalcoatl made promises, the dog said nothing, my rates rose
This article is not about rates. Its just another platform for Joe to bag Christianity. Just another rush of bad blood.
This use of 'slut' is offensive? You must be yolking
There are serious issues around and NZ is busy gazing at its navel.
This use of 'slut' is offensive? You must be yolking
bastardo sounds more Italian to me
A shockingly below-the-belt counterpunch
I take your point about banter between friends, but some people are presumptuous about familiarity. I just dont see it as a serious accusation. Mind you, having just read the comment by @jantc2, I can see the seriousness. Im afraid I missed that aspect of the context.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
I suppose you mean intellectually offensive?You make some fair points (and some unfair ones, I think) but anyway Im talking about present day articles which are consistently and stridently anti-Christian, and anti-Catholic in particular. Its the norm Im familar with, so I was pleasantly surprised to read something fairly neutral.And I do see Christians as being among the victims in the inverted oppression that is being established by the extreme Left. I believe were seeing simple (and understandable) retaliation dressed up as social progress.
Church suffering from same-sex motion sickness
Youre right. Science wont stop people from being curious beyond science. The yearning beyond science doesnt mean God exists, I know, but many people will resent atheists for telling them not to look.
Danielle McLaughlin: What a reliably conservative Supreme Court means for America - and my daughter
Artfully disheveled, I expect.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
What consequences? Taking his livelihood? Imprisoning him? You may wish to describe a limit to these consequences.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
How did you misunderstand my post so thoroughly? I dont crave authoritarianism, I just recognise authority when Im confronted by it. If I had what I craved, Id be a morally sovereign atheist, as far away from Gods intrusion as I can get. But, I believe God is really there, so thats what I have to work with.I support the Church because its Christs Church - my attachment to Christ makes me a member of it. As you might know, supporting an institution doesnt mean you support everything it does: different issue.As to kindness, I know the Church has been unkind, I said so, and I know this must change.Youre clearly extremely angry. I dont hold that against you in the least, but I suggest that your anger is preventing you from engaging with some comments reasonably.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Science doesnt deal with the nature of reality unless you assume (without proof) that the natural world/universe (that science can deal with) is all there is to reality.
Dont steal - not in 2018 or ever - Lorde erupts at Kanye West
Hes imitated her style. Is he required to say so?I cant tell whether he has stolen from her or complimented her.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Lets have a new control mechanism! Lets all get force-fed on secular identity politics: it worked in the Soviet Union, Maoist China and under Pol Pot, its working in North Korea - no lies and murder under atheist Communism - so it will work here too. And lets replace lies about God with exciting new truths about humanity: masculinity is toxic, children dont need a mother and father (especially not their own), disagreement is the same as hatred ........... And I suppose you think religious people are deluded.
Pope faces almighty test in changed Ireland
Lennon also imagined - - no countries- no possessions.He was smart enough to know that the misbehaviour of religion is not the only problem in the world.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Except, perhaps, in pretty senior classes, as a topic What is science?. I agree it shouldnt be presented as science.
No room for nuance in creation debate
@Wing Free, Oglet and DJA113. I didnt say atheism is a way of life, I said Communism was and is atheistic. The point is that, if you ditch belief in God and set up a society based on a number of tenets including that disbelief, that society will still have oppression, injustice, strife ....... This is because humans and power are a dangerous mix. Any humans, even atheists.And it is manifestly 1 that atheist Communism is incomparably the most violent system that has ever existed. They even outperformed Nazi Germany in violence, and thats quite a feat.
A shockingly below-the-belt counterpunch
Fair enough, it is. If it was an accusation, I would agree with you entirely, but I dont think every use of the word pedo is an accusation. Lots of strong banter involves words that have a strong meaning lurking behind them, and those words are used to spike or spice the banter, but that doesnt mean they are used seriously. Like bastard long ago, there was a time when it was often taken (and intended to be taken) literally. Sorry, pedo guy sounds pretty loose to me.I dont like the media using its influence to inflame situations, and I think that might be whats happening here.
No room for nuance in creation debate
@framu: Religion is man-made, 1. God isnt, though. Quite the contrary. I didnt mention the Bible, dont get ahead of yourself. The Bible hasnt changed very much - a bit, though. What has changed (increased) a lot is our understanding of the Bible, through Biblical scholarship. This is the main reason why Theology libraries are large - a lot of new learning, new critiquing etc.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Youre assuming that God is simply a part of the natural world that science can study. There is no reason to impose this limitation on our concept of reality. Anyway, even if we Christians are wrong about God, that doesnt stop us perceiving the natural world as atheists do, and being scientists.
Joe Bennett: Why Nessie will endure, however often we prove she's not there
Nessies undebunkable. You can disprove her all you like but shell endure. We much prefer our pretty stories to the dreary truth. Look at ghosts. Look at god.Joe, Im disappointed that you havent accepted the invitation to write a serious article promoting atheism and then enter the ensuing discussion. Instead, you prefer to be snide about. Disappointed, but also surprised: I thought there was more to you.Nessie and God are different situations, and its lazy (or worse) of you to conflate them. If Nessie exists, she exists in natural form in the natural world: she is amenable to empirical/scientific inquiry. God is altogether different - distinct from the natural world, supernatural - not amenable to empirical/scientific inquiry. This is why God survives scientific scrutiny. You think its because sheepish people like me are either bone-headed and obstinate or childishly needy, but its actually because science (for all its great merits) has nothing to say on the subject, one way or the other. Your derision needs to shape up or ship out.
A shockingly below-the-belt counterpunch
I think Musk used pedo because Unsworth had told him to stick his submarine where it hurts. Especially if Unsworth is older than Musk. Sounds like male banter to me.I suppose that, in light of this kind of fuss, Unsworth will feel obliged to be highly offended by the remark. Whether hes really offended or not. It would be a pity if men started overreacting just because so many others do it to such good effect. I heard recently that, at some schools, boys are imitating girls in this way (not all girls, of course): unfortunately, being a drama queen seems to work.
Kevin Norquay: Why we all win when All Black Luke Romano uses his profile as a force for good
One out of 10 Kiwi women will experience a miscarriage in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy while after 21 weeks, one in every 200 pregnancies ends in stillbirth. Thats a lot of sorrow to alleviate.True. As in Romanos case, the sorrow is felt by the father as well as the mother. So, One out of 10 Kiwi women will experience a miscarriage is an incomplete statement. Fathers suffer, men suffer, no-one has the monopoly on this, life is hazardous.
Danielle McLaughlin: What a reliably conservative Supreme Court means for America - and my daughter
Fear mongering.Anyway, US Presidents are always loading the Supreme Court with their judges: Trump is no different. I dont mean its okay, the whole process of appointment is wrong, because its so easy to abuse in this way. This writer is only annoyed because the politics are not pleasing to her: next time a Democrat President appoints a leftie judge, she wont bat an eye.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Sure, lets not blame the gay basher. Lets play around with responsibility like pieces on a board. The gay basher is responsible for their actions. There are some exceptions, like inciting violence, and Im sure the LGBT+ juggernaut would have got Folau into court over this if they could, but it is clear he was not inciting anything.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Even if science explains how they occur - the mechanics and chemistry - it wont explain why they are good, why we should apply them or go for them. Science doesnt help with should. You need an authority for that.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Apart from creationism, the debate between science and religion is a con - it doesnt exist outside the agenda of those who want the two to be opposed. The history of Christianity is varied and vexed, but its full of science and the promotion and support of science. The view that it isnt (lets wheel out Galileo to prove it!) is just a Christophobic myth - that some peddle dishonestly and many swallow whole and uncritically.The good news is that science never stopped. Beginning with the Ancients, it was picked up by Rome and then Christianity. When Christianity split between East and West, the East kept it going (this is often overlooked by people who think Christianity is merely Western). When Islam conquered the East, it kept it going. As contact between Western Christianity and the East (Christian and Islamic) increased, Western Christianity also picked it up. Anyway, there is no reason why Christianity would suppress science. Christianity loves the world: it has to, because we believe God made it and loves it.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Thats just censorship. And a totalitarian intrusion into families and communities. Very modern Left, very retro-Eastern Bloc.
No room for nuance in creation debate
True, but not many Christians are creationists. Dawkins is lazy and just chooses easy marks.
Should Israel Folau have been fired?
Its a fair question, but I think the situations are quite different. Those picketers werent invited to the funeral and asked what they think will happen to the deceased gay soldier. They have intruded at a time when saying such a thing in a deliberately focused way is designed to inflict maximum hurt. Whether or not what they say is 1, saying it that way is not something I can justify. I dont think anyone says there should be absolutely no limit on the freedom to speak. For example, telling lies might be called free speech but is not justified. Its just that the modern Left is imposing unreasonable and arbitrary limitations.
No room for nuance in creation debate
One believes in the supremacy of verifiable evidence as the basis of useful knowledge. Only useful knowledge of what exists and what happens in the natural world. This doesnt cover all of reality - not necessarily, anyway.The other believes that our beliefs need no rational explanation, no evidence, no logic Not 1, we (Christians) rely on logic as much as anyone else: theres no getting away from it. We even rely on evidence re supernature (experience, anecdote), just not the kind of evidence that is needed to prove facts in the natural world.
No room for nuance in creation debate
Its a great shame that you were taught in that fashion. The fact that many Christians have taught Christianity badly doesnt mean Christianity itself is 0, it means that the Christians (including me) are not the bees knees.In defence of this awful teaching, Id say it is largely motivated by panic - panic for the person being taught, that if they dont believe theyre in big trouble. A well-motivated attempt to save someone can accidentally do harm.