Curse you, insomnia.

See above.

It's not easy being Green

Or at least, it wouldn't be if the Greens ever had to enact any of their policies.

They want to stop global warming by stopping coal power. As for alternatives:

Hydro - no thanks, dams wreck the environment.
Nuclear - no, banned.
Gas - maybe, but still contributes to greenhouse.
Solar - no, far more expensive, and unreliable.
Wind - see Solar.

They also want to reduce working hours and increase wages.

Doctor, my head.

Donne on death

I have never been much of a romantic; certainly not one for poetry.


Still, this particular sonnet has touched me deeply. I enjoy reflecting on it as I consider that death for the Christian, while it brings temporary grief and sorrow to those left behind, is the beginning of life eternal. (See also Philippians 1:20-24)


I was introduced to the sonnet watching the movie Wit, which is based on a play of the same name. The story follows Professor Vivian Bearing, scholar of 17th century poetry, from when she is diagnosed with Stage IV metastatic ovarian cancer, unto the point of death. 


Incidentally, I recommend anybody in the health profession watch this film, as it gives into the patient's perspective, and a much-needed reminder that patients are people - not simply case reports.


As for the poem, Professor Bearing discovers throughout the film that Donne's intention is speaking of death is not a grandiose attempt to overcome the idea of death with melodramatics, but rather a simple acknowledgement of death for what it is (for a Christian, at least): a breath, a comma, a pause, between this world and the life everlasting.


                     ___________________________


Death be not proud, Divine Sonnet X
    by John Donne (1572-1631)

Death be not proud, though some have callèd thee

Mighty and dreadfull, for, thou art not so,

For, those, whom thou think'st, thou dost overthrow,

Die not, poore death, nor yet canst thou kill me.

From rest and sleepe, which but thy pictures bee,

Much pleasure, then from thee, much more must flow,

And soonest our best men with thee doe goe,

Rest of their bones, and soules deliverie.

Thou art slave to Fate, Chance, kings, and desperate men,

And dost with poyson, warre, and sicknesse dwell,

And poppie, or charmes can make us sleepe as well,

And better than thy stroake; why swell'st thou then;

One short sleepe past, wee wake eternally,

And death shall be no more, death, thou shalt die.

                     ___________________________


Here is Prof Bearing reminiscing on her academic life, and a discussion with her mentor, who articulates what I tried to above, though much better. It must be the English accent...





Finally, you can hear Emma Thompson's beautiful recitation of the sonnet (most of it) below.





In Christ, what is left to fear, if not death?
SG

A little, gleeful response

This post is in response to some comments that were made by an Anonymous reader. I'd like to thank them for their input, and say how much I loved how concisely they were able to articulate their thoughts - this is definitely a skill I lack!


I wanted to respond, but unfortunately it was too long post as a comment, so I have chosen to publish my response here, as well as cite the reader's comments.


You can read the initial post which started it all, here.

____________________________

"1. Pushing the boundaries is necessary for growth of culture and society. Sometimes the push isn't elegant. Sometimes it breaks away the very foundations of an individual's beliefs."

Agreed, but there should be some constructive objective to reach. So much of what we see today as far as boundary-pushing goes doesn't seem to have any positive, constructive objective. Rather, it seems to be driven by desires simply to rebel against authority; not to correct any great wrong in society. "I want to do what I want to do, regardless of whether I should."

While pushing boundaries can lead to growth, it can also undermine the social and moral framework and cause society to deteriorate.

"2. Lady Gaga took some effort to understand. What an awesome, honest, imaginative sense of humour she has. Her art parodies life, producing guilty little cathartic pleasures."

Personally, I find Gaga's art seems to rely so much on the controversial and the provocative, and it feels loaded with sexual promiscuity. To me it says that uninhibited use of your body as a sexual image is a way to get ahead in life. I don't know what it says to women as a whole, who rightly feel like their value or success or identity as women shouldn't be tied up in their looks, or how much they're willing to 'put out', and gratify others sexually, even that's only in an image. 


Perhaps you might even agree with me that there's something inappropriate about what she puts forward, if you acknowledge that some of these pleasures are 'guilty'; there must be something there to feel guilty about if you feel that way.

"3. Society has no right to deny the love of any two individuals, regardless of gender. To deny them the right to perform a romantic ritual that most people spend half their life dreaming about is just mean."

This is a complex issue. The feelings and actions of two individuals are what they are, and where they are consensual, mutually understood, and neither party is at risk of harm, then contemporary society as we know it (which respects the rights of the individual) has no real basis on which to intervene. A society which held true to God's principles as set out in the Bible would be different, as it would value God's law above the rights of the individual, however that is not the society in which we live, so let's keep it at that level.

However, I believe society does have a right to govern the people in a manner which is best for their collective wellbeing, even if it's to the dissatisfaction of a particular minority. If that is the case, then society should be able to control legislation to that end. So then, it becomes necessary to look at what we are legalising, and the effects it will have on society, regardless of whether it is considered 'mean'.

I think we underestimate the importance of marriage by referring to it simply as a 'romantic ritual'. Redefining the institution of marriage is restructuring the most basic, functional unit of society, which has existed (or as I believe, was set in place by God) since the time man first walked the Earth. With regard to adoption or having children in same-sex unions, there would no doubt be consequences to the development of a child. How do two women teach a boy how to be a man? How do two men guide their daughter through her first period?

Then, if we were to redefine marriage to be indiscriminate with regard to gender, then why shouldn't we go on to disregard age? Or why limit it to two people? No matter how much you pull the boundaries back, people will always push harder. "Give people an inch and they'll take a foot."

Studies have also shown that infidelity and the brevity of homosexual relationships are significantly greater than in heterosexual marriage (even with divorce rates being what they are). Some of these studies have been conducted by homosexuals, seeking to disprove the idea. They concluded that sexual fidelity appears to be the exception in these relationships, rather than the norm. If marriage were redefined to include relationships of this nature, then adultery and infidelity would become even more 'normalised' in marriage, and this may likely spill over into heterosexual marriage, resulting in even more broken relationships and broken families. In these instances, the losers are the children who are the future of society, and carry with them into adulthood the ideals which they have been exposed to as children.

My point is that those governing society have a responsibility to protect its people, and society as a whole. Not only do they have the right to make these decisions, but they also have the responsibility to make these decisions. I believe that the data (if you look closely enough) supports the government's current attitude, and is in accordance with God's design for people and relationships.


But this is not simply an intellectual debate, as I'm sure you'll agree. Maybe you know people who are caught in the middle; I certainly do as well.


Truth is, there are thousands of people stuck in the middle, torn apart by the endless debate. Friends, family members, and homosexuals themselves. And these people are hurting, not just because of all the yelling, but because of the pain in their own lives. I can give you some alarming statistics examining the health picture in the (male) homosexual community. They appear to highlight that there is something 'not quite right' in all this, and it's resulting in broken people. 


We all need to better-understand God's design and intentions for people, relationships, sex and marriage, and we could debate this until the end of time. But more important than any of that: homosexuals need to understand that God loves each one of them and wants a relationship with them, individually. He wants them to know Him as their Father, and know that He deeply cares for them despite of all the pain that they experience in the world. God loves us all and His way is the best way. We just need to listen to what He has to say and trust Him on it. And in the meantime, we need to love each other and respect each other, and support and encourage each other through all of our hardships and trials.


Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Anon. God bless you, and I'd love to continue any discussion should you wish to do likewise.

Sincerely,
Scotty

For the techno-junkies

It's the 'Ford vs. Holden' debate in the world of Smartphones.

A little, gleeful wisdom.

As much as the hit television show Glee has slid down the slippery-slope of cringe-worthiness in its second season, I have been persisting in watching it with the hope that it will redeem itself with some decent story-lines, and hopefully deliver some good quality music covers in the meantime.


One of the characters we love to hate, the sadistic, sarcastic, champion cheerleading coach, Sue Sylvester (played by actress, Jane Lynch) must be one of the most fun parts to play on television at the moment. Here is what she has to say on the subject of Halloween:

"You know, Halloween is fast approaching. The day when parents encourage little boys to dress like little girls and little girls to dress like whores and go door to door brow-beating hard working Americans into giving them free food."

Now, that was just for laughs. 


A couple of weeks ago, in the episode playing tribute to The Rocky Horror Picture Show, the debate arises over the appropriateness of kids to perform its (rather 'adult') content, and the generally debatable concept of 'pushing boundaries' in art. In her critique of the situation at hand, Sue Sylvester gets to deliver one of the most profound, cultural truths to have come out of the show to date:

“Just because you’re free to say whatever you want, it doesn’t always mean you should. Artists are free to push boundaries in order to make art, but when pushing boundaries is their only aim the result is usually bad art. There's a time and a place for everything and squeamishness about what we want our children exposed to is not the same as bigotry. Freedom-loving adults are free to have an open, lively debate about what we want our society to be, but let's not make our children fight the culture war for us. They deserve a little better than that."  (Emphasis mine)

 Unfortunately, the show fails to live up to its own message: the kids go on to perform the show solely 'for themselves', without an audience. Still, it managed to articulate those very good points in a way which I've been trying to do for so long, yet failed.

Artists such as Lady Gaga, whom I have discussed before, should take note of the first point: How about creating music with positive messages, and build your public image simply on a foundation of musical creativity and talent, rather than how creatively (and let's face it, bizzarre) you can present your body in a sexual context?

As for the second point, the public debate over homosexuality and gay marriage springs to mind. Those opposed to gay marriage are too readily painted with the 'bigoted homophobe' brush. They should be free to respectfully(!) express their views and concerns, based on their own convictions without being labelled with hate. 

On the flip-side, those opposed to gay marriage (Christians especially) need to respect the pro-homosexual viewpoint, and respond without judgement and condemnation. These people are also trying to shape society based on their own convictions. I cringe when I read what some Christians have to say on the subject of 'gays'. Our speech shouldn't be filled with haughty disregard, or self-righteous moralising; this reinforces the perceived rejection of homosexuals by the church.

Yes, there are irrational extremists on both sides of the debate, and there always will be. The majority of us in the middle, however, should be able to debate the issue constructively, and lovingly. Jesus didn't win people with messages of judgement and condemnation, but rather through messages of hope, healing, forgiveness and God's love.

Should we not follow His lead?

It's Hip to be a Christian (29/10/10)

Tonight I met Josh and Naomi, which has truly been one of the most delightful experiences I have had on this trip, and indeed for a while.

Josh and Naomi (or 'Nay' for short) happen to be the married couple with whom my mate Andy lives, and so I have the privilege of staying here tonight and tomorrow night, and while I have only known them for less than two hours, I have decided that they are two truly wonderful people.

Josh and Nay seem (as far as appearances go) to be hardcore hippie-hips. Dreads from here to eternity, funky clothes, piercings; you name it, it's there. As for the house, it's decked out in wonderful colours, various pieces of art, and there is even a lingering smell from incense that has been burned in the corner many times before. There is also a fish tank, which instantly caught my attention. Natural cleaning products and other 'organicky things' can be found around the house, and having forgotten to bring toothpaste with me, I tentatively made the decision to brush my teeth with something called 'HerbalFresh'. I may have wound up with more green things in my teeth than when I started, though I haven't been game enough to check yet.

Tonight, Josh, Nay and their dreads returned from a week or so of camping at a hippie 'Rainbow' festival, just west of the Blue Mountains; a get-together which, from their stories, sounds like it plays host to all sorts of heresy, paganism, and other dubious activities.

Despite all this, and the conclusions you may draw, Josh and Nay are long-standing, dedicated and mature Christians.

At 27 years of age, Josh and Nay have been married for five, and together for the five before that. They are currently expecting their first child. Both have trained at Sydney Missionary and Bible College, and Josh is the Christian chaplain at the Ultimo TAFE here in Sydney, while Nay works in retail at a hippie-style Tree of Life store.

Together, they share and live the Gospel in the hippie and spiritual communities, and are moving to India next year to proclaim Jesus among the ashrams to the multitudes of spiritual seekers which traverse the country.

I was very encouraged by their ability to 'live in the world, but not of the world', as they are able to live and share in select ways of'hippie living' while holding firm to God's truth, and declare Jesus as their Saviour. They are a great reminder that Christianity transcends mainstream culture.

Please remember them in your prayers this week; particularly for the safe arrival of their little one in the coming month, and their preparations to travel to India next year.

Sadly, I cannot find a link to a profile of them. I'll update if I find one. SG

Sydney-Bound (28/10/10)

Yeah, I meant to publish this one before my blog about Annaliese Szota. Ah well.


Hi all,

I am writing on my MacBook in luxury from the air-conditioned cabin of a Virgin Blue 737-700. We are currently cruising at an altitude of 38 000 feet, over the country town of Scone, in which I can see none, nor any horses for which the town is famous for. Probably an altitude thing.

The cabin crew are about to run through to do a rubbish collection. My first instinct (after many years of PC-based indoctrination) was to hurl my Mac into the bag when it goes past, but I guess I need to re-educate myself.

For those who don't know, I am on my way to the home of the 2000 Olympic Games - Sydney, Australia. It's also the home of two of my friends (whom I intend to visit), the Moore Theological College (which I intend to visit) and the Sydney Opera House (which I will try and score a gig at while I'm there).

Sidenote: I just heard the telltale sign of a text message being sent from an iPhone in the seat behind me. Currently fighting the urge to turn around and hurl some of my peanuts at his head. Well, if I die in the plane crash, at least I'll know who to yell at.

One of the things I love about flying is the collection of needle-like ice crystals which form on the window panes, even if you're flying in the middle of the day. They start ever so tiny, and grow into almost spider-like structures. So fine and delicate. If you look closely, you can even see a multitude of offshoots from each needle, which, to the naked eye, appear perfectly perpendicular. Fascinating.

Beyond those, I have a lovely view of the clouds from my window seat. Set against the greeney-blue of the landscape below, their billowing forms appear similar to steam pouring up from the sky like a stream of lava hitting the ocean. The less 'voluptuous' forms look like a snow-scape, stretching out to the horizon.

Unfortunately, we're approaching Sydney from the west which means we won't be coming in from the ocean, which is a most enjoyable sight. Still, with al the cloud cover there may not be much to see until we're 100 feet above the tarmac.

Well, it looks like we'll be on the landing approach soon, so I'd better shut down my Mac and yell at the man behind me. If anything is going to interfere with aircraft systems, it's a Mac, since it communicates with everything so much easier than PCs seem to.

See you on the ground! SG

Annaliese Szota (28/10/10)

Tonight, having arrived in Sydney after a reasonably long plane-flight, then a good ol'trek from the airport out to Moore Theological College in Newtown, my buddy Alan and I were able to gig it up at a club.

Perhaps not a club - more like a theatre restaurant dedicated to live music. One of my mates, Andy from Wollongong, was performing there with one of his friends, Annaliese Szota. Andy sings background vocals and plays the violin (electric on this particular occasion) an I was very excited to see him performing live (though not unplugged, thankfully) for the first time.

Left to Right: Andy, Annaliese Szota, Ben Szota

It was a very enjoyable concert, and for those who have never heard of Annaliese Szota, she is a relatively new artist with a bubbly stage presence, whose music is a mix of the bouncy and somewhat melancholic. Many have compared her to Regina Spektor, and others I don't recognise. Some compare her to Kasey Chambers, though I disagree and I prefer not to think about that. I find listening to Chambers similar to listening to a giant nose, whose voice has as much 'nasal twang' as the guitar she plays.

Some of Szota's lyrics are quite poetic, where others are abstract. Others are delightfully queer, such as those in one of my favourite songs, Deck of Octopi (which is now my ringtone). Alan commented that many of her songs contain vague acknowledgment of confusion and randomness in the world, asking or implying many questions though seeming to answer none. I would agree with this statement to some extent, though I haven't studied them in any particular depth to comment further.

Anyway, you can check out Szota on her Myspace. Listen to the clip from Deck of Octopi, and Blanket Meteor. It's worth it.

As for Andy, he used to be part of a Christian Band called Blind. I love his voice, but I was unable to link to any audio clips for your listening enjoyment. I'll update if I find anything. Andy, if you're reading this, point me in the right direction! SG

Violence a solution?

Most people will have heard of or seen footage of an audience member throwing his shoes at former Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, on ABC's Q&A the other night. If you haven't, have a look:



This was what one 'Txt the Editor' submission in today's Townsville Bulletin had to say:

___________________________

2 the guy who threw shoe at johnny howard, good 2 c someone so strong against war that they r willing 2 use violence 2 get their point across. Imagine if he was pm [sic, emphasis mine]

___________________________

I'm not going to point out the obvious flaw in that peculiar train of thought. I decided to write a short, succinct comment for tomorrow's paper. I hope it gets printed.

As for the ambushing shoe-thrower, I hope his anger held out for the entire walk home...

Geek Bling

I wonder if this comes in Ag...

Courage as small as a mustard seed

Tonight I was enjoying a leisurely conversation on DisgraceBook when the topic turned from cherry ripes to making the decision to become a Christian.


Don't ask me how this transfiguration occurred...


Anyway, I decided to make the point that 'sacrificing the world's ways' and the persecution we face as Christians make this decision a difficult one. This was the response from one participant:

_____________________________________________

"I like to be persecuted for my faith. It gives me a chance to take up a sword for God. I think the decision to live God's way or the world's way, while it is a big one to make, shouldn't be /harder/ [sic] to make because of what's involved. If you truly have faith in God, then courage should come with that. Otherwise you only have what I would call a "placebo relationship" with Him in the first place." (Emphasis mine)

_____________________________________________

Now while I admire this Christian's zeal for 'taking up a sword for God', his latter point struck an unpleasant chord within me. 


Leaving beside the notion that he appears to be referring to decided Christians (as opposed to the 'contemplating non-Christians we were discussing), I felt uncomfortable with the idea that if I am not 'courageous', then I must be experiencing some transient, pseudo-relationship with God. If I acknowledge the uncertainty in life, being what it is, and the very real risk of persecution and physical danger, and if I am unsettled by these ideas, then I'm not really right with God? Can I not be a Christian if I am a realist?


I wanted to respond a little more emotively than I should have, but thanks to God, I took the time to mull over his words a little more first. And low and behold, God actually taught me something.


It's true: for many of us, our days seem so devoid of 'courage' per se, and it takes that whole little mustard of seed of faith just to make it through to the end of each day, and be able to say 'God is good'. The real risk of persecution and the sacrifices we make to live God's way can render our lives full of uncertainty which can make us very uncomfortable! But when we endure the pain, the trials, the suffering and the uncertainty and make it to the end of the day still following God, has that not taken courage of a sort? 


A courageous man may charge into battle to fight for those he loves. A courageous man speak up against opposition to defend the weak and the orphan. What does it take to cling to the Truth in the storms of life, when the world tells him he is a fool, if not a courageous man?


While I do not agree one-hundred per cent with this person's statements (perhaps 'trust' would be a better word than courage to use in his remarks), I am glad that I was able to ponder this a little harder.


When we are of brave hearts, may God give us the strength to fight the good fight. When we are thrashed about by the wind and the waves, may he give us the strength to hold firm to the Rock of our salvation.

_____________________________________________

"The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock." (Matthew 7:25)

Coming in from Cairns

Today’s instalment comes to you from the delightful Cairns Base Hospital. In Cairns. Cairns. What the hell am I doing in Cairns? You might well ask such a question – I asked that of myself not too long ago.

I have travelled up on a mission of supreme international importance. I plan to eliminate world poverty, make the world safe for democracy, and be home in time for Glee tonight.

My cover story, should anybody ask, is quite the cunning plan. The delightful Miss Mel, cleverly arranged a physio job interview at the hospital today so that I could accompany her up as a ‘travel companion’.  While she has planted herself in the interview room and is wowing and amazing the panel with her distracting display of all things physiotherapical, I am setting the wheels in motion which will ultimately bring about world peace, an unlimited supply of clean energy, and a mint on your pillow every night before you go to bed.

The spies planted here by my secret enemy tried to thwart our attempts to gain access to the hospital, by charging us four dollars to gain access to a car park with no available car parks! However we were not deterred by this demoralising display of underhanded misdeeds. After some creative backtracking, I planted Miss Mel on her distraction run, and have made my way to the core of terror and vice that holds mankind as we know it in its mighty grasp: the Sea Breeze Café.

I can’t share the details of political sleight of hand, incredibly intricate tactical manoeuvring and mental manipulation through my commanding talents concerning The Force; that would give the game away to my opponents. Instead, I will tell you a little about the Cairns hospital.

 It appears to have everything which makes a Queensland Health Facility: inadequate car parking, lots of futile construction to keep up with growing populace which has since left it far behind, an overpriced café, agitated visitors, ‘no smoking’ signs which are ignored by the majority of smokers, employees wandering around who carry the weight of the world on their shoulders. If it weren’t for the lovely, cool sea breezes, I’d firmly believe I was back at work.  Well, that and the fact that a friendly, local pigeon has decided to visit my table. I dare not touch it. It probably has MRSA. Then again, I probably do too from working in the hospital for so long. Consider it a token of appreciation for my years of service thus far.

Well, Miss Mel will probably be back soon, so I had better post this and then eat my computer to dispose of the evidence. And remember; if you don’t find a mint on your pillow tonight, then you know my plan has failed and I will be lying low for a while.

Surreptitiously yours,

Scott, the MRSA-positive Super Spy

Musical Humour: The key to a good time

Two of the world's funniest pianists perform together.

A Pharmacist's Ode to Haloperidol

This is a little composition of mine for all my friends working in the hospital. I have been meaning to put it to paper for a while. I sincerely hope it brightens your day.

Where I go for a pick-me-up

In too high esteem?

Considering the contemporary ideologies that have permeated into the education system over the years, I wonder if there has ever been one which has impacted educational philosophy with such detrimental effects, as much as our obsessive focus on a child's self-esteem.

Image from
www.billboardmama.com

I recently learned from a peer in the teaching profession that progress through the primary and secondary education system is not performance-based, but rather age-based. That is to say, in my understanding, a youngling in grade 6 will progress to grade 7 simply because he is of the appropriate age to; not because he has satisfied the grade 6 curricular requirements. Indeed, it seems unsatisfactory performance is of no consequence, provided he keeps tearing the pages from his calendar day by day.

I don't know how 'recent' this change in the system is. I remember early in my primary school days rumours of kids being 'left behind', but not so much in high school. Despite the fact that I knew some of my classmates had failed certain classes, some of them were sitting across from me the following year.

Apparently one of the ideas underpinning this move is the potential damage that the child in question could sustain with regards to his or her self-esteem, or self-image. We don't want to tell a child he has 'failed' out of a concern that he will see himself as a 'failure'. Rather, some would prefer the term 'deferred success' (such was a laughable move by one educational institution some years ago). We are afraid to compare children to one another, because it may mess with their perceived value of themselves in comparison to others. Any benefits derived from the competitive motivation this may inspire aren't considered worth the risk of 'harm'.

The lack of discipline seems to run along a similar vein. 'Discipline damages self-esteem. Discipline shouldn't be necessary. Children really DO want to learn - we just need to create the right environment and it will happen.' Needless to say, anecdotes from a family friend who used to do supply teaching at a public school which followed this framework have left me somewhat unconvinced. Remove the discipline and chaos ensues. But I digress; this piece doesn't intend to focus on the bizzarre ideas driving discipline in schools these days.

So we push our younglings through the education system, despite their performance, remaining determined that their self-esteem is the most important thing.

In that case, what happens when, ten to fifteen years down the track, this self-assured individual discovers that he cannot exercise a basic grasp of mathematics which might enable him to manage his finances? This assumes he can get a job, which he probably can't, because his resume was so full of spelling and grammatical errors, that every employer tossed it aside.

What happens to his self-esteem then? How will his self-assurance hold up in the unemployment line, whilst his competent colleagues are out earning a steady income? Where does he go then? The education system is finished with him.

Those happy-clappy, group-hugging feel-goods who pushed him through the system for the sake of his ego, well-meaning though they may have been, have ended up failing this child. Not just in his education, but in giving him some atrociously misguided expectations about life in the real world. Outside those four walls of the school building, if you are not competent at your job, not only do you not get promoted; you most likely get fired.

So then what of self-esteem? Do we educate an individual to within an inch of his life with no regard for their mental health? Of course not, but let's consider how these humanistic ideologies might be creating the very problems they seek to resolve.

Many children come from broken homes; a large proportion of which may endure physical, sexual and emotional abuse of every kind. Their perceived value of themselves already cops a beating from mum and / or dad, which doesn't get them off to a good start. Likewise, discipline may be minimal, inconsistent or even non-existent. 'Parent's don't discipline their children - that's what school is for, right?' (Sorry Mum and Dad - the teacher's job is to teach.)

The child then spends twelve years of his life in an institution pervaded by atheism, learning a curriculum which reeks of evolutionary thinking like rancid parmesan, under which he learns that he is simply the result of random chance, spawned from the primordial sludge of yesteryears to become "stardust with a conscience" (as one of my past physiology lecturers would say), with no more inherent value or worth than the chair he is sitting on.

We rob our children of the divine truth that they are lovingly created in the image of their heavenly Father, and are shocked when their fragile ideas of self-worth collapse under the assault of the everyday realities of life.  

To my colleagues in the teaching profession, you certainly have your work cut out for you. I sincerely hope that God blesses each of you in your endeavours to shape and mould the children of society. You have been called to a service of supreme importance, and may you be encouraged and strengthened daily in your efforts, as you work in an education system such as ours.

I was encouraged by a video on YouTube, taken from a conference in the UK earlier this month. While our system in Australia does not appear to be this bad (although some may disagree), I admired the courage this woman had to speak up about some of the issues which prompted this piece.

Finally, I will leave you with a passage from Gary DeMar's foreword in Douglas Wilson's Letter from a Christian Citizen, in which he quotes C.S. Lewis. I think it nicely captures the frustration many of us feel toward the humanistic ideologies of today:

---

"We make men without chests and we expect of them virtue and enterprise," C.S. Lewis writes. "We laugh at honor and we are shocked to find traitors in their midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful." We strip men and women of the certainty that they are created in the image of God, and we are surprised when they act like the beasts of the field.

SG

Atheistic Morality?

Recently, I had the pleasure of participating in a small Facebook debate, triggered by a video of a Christian abortion survivor speaking out, and proclaiming Christ, at a summit of political and religious leaders in Australia. This ventured into the question of moral foundations for atheists.

It makes for interesting reading.

ATHIEST: [Quoting the young woman speaking in the video] "It is not at all politically correct to say the name of Jesus Christ in a place like this." She's quite right, it's not. And for good reason: that was on the eve of a Parliamentary debate over abortion, and Australia maintains separation of Church and State, presumably. It would be 'politically incorrect' to mention the name of Krishna or Muhammad just as much as it would be to mention Jesus.

Religion should be kept out of public debate. If she wanted to speak about her experience as a survivor of an abortion, that's fine - her experience provides a perfectly valid argument in the matter. There was no need to bring Jesus Christ into it. What an offense against the secular democracy that is Australia!

M

ME: God help the secular democracy. If a government rejects any kind of religious considerations, surely it rejects any kind of foundation for morality. In that instance, what does her experience provide in the way of argument over right and wrong? It would simply be her experience.

ATHEIST: ‎"If a government rejects any kind of religious considerations, surely it rejects any kind of foundation for morality."

/facepalm [Author's comment: I have since learned this is an expression of dumbfounded awe upon perceiving a person's ignorance]

No it doesn't. There are plenty of secular ethical theories that provide a splendid reason to be moral.

ME: If you were able to point me toward some of these secular ethical theories, I would appreciate it. It would be helpful to understand what foundation of reasoning these theorists use to support any moral framework. I find it difficult to understand how one can 'define' right and wrong while leaving God out of the picture. Without any kind of divine authority to declare what is right and what is wrong, it comes down to your definition and my definition. And where our definitions conflict, who is right? And why should you be forced to subscribe to my definition, or I to yours?

Sadly, the exchange was short, but gratifying in that my opponent was unable (or perhaps not bothered) to supply any of these theories, as I requested. But then, I would not expect him to be able to.

In Letter from a Christian Citizen, Christian author and apologist Douglas Wilson responds to some age-old atheist arguments in a clear and engaging fashion. The book was written in response to atheist propaganda widely distributed in the US by atheist, Sam Harris; a book entitled Letter to a Christian Nation.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book and would recommend it to anyone interested in getting a basic understanding of some of the premises of atheism, and some straightforward Christian responses.

With respect to the exchange above, I'll reiterate that I am confounded by atheists' claims to have a foundation for morality. Simplistically put:

If we, as human beings, are simply the result of a big bang (or, as Wilson puts it, "time and chance acting on matter") and you and I, and the rest of our random existence, are destined for dust and oblivion, then everything that happens in between amounts to nothing. What reasoning then, motivates me to be moral, or 'good'?

And even if we assume that we should, what is universally defined as 'good'? Harris argues that whatever brings pleasure and happiness is good, and whatever brings pain and suffering is bad, but what brings pleasure to my set of nerve endings may be different to what brings pleasure to yours. Paedophilia brings pleasure to some, yet even your average atheist would argue that this is 'immoral' (which is, gratefully, inconsistent with their world view). So then, what, do we go with the majority? A greater proportion of society believe it's wrong than right, so we're going to say it's wrong? That's just preference. That's no foundation for morality - it's just governed by numbers, or in some particularly unfortunate nations, governed by firearms. And if I disagree with your idea of 'right', why should I conform to it? If good is what brings pleasure, then why should I be concerned about anything that happens beyond my set of nerve endings?

The only person who can set a universal standard for right and wrong, good and evil, is the one who set the universe in place; the one who can claim the authority to decide such things.

But if you get the chance, read Wilson's book. He sets things out much better than I. It's a great and useful read. SG

• 
  UPDATE: Google books has the whole thing online. You can read it here. The foreword is worthwhile reading in itself.

Greetings from Gracemere

Hi everyones,

Today's published peculiarities come to you from the little town of Gracemere, located about ten kilometres west of Rockhampton. My family moved out here from Rockhampton last year, to a lovely house complete with veggie gardens and nice breezes. Since then, they have added an aviary, two birds and several guinea pigs to the list of facilities, and if you're lucky, the odd horse wanders down the street from time to time, ideally emblazoned with a rider of some kind.

It's a wonderful example of city-country hybrid living, and it's a great place to chill. I have travelled down here for a week to spend time with my family because my father turns the ripe, young age of 60 on Saturday. Quite the milestone of achievement, really, so good on ya', Pa - Happy Birthday!

The trip down here was reasonably non-eventful. I like to travel by road overnight, as some people know, and others consider unsettling. I enjoy it - it's cooler, there is much less traffic on the road and provided you know your body well enough to pull over and power nap when necessary, it can be done safely. Having a healthy supply of caffeine helps too, and a good collection of CDs to carry you down the highway as you sing your guts out.

So, having insomniated a total of about seven hours' sleep since Sunday morning, I didn't think I'd have any problems staying awake driving down with my friends, Mr Red Bull and Mr Ice Break (who, incidentally, are selfish prats when it comes to driving and won't do any of it for you).

And so here we are. Thanks, God, for the safe trip. And thanks to Miss Melanie, who assembled a pack of physical and intellectual stimulation to keep me going on the trip down. (Mel, I have not yet told you but your ANZAC biscuits are fantastic!) She taught me not only that I know more about Australian trivia than I thought, but also that seedless grapes are fantastic car food. They're fruit, they're healthy and you can make your way through them easily with no mess and no fuss! I think I polished off that whole bag by the time I made it to Mackay. So good...

Taskmaster Mel also set me an objective to compose a happy story about a sailing adventure, and an additional verse to our national anthem. I wasn't able to do this on my way down (too busy warbling) but I'll endeavour to work on these and post the results over the next few days.

I am hoping to travel further to Gladstone tomorrow (just for the day) to visit a paramedic friend of mine down there. That's only an hour-and-a-half drive, so since it doesn't justify a Red Bull, Mel's ANZAC biscuits are definitely coming with. SG

Morning musings

Good morning, once more from Mocha Mecca.

Bit of an earlier start today. The great thing about morning appointments is that they ensure your carcass is out of its coffin at a decent hour, allowing you to embrace the fullness of every opportunity the day has to offer.

If only there was something worth doing...

Just kidding.

I read a quote yesterday. Sadly my defunct cognition prohibits me from remembering the exact words, or even the poor sod who said it. Incidentally, he or she is probably lying derelict in a ditch, starving as a result of unpaid royalties. This is now likely to weigh heavily on my conscience, but rest assured that my crisis of moral obligation shan't interfere with my commitment to my readers, which is publishing a good minute-and-a-half of something not entirely unlike entertainment, approximately so often when it suits me.

What was I saying? Oh yes, the quote.

“The life of the optimist is one of disappointment.”

Granted, not the most inspired phrasing – my apologies to those who were expecting something a little more upbeat – but it highlights the 'no expectations; no disappointments' philosophy that the pessimists among us live by. Pessimists are the ones who aren't optimists, and I confidently count myself among them. Not that I awake every morning to find my pillow stained with tears and cheap mascara (please, somebody get me to a cosmetician the day that I do), but I do appreciate a healthy dose of reality in my perspective, which serves as a daily reminder of the fallen world in which we live. It may not make me Mr Congeniality, but a basal level of disappointment in this world helps me keep the foundation of my hope and joy built upon the life to come – the eternal life I have through faith in Jesus Christ – so as not to be consumed by these present and numbered days.

(Sidenote: a plainclothes Cowboys player walked into the coffee shop. I think I know exactly who he is. What the hell is happening to me?)

Anyway, back to the point of my article, and disappointment.

Last night I went to see The Last Airbender at the cinemas with a good buddy of mine from work. I'll try not to give too much away from the plot for those who'd like to see it, but I was excited at the beginning of this movie because it appeared to set up a strong theme analogous to Christianity.

Basically, the story concerns a world divided into four nations, each founded upon an element (earth, water, fire and air), and living among these nations were gifted individuals who were able to manipulate (or 'bend') the element concerned with their nation.

These nations lived in peace and harmony, under the authority of the 'spirit world', which maintained order and communicated with the nations through the Avatar, a particular individual who could bend all four elements.

A century ago, the Avatar went missing, cutting the link with the spirit world. Consequently, the fire nation sought to take over and enslave the other nations, and the story begins with the world awaiting the return of the Avatar to restore order and balance, in a war that would be won “in the hearts of men”, according to a tribal elder.

I was excited because this painted a similar picture to Christianity: an enslaved world waiting for a saviour, who is 'master over all creation', intercedes for the world of men with the spirit world, and who is ultimately sent to unite the nations and win the ultimate battle for men's hearts.

Sadly, any similarity may have been unintentional, or pluralistic at best, as the story seemed to prominently feature themes of eastern religions (such as elemental spirits, reincarnation, Yin and Yang, and inner Chi) as it progressed. Still, potential to trigger some stimulating conversation.

So disappointing to a degree, but a reasonably entertaining story. In my opinion, there was far too much happening in such a short space of time, and as a consequence the film lacked character and conceptual development. My buddy tells me it was based on a comic strip, so as far as most book-to-movie type recreations go, this shouldn't have been surprising. If you're interested, wait for the DVD. SG

Controversy sells

Ok, so this one is no surprise, but after reflecting on recent events in Australian free-to-air media and their outcomes, my dander is well and truly on end.

Matty Johns, former Australian rugby league assistant coach to Melbourne Storm and co-host of Channel Nine's The Footy Show, removed from both positions following reports of involvement in a non-consensual 'group sex' with 11 other teammates/colleagues and a 19-year old New Zealand girl in 2002.

Recently hired by competing network Channel Seven to host his own, "family-friendly" The Matty Johns Show. Additionally, hosts Matty Johns' Controversy Corner on Sunday mornings. How appropriate.

Radio/TV personality Kyle Sandilands sacked from Channel Ten's Australian Idol following an incident (just one among a broad repertoire of well-publicised controversy) in which the 2Day FM morning radio show which he co-hosts with Jackie O, strapped a 14-year old girl to a lie detector, in the presence of her mother, and proceded to question her on a number of things, including drugs and sex. The girl revealed she had been raped at the age of 12. Sandilands was suspended from the radio show. Idol commendably sacked Sandilands, stating that "His radio persona has taken on a more controversial position ... which is not in the interest of the [family-focused] show."

A few weeks later, Sandilands resumed hosting the 2Day FM radio show, but was suspended again within less than a month, over remarks made Australian personality, and face of the Jenny Craig weightloss company, Magda Szubanski, concerning how much more effectively she would lose weight if she was simply put in a concentration camp. Szubanski's father, incidentally, was a Polish resistance fighter in World War II.

Sandilands is still currently hosting his radio show, and has taken up a similar judging role on Channel Seven's (again family-focused) The X Factor.

To quote Scott Adams' well-known comic strip character, Dilbert,

"Are you saying I'm more employable as a famous screw-up than as a competent nobody?"

What are the media (particularly Channel Seven in both of these cases) communicating in regards to the idea that 'actions have consequences'? In a society already deafened by cries over the inadequate sentencing of criminal behaviour, we get to endure two controversial public figures doing whatever the hell they like, and even though they are reprimanded (in a sense), they continue to be upheld in the public eye by competing commercial enterprises, simply because they are well-known in their industry, because of the controversy that surrounds them.

When will Channel Seven, and the media in general, acknowledge the social responsibility they have to their viewers? 

May God be merciful on our society, as we all keep riding the roller-coaster to anarchy.