Been away too long

Feels like I’ve been away for while. Seeing as it is now almost a month since I have last blogged something.

Yesterday, Australia lost the Ashes – no no the men are still playing, but the Australia women lost their test series with England 1-0. And a few days from now we will see spring. Spring translates into the Australian Rules finals time. After one of the best seasons in years we are four weeks from the Grand Final. The Swans are in the finals, and we’ll see how they go. Before I stop talking about sport just have two more thoughts – great win for the All Blacks – was a cracker of a game – 31-27. Yes, Australia was not playing, but the sentence - New Zealand wins the Australian Rules Tournament just needs to be written.

Had pause for thought a few weeks ago reading a letter written by a parent to Grant Thomas a professional coach was interesting. It makes the point that the Junior AFL Competition had just got over a shortage of Umpires, then after a professional coach trashes the Umpires – parents start doing it and welcome back umpire-shortage. Point to make here, is that too many times I criticise decisions. Yet the human element of sport is the fact that people do make mistakes. Particularly those in positions of promience need to model respect for the officials.

Been a good weekend – went to my Aunts’ farewell service on Friday night, then Sunday, was spent at Dee Why for my Uncle’s farewell, they are going back to Dunedin, NZ where my Aunt will be taking up a position as Rector at Knox Cathedral. I’ll miss having them both in Australia.

Song of the moment

As I walked the five minutes or so to work, I listened to this song from Nichole Nordeman's latest CD Brave, and the words have been stuck in my head since.

Hold On

It will find you at the bottom of a bottle
It will find you at the needle’s end
It will find you when you beg and steal and borrow
It will follow you into a stranger’s bed

It will find you when they serve you with the papers
It will find you when the locks have changed again
It will find you when you’ve called in all your favors
It will meet you at the bridge’s highest ledge

So baby don’t look down, it’s a long way
The sun will come around to a new day

So hold on
Love will find you
Hold on
He’s right behind you now
Just turn around
And love will find you

It will find you when the doctor’s head is shaking
It will find you in a boardroom, mostly dead
It will crawl into the foxhole where you’re praying
It will curl up in your halfway empty bed

So baby don’t believe that it’s over
Maybe you can’t see ‘round the corner…

To hang between two thieves in the darkness
Love must believe you are worth it

(Nichole Nordeman) ©2005 Birdwing Music / Birdboy Songs (ASCAP), admin. by EMI CMG Publishing.

In Brief:

Over the past week I’ve not really done a whole lot – I borrowed the latest Harry Potter novel from my family, and on Thursday I went and saw an amazing Icelandic band called Sigur Ros.

Spoiler free review: I found the new Harry Potter book to be disappointingly predictable.

Links:
When the Premier thinks it's cool to cringe, it's time to get parochial
Beware the child glued to his handheld [via F]
I must preach holy war

+++

6 August 1945
9 August 1945
Lest we forget

Correction:

In my post 'out of control' I wrote:

[Aside II: Matthias Media have plagarised Voltaire with their rendering of - If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.]

It is Peter Jensen rather than Matthias Media attributed as saying "If we did not have the briefing, we would be forced to invent it".

Perhaps plagarisim is too high a charge, and I have since removed the Aside - but at the same time there is something that sits uncomfortably about the quote. Sure the point made is valid, but to me, it could have been made another way.

Chasing Amy …

Boy meets girl, Boy falls in “love” with girl, Boy or girl messes it up, Boy and Girl reconcile, this is typical of Hollywood romantic-comedies. To sum up why Chasing Amy is so good; it is simply because it ignores the script. Consequently it provides far greater commentary on life and love than most films. Sure if you can’t handle bad language or talk about sex you should avoid it. But without a sugar-coated ending it will be more real/helpful than most.

I found Alyssa terribly frustrating to listen to, but the dialogue was so real when it needed to be, and the film spoke a great deal of truth about our attitudes to relationships, and Love ("real" love, not lust, nor puppy love but enduring love).

… out of control …

One of the rights, enshrined in the Universal Human Rights Declaration of Human Rights (ratified by Australia) is the right to freely express opinion.

Now most students of history are familiar with Voltaire misquoted as saying “even though I may not agree with you, I will defend to death your right to say it”. What would this mean practically – should we defend the rights of Muslim’s extremists, Pauline Hanson, Philip Jensen, et al to say “what they believe”

[Aside I: For those interested the actual quote was by S. G. Tallentyre who said, of Voltaire, ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it, was his attitude now.’

Two similar themed quotes of Voltaire were – “Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too”, and Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.”]

Is there a limit to our tolerance, should there be limits of our tolerance. Or more fundamentally can we actually crack down on “hate speech”. Are any values non-negotiable? Are all cultures equal? On the other hand – is the collateral damage from trying to enforce tolerance worth it? There are median’s beyond our control - the internet, talkback radio. Can we control, or legislate against “thought”.

Another perhaps related case that made the news this week is about Professor Fraser of Macquarie University, who has commented on limiting immigration of particular ethnic groups. I see two responses here. On one hand to publicly respond to the comments is to give them credence, and weight, on the other to not respond is to accept them

But I think both of these miss a point – our nation is missing engaging debate – we should talk about these issues – we should allow conversation about the policies of the west. Yes, we may not agree with what is said, but we should debate our responses to issues, we should debate issues – to me that’s the greatest loss of the last 10 or so years, policy is no longer debated vigorously (perhaps it never was). The idealist in me is speaking in me again but there needs to be a greater interaction between different political persuasions.

The other issue to come out of the Fraser affair is that while I believe the University has no right to comment on what he says himself, if he labels himself as from the University I believe they then have a course of action, if I use the reputation of the company then I believe the company has the right to defend that reputation. However – as I look at the case of Professor Fraser – why not instead of suspending him – force him to defend his position. People should be free to express any view, but let us, as Hugh Mackay wrote in the Sun Herald, have debate out in the open, where facts can be weighed up against emotion, and prejudice exposed, fears allayed, or reinforced by the evidence”.

Some further reading.