Update - I can get one video up, but not the others ...
Update - I think I can get them up on Google+?
From late 2014 ‘Good Government’ became a clown circus – Abbott and Hockey both sank into political torpor and were casually kicked to death throughout 2015 by anyone who fancied a go.This has been a public information announcement. Thank you for listening.
This was not a case of ideological, dry, Thatcheresque heroes going down in flames. It was a couple of garden variety politicians fucking up on an industrial scale in the septic tank of Australian politics.
And, yes, Turnbull is a devious shit, with a pretty hopeless political CV, and likely to out-Rudd Rudd himself with his disruptive agility. Australia is certainly in a bad, bad place from a policy perspective; but not improved by airbrushing Tony Abbott.
“One does not argue about The Wind in the Willows. The young man gives it to the girl with whom he is in love, and, if she does not like it, asks her to return his letters. The older man tries it on his nephew, and alters his will accordingly. The book is a test of character. We can’t criticise it, because it is criticising us. But I must give you one word of warning. When you sit down to it, don’t be so ridiculous as to suppose that you are sitting in judgment on my taste, or on the art of Kenneth Grahame. You are merely sitting in judgment on yourself. You may be worthy: I don’t know, But it is you who are on trial.”― A.A. Milne
At my clinic alone, codes were deliberately destroyed for 88 pregnancies. Why those 88? Was it all the same donor? Are we all related? What on earth was going on? The RNSH also claimed that this was not "malicious management of records". I was gobsmacked. Not a single RNSH staff member from the time has been held responsible. This is the low regard that society has for donor conceived people. We are treated like unregulated products. Money, and careers, have been made out of our existence. Against that, our humanity doesn't count.Oh yes indeed. Read the full article.
"It's not yet public, but we have heard from at least one priest who confessed to his confessor, and in that way reconciled his offending behaviour, which continued with his belief in God," Justice McClellan said.Wrong.
In our time, when someone says, “I don’t agree with all of the teachings of the institutional Church,” you can bet your house that the disagreement has nothing to do with three Persons in one God, but rather two persons in one bed.- says Anthony Esolen, in a crackingly good article on how to fix the so-called vocations 'crisis' and reverse the feminisation of Church culture.
Creating a more liberal political order was not on Luther’s agenda, nor on anyone’s at that time, but it did become a central concern of some Protestants in the next century. The Protestant Reformation was not a matter of Christianity accepting the truth of something else, something beyond itself. And that is what people really want when they say that Islam needs a reformation: they want it to accept the truth of western values, adapt to them.PS. If you want a good laugh while you despair of Western civilisation, read the Comments section ...
So the ‘Islam needs its reformation’ line makes this mistake. It supposes that Christianity and Islam are two comparable forms of religion: if Religion A adapted to modernity, Religion B can too. But Religion A didn’t adapt to modernity: it inadvertently made modernity, by trying to be more purely itself.
The game-changing idea that emerged in the wake of the Protestant Reformation can be summed up thus: down with theo-cracy! (Maybe I’m a soppy liberal patriot, but it seems to me that this breakthrough was 90 per cent English.) Let the state no longer enforce religious uniformity, but rather protect people’s freedom to choose how to worship. This revolution in theo-politics was proposed not by atheists but by idealistic Protestants. God wills this new sort of liberty-protecting state, said people like John Milton and John Locke. (Nonbelievers like Spinoza and Voltaire followed in their wake and have received undue credit.) [take that, you Enlightenment geeks!]
Why did they think that political liberty was God’s will? They had learned from earlier Protestants like Luther to distrust bossy institutions and religious rules; they now applied this to politics as well as religion. And they pointed to the New Testament, which affirms no theocratic model of politics (unlike the Old Testament, with its holy kings). The whole tradition of coercion in religion is wrong, is at odds with scripture, they said. For example, John Locke, in his ‘Letter Concerning Toleration’, claimed that toleration is ‘the principal mark of the true church’.