More confusion on 'family values'

The Austrian case of multiple incest and domestic violence in a supposedly average family should offer warnings to anyone who tries to pretend that there is somehow something untouchable about 'the family'. Families, like most other institutions can be good and bad. Most murders and rapes happen within families. The obvious support given to the murderer of the young Goth woman in Bacup displays how families can be just as much part of the problem. It is the quality of living arrangements which matters -not the structure.

And remember the Catholic adoption agencies screeching about having to close all their adoption agencies because they would no longer be allowed to discriminate against gay people? In reality, none will close., What is happening instead is that the agencies - supported largely by the State, not Vatican plc despite its vast riches - are establishing themselves as independent agencies and they are signing up to the new regulations. because many of the well-trained social workers in their employ never wanted to discriminate in the first place, and will be able to provide a much better service outside the UK branch of Vatican plc. One really should question, given their record, whether the RC's are a suitable organisation to be involved in child care in any case. Thankfully, it appears their prejudices will help to make this branch of their 'work' history.

Inheritance laws and couple status

The ECHR ruled against a pair of sisters sharing a home who wanted the inheritance rules to apply to them in the same way as civil partnership or marriage today.

This was an entirely sensible decision. Essentially marriage and civil partnership contain the same rights and responsibilities. One can divorce one's partner in these circumstances. The same cannot be said for siblings.

There may well be questions about the fairness of the inheritance tax system - but they need to be dealt with and looked at entirely separately because they are simply not the same issue. The real aim of the Christian religionists who encouraged this case was to try and downgrade civil partnership and make it less like gay marriage. Unfortunately for them, it is gay marriage. Its just called something different. The template is the same. And that is the way it will stay, whether angry and reactionary peddlers of harmful religionism like it or not.

Richard Dawkins

We went to hear Richard Dawkins speak at the University this evening. Its amusing that such a convinced atheist has become such a High Priest of his own non-religious beliefs - but not surprising as he is articulate and funny.

And, on the whole, convincing.

Its been a long journey but I find myself having less and less in common with, and little attraction left to Christianity.

Government climbs down under backbench and public pressure

The Government appear to have climbed down with regard to measures to alleviate the effect of the 10p tax band abolition.

The devil will no doubt be in the detail, but wouldn't it have been refreshing for the Government to simply admit that they got it wrong?

And what of the bulk of Labour MP's who wouldn't sign Frank Field's amendment? Why, other than loathing of the Tory alternative, should we bother to vote for any of you? Cowards, the lot of them. Have they suddenly changed their mind or do they still agree that the abolition was a good idea?

Labour need to look very carefully at themselves and what they are doing.

Liverpool and family values....

Its interesting to see the conservative religionists such as Anglican Extreme jump on the bandwagon with regard to the Liverpool murder. The name of the perpetrator has been common knowledge for a while up here. I used to live about 2 minutes walk away from where Rhys Jones was killed. Its a pleasant estate, not run down or poor. That has at least been acknowledged.

However, the gang warfare on the neighbouring estates has been blamed on family breakdown. I think that some of these people ought to come up to Liverpool. Far from breaking down, these families are close knit, extended, even, as is always acknowledged by the death notices when one of them dies. There are fathers on the scene - much of the criminal knowledge is learned that way. Its all too easy to come out with the usual clichés about broken families - but family values are strong enough in Liverpool's estates. Its just that there are different types of families - and different types of values. The conservative religionists, in their eulogising of 'The Family' , fail to see that structure does not necessarily mean the sort of 'values' they promote.

In the news.,...

Sad to hear about the death of Gwyneth Dunwoody. I didn't agree with all she said, but she was one of the few politicians left who had a genuinely profound specialist knowledge - she would have made a fantastic Transport Secretary. Again, its easy to forget that she was always firmly on the Right of the party - yet New Labour has drifted so much over to the Right that she appeared to be a bit of a lefty.....sadly, we won't be seeing her like again, given that so few mavericks are likely to make their way through the selection procedures.

Mugabe has climbed on his British Paranoia platform again. A pity for all that Zimbabwe isn't sitting on some bubbling oil wells. However, it does underline the reality - that there is little that the UK can do in this situation when it is regarded as the old colonial oppressor. Anything that is said simply provides ammunition for Mugabe to rabble rouse.
The person most responsible for his survival is Thabo Mbeki. What a disaster he has proved to be. Could Zuma be worse?

Unpublished letter.....

Looks as if my local rag didn't have the courage to print this....

Dear Sir,

The progress made with regard to medical research has radically transformed the lives of many people, for example , beneficiaries of transplant surgery or IVF treatment.

Stem cell research offers the possibility of relief from debilitating conditions such as cystic fibrosis and Alzheimer's disease. It is early days, but at one time, the aforementioned technology was also in its infancy.

Imagine,then, if those possibilities had been snuffed out by the attempts of a minority religious group to impose their view upon others. Not only expecting those of the same religion not to partake in these benefits, but preventing others from doing the same.

This is exactly what is happening now. As ever, we hear threats from Catholic bishops, obscure backbench MP's passed over for promotion, and others whose aim appears to be to create some sort of theocracy.

It is vital that this important research goes ahead and that those who would believe that to prevent it is any sort of 'moral' stance be firmly defeated. And given that these people are either outside politics, in the case of Bishops, or elected to represent their party, not their church, can I suggest that they exercise their 'conscience' by starting their own Vaticanist party? That way, those of us who have strong disagreement with Catholic beliefs in these areas will know exactly who not to vote for at the next election.

Giving blood

There is a shortage of blood donors. Yet, still, gay men are arbitrarily stopped from giving blood. There doesn't seem to be any logical reason for this. All blood is sensitively screened, and it is clear that 'behaviour' is not actually the criteria as questions about sexual activity are not asked of heterosexuals - or gay men, for that matter.

The ban is being challenged in Scotland. I hope it is removed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7347108.stm

Missing children

No doubt the Shannon Matthews incident will be soon forgotten. But its all quite sad. I wonder how they thought they could get away with it in the first place - unfortunately, it may mean that there is automatic suspicion the next time a kid from a poor background goes missing.

The McCann saga still drags on. This will no doubt upset some people, so please don't read if you think they can do no wrong. Personally, I think its high time they left the public arena. Whatever way one looks at it, and whatever happened to the child, no-one knows other than whoever did it, there is no excuse for leaving three small children alone. A baby-minding service was available, and anyone who visits Spain and Portugal knows that kids go out with their families - there wouldn't have been any problem at all in taking them along.

Given that if the children were all left alone, that immediately suggests some culpability, does this mean that a high-profile public campaign led by the very same parents is appropriate? I don't think so.
It also seems odd that only one of the three children disappeared.

Government woes.....

All Governments run out of steam, but this one does appear to be doing so big style. There doesn't seem to be any sense of direction and whilst on one level, thats no surprise, there do appear to be some echoes of the desperation of the Major years.

The willingness of MP's to raise questions about policies which they accepted just before Brown's election is an example - the abolition of the 10% tax rate is an example. Overall, the change probably makes us better off as a couple. However, taking my earnings into account, that certainly wouldn't be the case. I think there is something seriously wrong with a tax system which is clearly acting as a disincentive for the low paid to work. Should people earning as litle as £12K really be paying tax at all? I don't think so.

Northern Spain

Spent a very pleasant time in the north of Spain. We took the car on the ferry from Plymouth to Santander, and spent time in the Basque Country, Asturias, and Galicia.

Its mountainous territory, green and fertile. Unfortunately, for the two days we were in San Sebastian, it rained torrentially both days, so much so that it was impossible to walk to the aquarium without being blown into the sea! We ended up driving out to the centre of the jesuits at Loyola, which was actually rather good - there was a computer-aided English commentary by an Irishman who did a very good job at suggesting we should all become Catholics in a very gentle way...

Went to two of the star restaurants , Arzak, and Mugaritz. both excellent. What we tended to find, though, is that you get what you pay for in much of the region. pricey food is exemplary, cheap lunches pretty ropey.

And on the last night, both of us ended up vomiting violently and we are still not entirely back to normal. Virus, the tap water, or food could all be possibilities. Still, at least it was the end of the holiday - and there was a comfortable Commodore cabin on the ferry to sleep in for 15 hours solid!

Overall, its worth a visit. Natural beauty in abundance, and great wine. be warned, though, the distances between places are longer than they may appear on the map. And don't miss out Oviedo - its a delightful town but very much off the tourist itenary.

and yet more...

Some other Scottish cardinal ranting on - but I am sure that their approach will be counter productive. people generally aren't too keen on minority religionists telling the rest of us what tio do.

They do a great job, though. Joanne Bogle, former Tory councillor and doyen of various far-right immoral causes over the years did her usual sterling work this evening on 5 live. Shrieking, interrupting, lecturing and hectoring - do these people ever listen to themselves? Anyway, all for the good - the worse their spokespersons, the more reasonable people will recognise the paucity of their flat earth beliefs.

More lunacy from a minion of vatican plc

I'm not sure what they put in the holy water these days, but it looks as if the flapping of white coats is once again to be heard amongst our dear friends at Vatican plc (Scottish branch)

The latest loon is one Joseph Devine, senior frock wearer of Motherwell, who has complained about gay people being represented at Holocaust remembrance services. Well - hel-lo - but actually the gay people were persecuted and killed by the Nazis. Now, what were the catholic church doing - ah yes, collaborating and making secret deals with Hitler, a baptised Catholic. And let us not forget Ratfinger's enthusiastic membership of the Hitler Youth. Leopards don't change their spots, do they?

He doesn't seem to have realised that the world has changed - and he has been left behind fulminating as gay people are treated equally before the law and his institution is rightly prevented from discriminating at the public expense.

The next step really must be to abolish religionists running schools. Seems they have been cooking the books to prevent nasty common children getting in and spoiling their exam figures. We should expect no less from such upstanding, honest people.

No surprise here....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/europe/padre-pio-faked-his-stigmata-with-acid-397811.html

I wonder why anyone could ever think anything other.

Its obvious to anyone with even half a brain that this sort of thing is fake.

The Labour party

I was thinking the other day how it is all too easy to see things very differently from one place than another. The Labour party is one such thing. I think about rejoining, and then some bloody Government minister will come up with some utter tomfool nonsense about pledging allegiances to the Queen or such like ( this is NOT America and Brits find the reciting of poems to the flag hand on heart, as funny. Gordon, you don't seem to get it!)

It appears to me that an awful lot of decent mainstream Labour people have left the party. Iraq was a step too far for many of us, and as we are still there and direction doesn't appear to have changed, there isn't much to tempt us back to the fold.

What seems to remain are those who still seem to think that the battles of 1997 are being fought. No recognition that the Tories have certainly changed - it may be at surface level but change it is - and are no longer the incompetent unelectable mess of the last three elections. This group of NL evangelists are simply unable to be objective - they cannot or will not see that there are all sorts of areas where people really have had enough and have lost patience with the Government.

Then there is the hard left. naturally they spend most of their time fighting each other. The latest spat is over the choice of a new general Secretary for the Labour party. This is a functional not a policy making job. What is required is someone efficient with organisational ability. The purity of their politics is surely a secondary consideration. Already I have read blogs where such vitriol os expressed about the man simply because he works in the City! If he had been an arms dealer, fair enough - but what's wrong with drawing upon someone's experience?

he is undoubtedly taking a huge pay cut to do the job. he must be dedicated to the Party to want to do it in the first place.

So. Labour party members - a challenge - convince me that I should rejoin....

Catching-up time....

been busy again and have let this blog slip - so, some catching up.

First, Peter Tatchell has been mouthing off again about the age of consent. Sorry, peter, but no. Its fine at 16. of course some young people will have sex below that age but essentially the age does act as some sort of defence from predators - and they do exist, of all sexualities. What has to be remembered is that this is very much a lone voice. There is no campaign to reduce the age to 14. mainstream gay rights campaigners wanted equality, which is what we have, and have no desire to reduce the age further .

Did you hear last week's Moral Maze. There is something quite delicious about listening to that well known liberal (does she still call herself that?) Mel Phillips get angry. In this case, with a witness who was advocating prostitution. I didn't necessarily agree with him but the skill at winding up this quite humourless individual was masterful. Some people always rise to the bait.

Catholic MP's are once again trying to take orders from the Vatican to force the Governments hand. Quite simply, if your religionism is more important to you than supporting the Government, then start your own Vaticanist party. otherwise, belt up and stop trying to scupper urgently needed legislation which will hugely benefit people on the entirely spurious grounds of your make believe god and its disgusting, squalid, corrupt 'church'. There's nothing more immoral than Catholicism and its legions of hypocritical, fearful, brainwashed followers. particularly those skulking in their closets, scared of facing up publicly to their sexuality. there is just no excuse for it - its internalised homophobia through and through. One thing I agree with Peter Tatchell about is outing such hypocrites. They deserve to be shamed for their betrayal. I trust that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill will resist the threats of the religionists and will ensure that we remain a centre for this vital research, and that children of lesbian parents are recognised as such - as equality law demands.

oh, and that the Pope should die soon of an agonising death - no more than the bastard deserves given the number that his church policies have murdered by its attitude to the use of condoms to prevent HIV.

Doublethink

I've been fascinated to listen to the doublethink of many commentating on religious affairs this week.

First, those who actually agree with the ABC in wanting religious space, but wishing that to be 1) either universally imposed on everyone irrespective of their personal beliefs, or 2) selectively applied meaning that only their religions count. This is the conservative Christians position, and also that espoused by conservative commentators like Mad Mel Phillips. So, we ignore laws we don;t like (such as gay equality) and fulminate against it because it offends our religious sensibilities, but Islam is a wicked and evil religion and so should not be given space within the law, unlike us, because we are nice and British and they are evil and foreign and all terrorists wanting to turn this country into Londonistan writ large.....you know the rest....

Its an utterly illogical argument. It relies on a view that we first accept the essential goodness of conservative religiosity for some religions and not others - even though their social views are all much the same!

The other doublethink is the way that conservative Christians use the 'Christendom' view when it suits them but rejects it when it doesn't.

So, if they wish to convert others to their religion, the vast majority of us are evil sinners outside God's grace, heading to hell in a hand basket. But when they want to argue for theior views to hold sway in civil society, then we are a Christian country and 72% of us said so in the last census, don't cha know....

So, which is it to be - because the two positions are incompatible. Recent research has shown very clearly that very few of that 72% believe much more than Christianity is about being nice to people and synonymous with being English. So, why shopukd they expect their view to dominate in the making of civil law?

More fall out from RW

The positive outcome of all this is that Williams' aim of trying to advocate different laws for the religious has fallen flat on its face. people clearly feel there should be one law for all and that law should not be overly influenced by religion.

We are effectively a secular country. For most people religion means little more than a vague belief in 'something more' and somewhere to get married or buried, though less and less so all the time.

We don't like extreme religion and think it should stay in the private sphere for those who wish to believe it.

And RW has ensured no more religionist opt-outs and the slow death of those that remain - for that we should thank him.

Conservative religionists are livid because it has displayed how very far they are from achieving their Christian conservative theocracy.

I think it is entirely wrong to try and enforce religious or any other values therough the back door - we should be aiming for plurality and choice.

But it has also showed how little people and particularly the Press bother to read what people actually say unless it is in simple soundbites.

Sharia Law?

So, Rowan the Spineless has really put the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons

What I think he seems to be saying is far less radical then the headlines will no doubt say (though this is RW so he might be saying something quite different)

I think he is starting from the position that he wants to preserve some space for religious thinking alongside the secular law, which means that there may be areas where religious attitudes or regulations can run alongside the secular law. The exemptions from the SOR's given to the church would be an example of that.

I think RW is suggesting that there may be areas where Sharia law can be respected and seen as acceptable alongside secular law - for example, with regard to some areas of family law within Muslim communities, perhaps on the lines of the acceptability of the Beth Din which has control of some aspects of family law within the orthodox Jewish community ( and is respected by the state)

I think, though, that his agenda is to try and preserve a religious space given the logic of a multi-faith society is increasing secularism as no religion is given preference. i think he is worried that unless this space is given for sharia, then Christians' privileges may be lost.

My own view is that the civil law should be secular, and that means no exemptions for anyone, but I think it likely that churches and mosques alike are likely to practice that which they believe in within their own walls, which is what freedom of religion means. But if some Christians wish to see Christianity receive a privileged place, then there will also be Muslims asking for the same and in a pluralist society there is no logic in refusing. So - one law for all, no exemptions for religion. And no superior place for a church which the vast majority of citizens have no interest in attending.

Busy, busy....but some passing thoughts on Bishop James Jones

Merseymike's world appears to consist largely of marking exam scripts....

But, a couple of thoughts. Bishop James Jones of Liverpool has published an essay in which he offers apology to Jeffrey John for the way in which he opposed his being chosen as Bishop of reading. The essay also looks more widely at the issues surrounding biblical notions of same-sex friendship and the attitude of the Anglican church.
I wasn't surprised to read the article (its at http://www.liverpool.anglican.org/people/bishops/jamesspeeches/0712_Lambeth_essay.htm if you want to read it for yourself).

I think that there has been some hyperbole from both sides of the argument. Conservatives appear to be either keen to portray Bishop James as having abandoned their position, or wish to minimise the step he has taken in revising his perceived position. Liberals and the report in the Guardian are over-egging the pudding in the other direction.

I think that the situation and the views of JJ are more nuanced. I haven't met him for a while since I ceased active involvement with Changing Attitude, and then the Church, but I have met him on a number of occasions, and it is no secret that I served on the Theology of Friendship Group which he refers to in the article. I think the following observations are fair.

First, that his position has certainly softened in terms of what he thought and said when I first had contact with him
Second, that I think he is carefully saying what he can find in the Biblical account without necessarily imputing that which cannot be fairly imputed, given the reality of social construction. David and Jonathan loved one another and they may have had sexual contact - but that doesn't make them 'gay' in a Western sense. No-one in the Bible can have that label simply because it is a term with all sorts of social and cultural meanings.
Third, i think he may still have issues around same-sex sexual expression but that he isn't willing to see this being a matter which brings division
Fourth, that he clearly thinks that the Windsor process os flawed because it suggests that there may be a 'conclusion' reached. This, I think, is his most profound shift. I know that he doesn't regard the issue as first-order, which does separate him from conservative evangelicals. But I think - and I may be wrong - that he is saying that he is now more able to live with difference and diversity and that this is necessary to keep the issue open and allow continued dialogue. Unless he was open to the possibility of embracing change, then he wouldn't be suggesting this as a way forward. That doesn't mean that he necessarily fully embraces it himself, though.
Not yet, anyway. But he has moved.