Praying For Reign.
JULIA GILLARD: Working families didn't used to confront WorkChoices, they didn't used to be at risk of walking up to their workplace to be confronted by an Australian Workplace Agreement, which takes away basic conditions. Working families didn't used to be confronted by walking into a workplace and not knowing if this is the day they are going to be unfairly dismissed. Working families didn't used to be confronted with the pressure of wondering to themselves whether the kids would ever be able to afford a home of their own as housing affordability in this nation has plummeted, and working families are right to be concerned about the shape of our health and education services, and to be heartily sick of the Howard Government playing the blame game with State Labor governments.
This is the
woman who would be king.
Julia Gillard is a lawyer and a politician, although these things seem to be the same in a lot of cases these days.
Is it just me, or is this comment from last Sunday's
Insiders one of the most appalling things ever from a grammatical point of view?
While I am praying for God to lead the election as He will (preferably with John Howard and the Libs winning again), I am struck by what a load of old cobblers her comment is.
Comrade Gillard, could you please try and speak english for a change? Working families
never used to.... fill in the space....
Oh, and please spare me the crap about "working families". You bandy the phrase about with no qualifications. Is that a family with one working parent or two? What about one on disability with the other caring for them and the kids? What about single parent families? And is that a working family on a combined income of $40k or $400K?
This crap is like your policies:
trite and meaningless. And
redundant. Like your
militant unions. I really don't want them back, and that's coming from a former shop steward who spent years in the job.
Converting Propaganda.
According to our local, friendly
MuslimVillagers an American commander with the ISAF over in Afghanistan has
converted to islam.That is, of course, his choice, but there is a remarkable dearth of coverage across the western media players of this occurrence.
A quick google of
"cormier michel" brings up
Michel Cormier as the first link.
Not exactly breaking headlines around the world.
I probably shouldn't regard this matter so lightly, as it was also covered in extensive detail in
Afghanistan.And in
Pakistan.Over at
Discardedlies, there appears to be some doubt as to the veracity of this report.
Mind you, if it makes the news in
Romania, then I may have to take this a little more seriously.
Where are the people like
Bilal Hussein to make sure that such a propaganda coup gets out into the wider world? Not that
blogs aren't doing a fine job already, of course. (Add mine to the list.)
After all, as one
MVer says:Allhu Akbar. The conquer has been conquered. Just the beauty of Islam.
Somehow, I don't think the "conquer" has been conquered. Unless this is some arcane use of the word that escapes me.
Justice Is Pink
Magistrate loses gay adoption appeal
By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:32am GMT 01/11/2007
A Christian magistrate who felt forced to resign because he opposes adoption by gay couples has lost his appeal but vows to fight on.
Andrew McClintock, a Christian magistrate who felt compelled to resign over his views on gay adoption
Mr McClintock was 'deeply disappointed' with the decision
Andrew McClintock told an employment appeal tribunal earlier this month that he had suffered discrimination because the courts refused to allow him to opt out of cases involving such adoptions.
He also argued that placing children with gay parents was an "experiment in social science" that was not necessarily in their best interests.
But the Department for Constitutional Affairs, which is responsible for magistrates courts, said that judges could not pick and choose which cases they heard.
Mr McClintock, 63, from Sheffield, said that he was "deeply disappointed" with the tribunal's decision, but said that he would now go to the Court of Appeal.
He said that his Christian beliefs had been known to his fellow magistrates and court officials for the 18 years he had sat as a magistrate.
"It was no surprise to them that when the Civil Partnerships Act enabled same-sex couples to adopt and become foster carers, I was simply seeking some form of recusal from cases where I would be forced to act contrary to my conscience," he said.
"The Lord Chancellor's office is advertising for new magistrates from all sections of the community, but unless they are prepared to take into account the legitimate conscience needs of magistrates from Christian backgrounds, and others, they could well see not only a huge drop in recruitment but resignations from serving magistrates."
Andrea Minichiello Williams, for Christian Concern for the Nation, which is supporting Mr McClintock's legal action, said: "There is a prevailing secularist agenda which is pushing faith to the sidelines and quashing freedom of speech.
"In effect, Christians are being asked to leave their deeply held convictions and views at home and become someone else when they arrive at work or offer themselves for public service."
The article is a follow on from
this one about Mr McClintock, and what I find most interesting in this situation is that the magistrate has the honesty to admit that he cannot be impartial, and is basically told, "Too bad."
Here in Oz, we have plenty of activist judges, with one of the most prominent being Justice Michael Kirby, who makes no effort at impartiality from what I've seen. (I'll admit that I've not made a huge study of him, but
everybody knows he's out and proud)
With his giving speeches at
the Gay Games in 2002, I guess there's no worries about his lack of bias in any area of legislation.
To my mind, a magistrate who is willing to recuse himself from a case on the basis that he cannot apply the law with the necessary impartiality is one who should be held onto at all costs.
In this day and age there are too many stalking the corridors of power with their own agenda.
One that does not always act with the aim of upholding the Law.
