Prime Minister, You Have Run Out of Our Money!

Conservative MEP for South East England Daniel Hannan addresses UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown on 26 March 09 in the European Parliament. A couple of gems from his speech (below): "the truth, Prime Minister is that you have run out of our money." And a little later on, in response to Brown's Keynesian approach, "you know - and we know, and you know that we know that it's nonsense". 1.8 million views in less than a week makes this a speech not to be missed.

Here's a good seven minute discourse on why Keynesianism doesn't work. This is summed up well with the quote, "Politicians just love to spend other people's money, and Keynesianism is a convenient rationale [for this]".

hat-tip: MandM

Why Should Atheists Be Pro-Life?

...asks Judy Ferris of Pagans for Life. She answers this question and also explains the reason behind the claim that pro-life and religion are inseparable - which is made by the media and pro-death people in general.

"I am often asked this question. I usually answer, "Why shouldn't atheists be pro-life?" Nobody questions why non-religious persons fight drug abuse, drunk-driving, rape, poverty, crime, etc. Why should fighting abortion be viewed so differently?

Some people think that unless you believe in God, or more specifically, a God that will punish you in Hell if you do something wrong, then you cannot be made to behave. They apparently believe that atheists must be criminals.

Yet, many non-religious people actively fight crime, violence, and "wrongdoing" for many reasons. We believe in fairness and justice, protection of people's rights, lives and property. Heck, we even register to vote and try to pass laws to govern the behavior of other citizens! I am living proof that a belief in God or religion is not necessary for a person to become involved in the fight against abortion.

In fact, one thing that both the abortion industry and the pro-life movement agree on is that public ignorance about fetal development, abortion methodology and post-abortion complications is necessary if abortion is to remain legal. Ironically, the religious orientation of most pro-lifers may act as the major factor preventing education from taking place.

Once upon a time, I was a "pro-choice" woman. I believed in many mythical things back then: that sex could be "free" from any committments or consequences, that legalized abortion was "safe", that "control" over female reproductive functions would lead to equal rights for women. But the myth I held to most dearly was that opposition to abortion was merely religious.

Since I had allowed my first child to be killed by abortion, I wanted to be reassured that I had nothing to feel ashamed or guilty about. Certain women's groups comforted me by calling abortion a woman's "right" - merely a medical procedure. I would literally hold my breath whenever abortion was the topic on television, waiting for religion to be mentioned. The media never let me down. Abortionists angrily complained about the trauma experienced by patients because of pro-life picketers. Abortion-rights activists harassed preachers who spoke up against abortion, accusing them of being insensitive to women...."

Click here to continue reading...

Earth Hour 2009

MandM poses the question, "what you are going to do to protest earth hour?"

Last year Act on Campus Canterbury attended the Earth Hour event in Cathedral Square, Christchurch. We handed out pamphlets, put up posters, shone our torches, and got on TV.  This time round it has been much more low key, with Rick the objectivist and I handing out pamphlets at University over the last couple of days.

I'm also involved with the Anti Earth Hour Blog, which is running under the motto, SWITCH ON THE LIGHTS!!!

Tonight I think I'll lie low and have a quiet beer or two with my mate who's down from Auckland for Le Race. We'll make sure that the beer is absolutely freezing cold, as this will use more energy. Take one for the team.

Rogernomics Round II

Sir Roger Douglas comments that instead of simply identifying that we have a problem, Minister of Finance Bill English should take some serious action...

"Having managed New Zealand through difficult times, I understand how important confidence is. Consistency of policy is the only thing that leads to credibility in the Government. In turn, this creates the kind of confidence that New Zealanders need to get through this pain.

Governments must be consistent to ensure that the market can predict what the Government will do. All this talk of bailouts and the like undermine certainty. It suggests to business that the Government may begin to actively pick winners and losers...

...the Government is stuck in the past; wedded to the idea that Governments can actually deliver these services through the monopolies they have set up. To put us back on the path to growth, we need to make several quick changes in policy.

1) We need to immediately abolish those departments that deliver no social benefits. Who has ever heard of an earth-shattering report from the Families Commission? What does the Charities Commission even do? Why do we need a Ministry of Economic Development when we did alright without one until the fifth Labour Government - and that's without even looking at the political correctness that has led to the Ministry of Youth Development or the Ministry of Women's Affairs...

...It is not about whether we have a duty to the poor - ACT agrees that we do. It's about how we make good on that duty."
- Press Release, ACT Party, 26 March 2009

It's good to have Sir Roger back in Parliament.

Ray Comfort in New Zealand

World renowned evangelist Ray Comfort visited his home country of New Zealand last week. The man who began his ministry by preaching daily in Cathedral Square, and debating with the Wizard now heads up one of the largest evangelical movements in the World. I admire Ray for his devotion to the Great Commission which Jesus gave his followers moments before he ascended back into Heaven. Ray's model for witnessing is also of great value, and I have used it myself many times. You can view a web-presentation of this model by taking the good test. Living Waters, Ray's ministry has also been responsible for publishing many well thought-out and professionally presented tracts. In particular, I have been* a fan of the Smart Card, the Million Dollar Bill, and the Christmas tracts. More recently however, Living Waters has been publishing tracts (like this Obama Million Dollar Bill for instance), which cause me to roll my eyes and wonder what on earth they are hoping to achieve.

I attended three events in Christchurch where Ray was speaking, and found them to be increasingly dissapointing and frustrating.

On Tuesday17 March, Ray "debated" with an atheist at the Ngaio Marsh theatre, University of Canterbury. I can't remember the fulla's name, but he was a post-graduate philosophy student. I say "debated", because that's precisely what it wasn't. The atheist opened the forum by presenting his views, outlining his understanding that it was absolutely impossible for a god to exist, and then proceeding to pre-empt arguments that he suspected Ray would make, and then proceeded to answer them himself. A bit below the belt I thought, but nonetheless; he aired some weighty arguments for his case. Ray spoke next - and instead of addressing the atheist's arguments, he lightly touched on one or two of his comments, but then proceeded to give a short version of his life story, a collection of apologetic arguments, as well as a presentation of the Gospel. During question and answer time at the end, Ray ignored two fair and well thought-out questions, by simply responding, "yes... next question?" One of these was, "If humans are sinful and unable to please God, how are they able to ask God to save them; to repent?" Ray could have addressed this doctrinal issue, but instead left the question hanging. I spoke to a student (A Bahai follower I think) later in the day, and he told me that he had been surprised to hear Ray mocking people who disagreed with him.

The following Thursday I dropped in on Student Life's weekly meeting, where they had invited Ray as a guest speaker. This talk wasn't quite so bad, considering that it was in a different context. However I was reminded of Ray's neglect to consider other approaches to presenting the gospel. The whole of the Living Waters ministry is really stuck in the rut of their single Gospel model.

Sunday evening, I attended the evening service at South City Church where Ray was speaking. To kick off the evening, Ray told us a joke which immediately marginalised anyone in the audience who was dyslexic, or who knew someone who was. "I've just figured out what the acronym D.N.A. stands for," said Ray. "The National Dyslexic Assocaition." What the heck. That's relevant isn't it.

To his credit, Ryan the atheist had made it along to each of these three events. So I cringed as Ray proceeded to crack yet another of his thoughtless jokes. He told us of the time that an atheist organisation had flown him to another city in the United States where he was scheduled to speak at their conference; and had put him up at a hotel for the night. "When I got into the room," he said, "there was a big plate full of fresh fruit. I had someone else taste it first to see if they had poisoned it." What would Ryan - or any other atheist in the room think when they heard that... am I supposed to take these Christians seriously?

As with the last two speaking arrangements, Ray spent a large section of the time sharing his life story with us. In a manner that I can only say is foreign to Kiwis, but much more common with Americans, he excitedly told us of how many million tracts he had sold, how many atheist conferences he had spoken at, how his book had shot to number one in the Atheist section on Amazon.com, etc. I am delighted to hear of Ray's success in his ministry, however it comes across wrong, having him tell us this from the stage.

Ray gave us a good number of ideas for what Christians can say when sharing the Gospel. However as a friend of mine said, "Ray seems to think that if you follow his pattern of logic, you will become a Christian. He seems to skip over God's salvation of people, and simply thinks that we should laugh at people who are atheists or otherwise."

Thankfully, there are many more positive aspects to Ray and his ministry than negative ones. I agreed with, and appreciated much of the content of Ray's talks. He has a good knowledge of apologetics, the Bible, atheism and evolutionism. This post has not been an attempt at running him down, but rather summarising the opinions of myself and others - of Ray's talks while he was here in New Zealand.

-------------------------------------

*I have been a fan of the Living Waters tracts. I have a 100 pack of Smart Cards sitting here on my desk; they've been there for a few years now. I don't know what to do with them. The Gospel message on the back is sound, apart from the explanation of what Jesus' death on the cross means to us. Here is the relevant excerpt:

"Jesus Christ suffered and died on the Cross, so you could go free. That's how much God loves you. We broke God's Law, but Jesus paid our fine."

If this summary is correct, then in fact every person in history is going to Heaven. In actual fact, Jesus died on the cross, paying for the sins of only those who would put their trust in Him. I agree that God loves everyone in the World; but not in a saving way as the tract implies. We've all broken God's law, however Jesus only paid the fine for those who would put their trust in Him. If Jesus in fact died for people who would never put their trust in Him, then God's plan is thwarted, and he is therefore not sovereign: that is impossible. I can't give out tracts that tell people that they're going to Heaven no matter what they do.

Gamaliel's Advice

I'm currently reading through the book of Acts in the Bible, and came across this intriguing passage,

Peter and the other apostles said: “We ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.

When [the Sadducees] heard this, they were furious and plotted to kill them. Then one in the council stood up, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in respect by all the people, and commanded them to put the apostles outside for a little while. And he said to them: “Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do regarding these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and came to nothing. After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census, and drew away many people after him. He also perished, and all who obeyed him were dispersed. And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it — lest you even be found to fight against God.”

And they agreed with him, and when they had called for the apostles and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
- Acts 5:29-42

Gamaliel was onto something here. Note especially the comment in bold. Gamaliel suggests that this "newfangled" Christianity be given the ultimate test: the test of time, to see if it has any credibility or worth.  Almost 2,000 years later and we're still holding to the same gospel as famously summarised by Peter and the apostles in the first paragraph above...

Huckabee on Modern Slavery

Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee spoke at a pro-life convention recently

"What are we saying to the generation coming after us when we tell them that it is perfectly OK for one person to own another human being?" Huckabee said.

"I thought we dealt with that 150 years ago when the issue of slavery was finally settled in this country, and we decided that it no longer was a political issue, it wasn't an issue of geography, it was an issue of morality," Huckabee added. "That it was either right or it was immoral that one person could own another human being and have full control even to the point of life and death over that other human being."

He said civilization cannot survive if "one group of people have life and death control over another for no particular reason other than their own conveniences and, in that case, prejudices."
- Life News, 24 March 09

...would have been wonderful to have Mike as president of the States.

You're Great!

Validation is an independent short film (15 minutes) which has won a number of awards. This evening, why not boil the jug, make some hot drinks, press the fullscreen button on Youtube, switch off the lights and grab a seat on the couch with the whānau and take in this film.

The film employs a number of clever techniques and shots to portray a situation that takes place over an extended period of time, within fifteen short minutes. In black and white, and making use of some talented actors who come across as "normal people" - as opposed to the usual glamour of the mainstream films, the viewer is transported into another corner of the world they know; this is happening just down the street from you...

:)

Prolife NZ Opposed to FPA. Application for Abortion Licence

Yesterday Prolife NZ made a press release, calling for the Abortion Supervisory Committee to refuse the Family Planning Association's application for a licence to perform abortions at their 30 clinics throughout New Zealand. Click here to read the press release.

LifeNews.com quickly picked up on the press release, alerting US readers to the situation here in New Zealand. Below is an excerpt from their article, and you can click here to read the full article, where they continue, discussing Right to Life's case against the Abortion Supervisory Committee currently underway in the High Court.

A pro-life group in New Zealand is mounting public opposition to a bid by the Family Planning Council to distribute the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone. FPC says abortion should be more available across the island nation and it wants to distribute the drug that has killed women worldwide.

The council has submitted an application to the Abortion Supervisory Committee for a license to distribute the abortion pill.

Mifepristone, also known as RU 486, has killed more than a dozen women worldwide and injured more than 1,400 in the United States alone.

Andy Moore, the director of Pro-Life New Zealand, says his group is opposed to granting the application to provide the abortion drug at its 30 locations in part because FPC is allowed in New Zealand schools.

"It is unethical for a group to be in our schools promoting abortion as a preferable option, and then turning around and offering the service at their clinics," he said.
-Life News, 23 March 2009

To stay informed of abortion and pro-life news Worldwide, you can sign up to LifeNews.com's daily/weekly email updates (click here).

You Do Not Know...

...the power of the dark side of the force

On the Boscawen Ammendment

ACT MP John Boscawen has introduced a bill calling for ammendments to Section 59 of the Crimes Act, ensuring that smacking (the use of reasonable force in the circumstances), will not be a criminal offence. There is conjecture that the bill has been based on Chester Borrows' proposed ammendments back in March 2007 (which were defeated).

The Borrows amendment would allow physical discipline unless:

1. It involves conduct prohibited by an enactment creating a criminal offence...
2. It causes or contributes materially to harm that is more than transitory and trifling; or
3. Any weapon, tool or other implement is used; or
4. It is inflicted by any means that is cruel, degrading or terrifying.

Samuel Dennis explains why the Chester Borrows ammendment model is not a good move for New Zealand.

"...what need is there for point [3], when you already have point [2]?

If no more than “transitory and trifling” effects are produced, what difference does it make whether a hand or a wooden spoon was used? homerstranglesbart1

In fact, it is quite possible to beat a child to death with your bare hands. You don’t need a weapon to inflict major injuries. Whether an implement is used has absolutely nothing to do with preventing child abuse, and is actually a distraction from the real issue.

It also opens up a new issue - what is an implement? Is a ring an implement if a child is smacked with an open hand but accidentally injured by a ring? What about if the parent happened to be wearing a soft glove? What about a thick leather glove?

Let’s not go there. The issue is whether harm is caused that is more than “transitory and trifling”. Forget about whether an implement is used - that is completely irrelevant and just another point of dispute."

In his usual no-mucking-around style, Samuel sheds some light on this supposedly cloudy aspect of New Zealand's approach to child discipline. Head over to his blog to read the entire article.

Rachael

"...Although I was scared to death, I have never regretted leaving that clinic.

When she was invisible to the world in the form of a tiny person known only to me and a handful of clinicians, she was still a person. She was still her. There are moments that grip my heart with despair knowing that I was one step away from taking her life in order to restore mine to it’s prior stability. Other moments are joy unexplained when I look back, knowing that I was one step away from extinguishing this little girl from existence…but I made the choice for her. Do I still face hardship? Yes and I still do it alone. The crisis of pregnancy I faced was minuscule compared to this beauty of life named Rachael. She’s a gift no matter how she was conceived; no matter how bad the timing; Her life is priceless..."

- an excerpt from a post at the It's a Child, Not a Choice blog. Head over there and read the rest of this lady's story. It's short, and well-written and puts a genuine perspective on an issue which is so often dealt with in terms of cold hard statistics and claims.

Boscawen Introduces Ammendment to S59

Press Release, ACT, 19 Mar 2009: Amendment To Fix Broken Anti-Smacking Law

ACT New Zealand MP John Boscawen today announced that he will introduce a Private Member's Bill to amend the controversial Anti-Smacking law inflicted on New Zealanders by Labour and the Greens in 2007.

"My announcement coincides with yesterday's release of a poll that shows widespread support for the law to be altered," Mr Boscawen said.

"This poll, commissioned by Family First NZ and conducted by Curia Market Research, surveyed the views of 1,000 everyday New Zealanders - 83 percent of whom felt the law should be changed, with a total 77 percent of respondents believing the law would not help reduce our child abuse rates.

"While addressing the concerns of those who felt that the original section 59 of the Crimes Act was too vague, my amendment to the law will protect from criminalisation those parents who use a light smack for the purpose of correction.

"The amendment will change the Act so that: it is no longer a crime for parents or guardians to use reasonable force to correct children; there are clear statutory limits on what constitutes reasonable force; parents and guardians have certainty about what the law permits; it is no longer reliant on police discretion for the law to be practical and workable.

"In an attempt to curb child abuse, this law has simply criminalised law-abiding parents and removed their freedom to decide how best to raise their children - something that ACT has consistently opposed.

"The Labour we know best' Government is out and National is now in. Perhaps we will now begin to see an end to the madness of the past nine years - where politicians saw fit to tell New Zealanders how to live their lives," Mr Boscawen said.

----------------------------------------

This is what we've all been waiting for. Now National has a reason to support a major ammendment (won't be full repeal) of this flawed anti-parental-authority law. ACT, one of the two major parties in their confidence and supply Government will be pressuring National to give their support to this bill.

hat-tip: Constant Joy

You

Here's a long-time favourite song by Switchfoot. They sing about their relationship with God; He is their hope... "Not in me, but in You"

There's always something / In the way / There's always something / Getting through / But it's not me / it's You
Sometime's ignorance / Rings true / But hope is not in / What I know / Not in me / It's in You
It's all I know
And I find peace / When I'm confused / I find hope when / I'm let down / Not in me / But in You
I hope to lose myself / For good / I hope to find it in the end / Not in me / It's You / It's all I know

Weekly Joke

A father and his small son were standing in front of the tiger's cage at the zoo. The father was explaining how ferocious and strong tigers are, and junior was taking it all in with a serious expression.

"Dad," the boy said finally, "if the tiger got out of his cage and ate you up ... "

"Yes, son?" the father said expectantly.

" ... what bus should I take home?" the boy finished.

2009 Research, 83% NZers say Change Smacking Law

from the Section59 blog

Almost two years after the passing of the controversial anti-smacking law, more than 80% of NZ’ers still want the law changed and 77% say that the law won’t have any effect on our unacceptable child abuse rate.
These are the key finding of research commissioned by Family First NZ, following on from similar research in 2007 and 2008. The Curia Market Research poll surveyed 1,000 people, and also found huge confusion over the legal effect of the law.
83% said that the new law should be changed to state explicitly that parents who give their children a smack that is reasonable and for the purpose of correction are not breaking the law (85% in 2008, 82% in 2007).

---

Key Findings:
83% say the law should be changed – only 13% say to keep it as is
77% says the law won’t help reduce the rate of child abuse in NZ
Less than one third of respondents actually understand the law

---

Below are two graphs from the Press Release

Click here to read the full article

Tommy In Trouble

I haven't got round to blogging in the last few days, so thought I'd post something I wrote a while ago. This is a story I wrote, as a project I think, for my English class at Windermere Christian College, 1995. It was pretty special, Dad let me type it up on his work computer! Then I printed it out, drew pictures in, and made it into a book. Cooooool.

CHAPTER ONE: THE BIG CHASE
One day my dog was walking along the street with me (I'm Andrew.) That moment a cat named Jimmy walked by. Of course Tommy chased the little cat right into a dustbin. Poor Jimmy, Oh no! Jimmy was having fun nibbling at odd's and end's, then, out of the corner of his eye he spied a bit of bacon. So he started nibbling at it but when he finished his meal he got a bit scratchy. He tried to get out but he couldn't, Tommy was sitting on the lid. Poor Jimmy pushed and pushed up on the lid. Tommy falls off and onto my head. I shake him off. Tommy chases Jimmy up a tree. A twig breaks, leaves fall, Jimmy falls! Tommy jumps, another twig breaks, Tommy falls snap goes his leash! I say, time to go home Tommy! That night Tommy ate hardly anything. I thought he was tired after the big chase.

CHAPTER TWO: RIDE IN A PRAM
One day Tommy saw a pram. He jumped into it then the pram moved. He looked out, an old lady was pushing it. It jingled ,it went bump-bump-bumpity-bumpity-bump. Tommy fell out head-first into a lake. He swam out caught up with the old lady and Tommy gave her a hard stare. She screamed and shrieked. She ran so fast she jumped up into the air and ran out of breath. "Oh sorry, i'm so very sorry!''

CHAPTER THREE: TOMMY INTERFERES WITH CRICKET
One day Tommy thought Hmmmmm...
I'll go and watch cricket. He went to tell Andrew, his owner, "Can I watch cricket?"
"Oh all right" said Andrew. But do not interfere with the batter... No buts! I'll give you a red apple for the ball and a Mars Bar for the bat to remind you.
"Thanks a lot Andrew" said Tommy. I will try to remember..."

Tommy strolled down the road. He looked at a sign post, it read St lukes Street. He said to himself, I am in the wrong place! So he turned the corner. Wheeeeeeeew I’m here at last! Oops, he jumped but sadly he landed on the batters head! The batter got such a fright that the ball hit the wickets! What a surprise this was! Everybody from the other team cheered.
Meanwhile at Tommy's home Andrew was watching television. He was so mad at Tommy that he went to get him. But instead of Andrew bringing Tommy home, Tommy dragged Andrew all the way home, right into the bath tub which Dad had only just filled for himself. Poor Andrew sitting in the tub with all his clothes on!

However one exhausted but satisfied dog.
All but submerged in the tub.

THE END

Abortions: Best Value, Lowest Prices

Stand-up comedian and social/political commentator Steven Crowder attacks Planned Parenthood's marketing of their abortion services using taxpayer dollars.  I saw this video a few weeks back and was hesitant to post it, as it uses humour to discuss a subject which is the furtherest thing from funny this side of the black stump.  However it's a short message well worth watching, whether you're pro-life or pro-death.

Steven has a number of other good videos dealing with such subjects as gun control and the Quaran

Feeling Lucky?

...well, do ya punk? Not if you know that every other teacher at the school is carrying a gun and knows how to use it.

Charl van Wyk at WND.com presents the option of arming school-teachers,

By the time a 17-year-old gunman had finished his wild shooting spree at a school near Stuttgart, Germany, this week, at least nine young pupils and three teachers lay dead. Only after fleeing the scene, with the police in hot pursuit, and a final shootout with authorities, was the attacker finally killed
Could an armed teacher have made a difference? Of course. Surely a teacher with a gun in the hand would have been better than a cop on the phone. The incident proves what has long been known: The only person who can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun – nobody else will be of much help

Related posts:
Call to ban GTA4 in NZ
33 murdered students, elephant, video games
25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'

Photobucket... wow!

The abortion counter which I created late last year has become fairly popular. A lot of bloggers who are pro-life are putting the counter in their sidebar in an effort to reinforce in visitor's minds, the awful reality of this silent holocaust that is upon us. A few days back when I checked the stats for the www.prolife.org.nz server where the counter is stored, I was concerned (and encouraged, obviously) to see the high bandwidth* that was being used. Approximately 3 Gigabytes of data was being transferred per month, with most of that being for the abortion counter.

I decided I would host the images with Photobucket instead, to save bandwidth on my own server. Well that's all very well, but what bandwidth does Photobucket give you? Get this - 25GB bandwidth per month, plus the ability to store up to 1GB of pictures, and that's just on the free account!

The counter has already been translated into six languages, with more on the way. I'd love to have the problem of getting close to the 25GB/month cap, in which case it will be a simple matter of uploading the same images to a new account, and providing a new piece of code for the counter, pointing to the new images.

*Bandwidth means how much data you are allowed to transfer within a certain time. Most people have a bandwidth cap on their internet connection, for instance 5 gigabytes of uploading/downloading per month - and after that it goes really slow, you know the one :P

How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone...

...to not share the gospel with them - if you really believe it yourself? - asks atheist, Penn Jillette

What's My life Worth Anyway?

A lone sidewalk counselor at a Cherry Hill abortion center is suffering from serious injuries after a young man driving his pregnant wife to the abortion facility reportedly struck the counselor and ran him over. But the victim's wife says that the event probably saved a life, as she believes she was able to persuade the man afterwards not to have his unborn child killed...

...Tina Krail, who was badly shaken when she arrived on the scene, said she then had a chance to confront the man along with his pregnant wife.

"I thought, 'What would Jesus do?" she told LifeSiteNews. "So I walked over and I said, 'Hon, I'd like to talk to you. I forgive you for hitting my husband.' And he said, 'Oh, I'm so sorry,' and his whole face just changed.

"Then I said: 'I want you to look at me in the eyes. I've been where you're at, and I can tell you my husband also forgives you, and he probably wants me to tell you that if one broken leg would save your child, he would do it over again.

- read the full report at www.lifesitenews.com

Slumdog Millionaire

Finally watched Slumdog Millionaire tonight.  The story follows three young friends who are growing up in the slums of Mumbai.  In a unique style, the movie uses a series of flash-backs intertwined with scenes from the present (2006) to tell the story of these three young people.  This is a wonderful film; no wonder it received eight Oscars, and is currently sitting at #42 film in the World.  It is ideal as a family film, though wouldn't recommend young children watching it as there are some disturbing scenes.  "If Charles Dickens was writing in 21st century India, Slumdog Millionaire could easily have been one of his stories. It carries all the trademarks of the literary master: Urban squalor, wayward children, evil adults, chaste love, serious serendipity." says PluggedinOnline.com.

A Trillion Dollars

here's a million dollars in $100 bills

But how much is a trillion dollars? $1,000,000,000,000 - a million million.  But what would it look like in cash? Someone's drawn up a really interesting diagram to put it in perspective.

hat tip: Whaleoil

To Heck with Blogrolling.com

[Update: 13 March 09] So much for the Google Reader blog roll! I don't know what went wrong, but all the links disappeared out of the list. I played round with the settings at the Google Reader end, but to no avail. Instead I've just gone for a list that I will update manually. I think they will be higher-quality (more search engine friendly) links this way anyway.

As many of you will know, Blogrolling.com was hacked - and was subsequently down for a long time. Half a year or something. Anyway, they're finally back up and running, so this evening I went through, revising and updating my blog roll - have been waiting to get onto this for ages. What they've done though, is they've made it so that if you don't pay for the service, when someone clicks on a blog in your list, it takes them to a blogrolling.com page with an advert at the top, and the blog you're visiting sitting in an iframe below. It's relatively inconspicous but still highly annoying. As a free service I loved it - but with the adverts and the new slow but flashy back-end interface, it's not worth bothering with...

continue reading at my webdev blog.

The Brilliance of Tolstoy

"Oblonsky was on familiar terms with everyone with whom he took a glass of champagne, and he took a glass of champagne with everyone."

- from Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy

ACTually Authoritarian

"This isn't an agreement cobbled together out of self-interest, but one developed through our shared vision to create a better and brighter future for New Zealand." - Rodney Hide in ACT's press release, National-ACT Confidence & Supply Agreement Announcement, 16/11/2008.

In a 4 March press release, Rodney Hide says "Garden centres can open on Easter Sunday but the Mitre 10 hardware shop nearby, which also sells plants, cannot. That is ridiculous... People just want to get on with their lives unhindered by silly rules." That's a classic ACT position - government should keep out of people's lives.

The Prohibition of Gang Insignia Bill...

Lindsay Mitchell notes that both Rodney Hide and Heather Roy were strongly opposed to the gang-patch ban as late in the game as September 2008 - and yet today, both are singing a different tune. The ACT party is supporting National's Chester Borrows' gang-patch ban, presumably to buy National's support for ACT's 3 Strikes and You're Out policy. It's a given that some compromise is necessary if you want to get anywhere in Parliament - however ACT's support of National's bill is unacceptable. There are two major problems with the proposed law. Firstly, it is restricting the freedom of citizens; in their freedom of expression. They will not be allowed to display gang-patches on their clothes or vehicles. Secondly, the bill is unjust because it will only apply to people living within a certain area of New Zealand. Only those living in the Wanganui District will be subject to this law currently being pushed through back down in Wellington.


Samuel Dennis saliently observes, "This gang patches law is not only unprincipled, it makes life a lot harder for the police. Currently the gang members make policing easy by wearing nice uniforms saying in effect "Check me, I probably did it". If they are forced to wear civilian clothes, crime fighting will be far harder."

What is the argument against displaying gang insignia on your person, or on your vehicle in public? Surely any such argument is one that will lead down the slippery slope of restricting people's freedom of expression - for the greater good. ACT is letting itself down by supporting this authoritarian bill.

"We accept that allowing the Wanganui District Council to make these bylaws could be perceived to breach the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, but we think for the safety and security of the residents of Wanganui these powers are desirable." says the select committee looking after the bill. Ahem, excuse me... did I hear that right?

What's next? Is ACT going to support a move to ban t-shirts that have a Christian message on them, or that say something along the lines of "Abortion is Murder"?

You're Not Prolife

The vast majority of Christians when asked, will tell you that they are "prolife". They will nod their heads and agree with you about the barbarity and injustice of the abortions taking place everyday in our country. However on the whole, these people are not prolife, they merely say that they're prolife.

When the Nazis were rounding up Jews in German-occupied areas during World War II, many non-Jewish citizens knew that what was going on was evil, but they did nothing to help. Others however, risked everything and did what they could to find jobs for them, or to hide them from the soldiers. We look back with disgust at these cowardly people who knew of the injustice that was going on, and who even had the power to do even something very small about it - and yet did nothing.

In Jesus' parable of the two sons, it wasn't the son who said he would do the work who did the will of his father, but rather the son who actually did the work. Unless you're actually committed to doing something about it, you can tell me you're prolife until the cows come home, but your words are meaningless.

You don't have to stand in front of an abortion clinic with a sign to be prolife. There are many things you can do - some small, some great - to be actively prolife. One of the most important of these is to make sure that you are informed of the issues, that you know where you stand, and if questioned are able to back up your position reasonably well. You can wear pro-life t-shirts or wrist-bands, join your local pro-life group, donate, write to your MP, and talk to people around you about why this issue is so terrible, and what we can do about it - on a national, and on an individual level.

Break your stereotype!

Kutless

I bought a Kutless CD Hearts of the Innocent a few months back, as I had a gift-voucher I was given over a year ago on my 21st. I didn't have high expectations for the band, but from pretty much the first play, I've been captivated by the great lyrics and the music's good too. Here's the music video of one of their best songs from the album, Shut Me Out...

And two other favourites, Smile and Hearts of the Innocent. Here's the lyrics for Hearts of the Innocent which I really love...

I’m looking down into the eyes of hopelessness
They’re crying out to me
I see the pain
It’s so much more than youth should know
It tears me apart
What can I do to change what I see
This vicious cycle must come to an end

Can’t you see
We’re crushing the hearts of the innocent
We’re teaching them to fail
And how it breaks me to see how we’re living
And punishing the ones that need us to care
To see them hurting
Feels like knuckles to the back of my head

Where have the days gone
That a promise was forever
Families stuck together
We wonder why their generation struggles to get by
There’s no one to help
What can I do to change what I see
This vicious cycle must come to an end

Quid Est Libertas?

What is freedom? Earlier today, Rick and I were discussing this question.  As it became clear, we have different understandings of what it means to be free, or to be more specific, what it means to be truly free to make a choice.  First I'll explain what I believe freedom of choice means, following this with my understanding of Rick's position.  Then a brief example to clear things up a bit, because it may be a bit confusing.

;)

Andy.  Freedom can be most simply expressed as a person's inherent free will.  It is the ability to choose between right and wrong, or between life and death.  Noone can ultimately take away our freedom. Of course, we speak of such things as the Anti-Smacking Law, or the late Electoral Finance Act as taking away our freedom, however it would be more correct to say that such unjust laws give our freedom new parameters.  In Mel Gibson's timeless epic, Braveheart, William Wallace famously says "they'll never take our freedom".  Towards the end of the movie when Wallace is on the rack being tortured to death, he is given the chance to ask for mercy.  Instead he lets forth the haunting but rallying cry, "FREEDOM!!!" before the executioner's axe swings down.  To William Wallace - at least in this film, freedom was the ability to choose between right and wrong, duty or compromise - whatever the circumstances or consequences might be.

Rick.  Freedom is the ability to be able to make a choice without threat of adverse consequences.  I'm not sure if it would matter whether or not the choice was either logically sound or morally good.  Also, I'm not sure whether the adverse consequences would necessarily have to be initiated by another person or group of people.  Otherwise you could say that because walking off a 20-storey building would bring about adverse consequences, your freedom was therefore impeded.  As you can see, I am not arguing for this position very well, firstly because I don't believe it, and secondly because I don't yet fully understand it.  Rick will no doubt clear up any confusion in his response on his own blog.

Example.  "The soliders" bust into your place and tell you that they're there to enforce a new law.  The new law states that no citizen may hold a religious belief, and further, must officially declare their refutation of any previously held religious convictions - on pain of death.  I think Rick would say that in this situation, you don't have any freedom.  On the other hand, I think that you absolutely do have freedom - even if your choice results in your death.

It may be that we're actually talking about different things but using the same word - I'm not sure.  What do you think?

Chauvel and Goff

In our New Zealand Politics paper today, we were privileged to be delivered a lecture by the (token) leader of the Opposition, The honourable Phil Goff. Also in attendance were Phil's office-lady, an ecstatic looking Brendan Burns (Tim Barnett's replacement as MP for Waimakarari), and the ever-uninspiring back-bencher list MP, Charles Chauvel.

Chauvel, Burns, office-lady

Phil's lecture was informative as he explained to us his experience of being in Parliament as well as answering a few questions regarding Labour, the 2008 election, and the general workings of Parliament. His three colleagues sat and listened to their leader, with Chauvel popping up at one stage to pass Phil a note telling him that "he had 10 minutes left". Phil read the note out loud and we all laughed; Chauvel and Brendan exchanged a few whispered, seemingly humourous comments - as MPs do when they're nervous or confused.

David Garret (ACT's Law and Order man) told me that Burns is a remarkably nice man to work with in Parliament - so despite his FAIL billboard and my run-in with him on abortion at a public forum, I haven't got too much against him; he sat bolt upright, switched on throughout the entire ordeal.

Chauvel on the other hand was his usual, arrogant self. While the other guests left their cellphones in their pockets, and their briefcases stacked near the wall, backbencher Chauvel obviously felt compelled to make the most of the indespensible 50 minute slot to get some work out of the way. He looked at - or used his cellphone several times throughout the lecture, as well as shuffling through various files from his bag, making notes here and there; catching up on office work while supposedly engaging in a teaching/campaigning opportunity with a room full of bright young, future politicians. The paper shuffling and sorting went on for well over half the lecture. Brendan, the office-lady and our lecturer shot the occasional concerned glance in Chauvel's direction but he didn't appear to catch on. Simply reinforce for me the fact that he's a drain on the tax-payer and we'd be better off not having people like him in Parliament. (Click here to see some of his speeches)

Some students asked ridiculous questions such as "I really want to enter Parliament, but I'm concerned about corruption...", or "What is the favourite part of your job as leader of the Opposition"... However, one or two asked a decent question, for instance, why had Labour passed the Electoral Finance Bill, and then been happy to vote for it's repeal once National was in power. "Oh... we knew it wasn't perfect when we passed it... we want to discuss a new approach with National..." (not verbatim) was the weak response.

Phil's done twenty-five years in Parliament now - 15 years in government, and he's currently in his 10th year of opposition. I wonder if he's got it in him to lead the Labour party to the '11 election.

On Technophobia

Too often I hear people say to me that they refuse to make use of a particular piece of technology, because it will interfere with their lifestyle. They don't want a cellphone because it will mean that they are always contactable. They don't want a TV because there's nothing to watch on there, and they'll end up wasting too much time watching it. They don't want to join an online social-network such as Facebook, again citing the reason that it will waste too much of their time. They don't want to play computer games because they are convinced that they will become addicted.

Heck, people are free to do what they want - doesn't bother me if they don't want to join Facebook or get a cellphone. What intrigues and concerns me is that people are reluctant to invest in such technology because they fear "it may take over". They see such innovations as all-enveloping black-holes from which, once entered into there is no escaping. By all means choose not to make use of an inovation or invention which is widely accepted to be useful and beneficial to the improving of your quality of life - for example. But if at all possible, see if you can come up with some other reason for your choice other than that it would use too much of your time. You have the freedom to choose whether to use a thing, or not.

There's no law that says you have to keep your cellphone turned on, and within reach at all times. You can put it on silent, turn it off, or drop it in the toilet. You can set your Facebook profile to private and change some settings and only look at it when you have time - it doesn't have to control you. And heck, you can always rip the TV tuner out of your TV and just use it to play your DVDs - or not. Some people enjoy watching the 6:00 news so that they can be assured of always being up to date with the latest news, confident in the knowledge that "it's the news, they're not going to lie, are they."

Basically, if you find something useful, just go for it. If you find it annoying, switch it off or ignore it, or simply destroy it. But don't crusade round the place telling us all why you don't use it, and why you think we shouldn't use it!

Right, got that off my shoulders ;)

NZ Set to Ramp Up Selective Abortions

The so-called loophole* in New Zealand's abortion law is set to be further exploited. A recent study from Otago University is calling for an increased number of babies to be scanned while in the womb, to determine if they may develop health problems later on in life. And of course, the obvious and sensible solution is to kill such unfortunate babies before they are born. Below is an excerpt from TVNZ's report,

There is a call to widen the availability of tests to screen unborn babies for potential health problems later in life...

...Each year dozens line up for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to help screen their unborn babies for inherited diseases. - TVNZ, 4 March 09

Brendan Malone who heads up Family Life International, NZ had this to say,

One thing that really irks me in the way that the pro-eugenic evangelists always use euphamisms to hide the true reality that they aren’t actually treating any disease, instead they are support the killing of anyone who happens to have a disease, or who MIGHT contract that disease at some point in their life.

Welcome to the brave new world of equal rights and protections for all - except those who happen to have certain genetic traits. - SemperVita

*The Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977, Section 37 (2) states, Nothing in subsection (1) of this section shall apply to the performance of an abortion by a medical practitioner who believes that abortion is immediately necessary to save the life of the patient or to prevent serious permanent injury to her physical or mental health. (reference). Approximately 99% of abortions in New Zealand are done on the grounds of this defence. (reference)

hat tip: SemperVita

Palin Pushing for Parental Consent in Alaska

Sarah Palin is pushing for a parental-consent amendment to the abortion laws in Alaska.

Governor Sarah Palin today was joined by Representative John Coghill, Senator Donny Olson and other lawmakers who offered their support for legislation that would require parental notice and consent before a minor can have an abortion. The governor stressed the broad support for the family-oriented bill. “The most important thing at stake is the right of Alaska’s children to receive the support and input of their parents as they face a life-changing decision,” Governor Palin said. “Certainly, if we are a society that mandates parental consent before our daughters get their ears pierced, or even take a Tylenol tablet at school, I would think that there would be support both for parents to have to give consent and be informed anyway before such an invasive procedure of an abortion would be performed on our underage daughters. I found it appalling that this issue could not pass last year in the 25th Alaska Legislature. Now, Alaska families have an opportunity for parents to finally have this right to help their children in this 26th Alaska Legislature.” - February 26, 2009, June, Sarah Palin's website

Brilliant. I hope they get it through.