Big News

news views politics

Friday, April 30, 2004

I'm BACK!!

Yeah, it s been a while. I've been busy with a new job, study, family etc as well as my other blog at http: //
I seriously considered canning this blog but may continue. What do you think?

Thanks to those of you who were still coming back during the past week.

Why did I consider quitting and concentrating on my other blog? In emerging blogdom, it appears you are seen to be credible if you are one or more of the following:

1. You are a pastor or church worker, or run a christian website (not your personal blog) and you preferably have a degree.
2. You are a missionary
3. You have written or are writing a book or you lecture at a theological seminary.
4. You value your reputation within your christian community and networks, and want to preserve and even extend it.

optional - you can speak fluent Christianese, and see yourself as tolerant of others. It might help if you are male.

Despite my networks etc, I dont fit into most of the above so I, unfortunately, am not seen as "important" as others. "people of influence" don't ring me if they want a book review,movie review, or theological insight fo, say, their publications ( but they may if they want a music review or a few quirky poems). Secular media, ah thats a different story.....

The thing is, how many of the four did Jesus fit into?

I'm actually a bit tired of the heirarchy displayed by people who are promoting a flat hierarchy in their "missional communities" but are happy to climb the rat race ladder in other aspects of their lives. Humility is a good thing, no matter where you are on the hierarchy. That's why I like Andrew Jones and his blog. He' comes across as having that kinda attitude.

And I emphasis "come across" - as blogs create an impression of who that person is. If you read this blog regularly, but not my other one, you may have a totally different view of me if all you just read my other blog.

Especially if you haven't met me - which is most of you.

Humility is a good thing and people with like minded qualities are easier to build community with.

And the male thing? Why should males be seen as more credible than females in this day and age.

Saturday, April 24, 2004

thoughts on civil unions

..::generally sympathetic to homosexual rights.
..::rights and responsibility of civil marriage while avoiding the word itself.
..::unjustified discrimination is a violation of human rights
..:: under NZ law, denying marriage to same sex couples is not unjustified discrimination.

The most common liberal argument to civil unions but against same sex marriage was summed up by Hillary Rodham Clinton in January. "Marriage," she said, when pressed to take a position, "has got historic, religious, and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been: between a man and a woman.

Same sex couples cannot have children - neither can sterile, infertile or aged couples. Why bring procreation into the debate?

There is no moral reason to support civil unions and not same-sex marriage unless you believe that admitting homosexuals would weaken a vital civil institution,

Both this party and this party oppose the legislation.

The proposed legislation

The aim of the Civil Union Bill is to recognise and formalise same sex relationships. Another bill, which will also be introduced in a few weeks, is to extend legal rights and privileges of marriage to unmarried couples. This is called the Omnibus Bill and will amend individual acts and regulations so that unjustified differences in the treatment of different kinds of couples under the law are eliminated, whether couples are married, de facto or in a civil union

The third bill is the Adoption Reform Bill that should surface later in the year. This will allow for same sex adoption.

If both bills pass, all couples will have equal legal rights, even those who do not formalise their relationship with a civil union.

Should the Omnibus Bill pass and the Civil Unions bill be rejected, all couples will have legal rights under the law

That’s why the Omnibus Bill is the vital piece of legislation of all three.

Sunday, April 18, 2004

Is the Christian Right Christian?

An explanation as to why the Christian right is not Christian - especially for Craig Young, who reads this blog.

Friday, April 16, 2004

Ethics:What would you do?

OK, you`re an accountant, you've just been to the country's biggest Christian music festival - because you're a Christian who's into such things - and you have been caught speeding on the way home.

Do you pay your ticket? Of course!

But what if your ticket had the incorrect accident date- and that date was your date of birth. Would you pay it or write in and try to get off.

Well, you may take that chance. And if you succeeded, would you
brag to the media about how clever you were in getting off it, email not only your very clever letter letter and your scanned copy of your ticket, but the reply from the police and email it around on a PDF file to boast how clever you were? Maybe not.

But after hearing the story, would you want to read the letters and see the ticket?

Of course you would! Well, drop me a comment and I`ll email it to you. It really is very clever. I just can't post it. Maybe you can if you`re not on blogger.

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Dull, dull, dull, so very dull

This is the dullest blog in the entire blogosphere,but it is has the most comments of any site I have seen. It started like this and it is even duller now


Wednesday, April 14, 2004

I like The Age It has a good article on religion replacing ideology .....well western ideology anyway. But Christianity is not religion, and it is more than an ideology, isnt it?

Resurrected Christendom ( some call it post Christendom) may be a good thing after all.

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

Millions for what?

Here's something interesting: As of April 9. 435,456 people have signed this petition supporting gay marriage. That's at least 250 every day. They are trying to get to a million. These guys have responded with a similar poll to get a million signing up for Christ. They have no counter. They are about 20% of the way there. Who will get there first? I`ll be watching….

I know which web site I prefer, though.

I wonder how many have signed onto both petitions. Maybe I could start my own poll - a million people who do not wash their hands after going to the toilet. C'mon, I know you`re out there .

Monday, April 12, 2004

The Passion of the Kan

SUnday Star Times columnist Raybon Kan, who doesn't really seem to know the difference between Christianity and religion, has a pretty funny piece in yesterday's paper on the re-rating of The Passion of The Christ, blaming the lower rating on the Bible, rather than the board who lowered the rating. He says the film may as well be rated GA - God Approves.

Read it, Raybon is a very funny boy, actually. Perhaps Raybon would rate the movie RD (Raybon disapproves). He writes "The same voices who quibble about movies they haven't seen, and fight to prevent us seeing them, supported this film without even seeing it first. Plainly because it came from their literature."

Ummm... Not true. This time most of these voices actually saw the movie.

However, now that the rating for The Passion has been lowered - and is being pregressively lowered right around the world - does that mean that film censors will be taking a more tolerant approach to violence in films in future, purely because some Christians sucessfully attempted to lower a rating based on cultural significance?

Thursday, April 08, 2004

It's Easter!

seen on bus-stops all round town

Tuesday, April 06, 2004

"Passion" rating lowered

The Passion of the Christ is now R15 in New Zealand, from R16, thanks to an appeal by the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards, a watchdog group notorious for challinging ratings of violent and sexually violent films. Could these challenges be because the group is predominately Christian and the chief and deputy film censors are both gay?

But the film should really be R13, with parental guidance.

Perhaps SPCS secretary David Lane could take a trip to Singapore - where the film is R18...

Monday, April 05, 2004

Saw a good article in The Age on how the churches can become relevant again.

I have a few "why" questions:
1. Why should churches be relevant - relevant to whom?
2. Why are all religious articles for The Age written by Anglicans?
3. Why are church leaders concerned that congregations are declining, and then put programmes as a higher focus than building relationships?
4.Why is being a gay christian such a big issue?

OK we're going through a light blogging phase.... two people have put chapters of their books online. One chapter of a book is here,, on punk rock, and another whole book here. Me, I'm too busy to write a book, but I've started a new blog here which has taken a bit of time....

Off to Palmerston North tomorrow. Back on Wednesday or thereabouts