Marriage Equality---opportunity to act SUPPORT NOW

I have taken up the invitation to write to Parliamentarians in anticipation of next-week's resumption of sittings in Canberra about Marriage Equality.
In particular you could do likewise by following Australian Marriage Equality's link.

I chose to write to C Pyne, as a prominent SA Liberal politician ( or another similar) along the following lines

Dear Mr Pyne

You are more than well-aware  that the nation is paying close attention to the discussion in your Party room next week about Marriage Equality.

I happen to be a priest of the Anglican Church, and along with a number of my colleagues am steadfastly in favour of Marriage Equality. Many Christians are in favour of this move

I also recognise, sadly, that it is unlikely that internal processes within a number of Christian Church's themselves will allow this to happen within Church ranks.

Yet this does not mean, I suggest, that our Nation as a whole should not go forward .

It seems unlikely to me that, as a priest, the Anglican Church will allow me to pray for God's blessing on the marriage of same-sex partners who clearly wish to make a lifelong marriage commitment to each other and their children. This is to the Church's shame.

I am sorry that, as a Commonwealth,  we have got stuck, largely because the plebiscite as a process  is clearly not going to work!  

This is so atrociously political on all sides as to be offensive.

I think it is incumbent upon the party of Government to move to break this impasse and exercise leadership.

The community is more than tired of the petty-politicking and I urge you and your colleagues to move definitely to resolve this.

[I think the 'Dutton Postal Vote' option is just a bizarre distraction, and cynical in the extreme.  Non-compulsory, non-binding. In other word 'non helpful' & 'non useful']

All the best and 

Respectfully,

Stephan Clark

Parish Priest: St Mary Magdalene's  

Anglican Church, Adelaide.

You might like to write to Pyne (above), or Birmingham or similar .
Birmingham seems to have become such a 'creature of the machine' which is deeply sad as he is creative thinker and should do better

Marriage equality

You can contact the Senate about their committee on Marriage Equality
http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/tellthesenate/

I have recently written to them

I am an Anglican priest of a city parish in Adelaide and write to support the cause of Marriage Equality.

I would make 3 points:

1. The assumption that all church people and their ministers and priests are opposed to the marriage of people who are of the same gender is incorrect. I am quite clear from personal support I have received, that many Anglican priests would be privileged to 
I myself believe that there is no scriptural or theological impediment to the same.  
"Church rules" are another matter; I am sad to say that it will take my particular denomination an interminable time to work through this issue ( as it did through the issue of ordination of women)   

2.I have in my congregation a number of gay people. At times I wonder why people bother with the Church; which is  often uncaring and unsupportive. I am proud to say that we are not!  One couple has been in a stable relationship for over 40 years, they are well-accepted, normal and fine men. In fact their support of their wider family is exemplary.

3.I believe that the call for a Constitutional Referendum is a delaying tactic.  
Even the plebiscite would not seem to be much better, since it is neither binding nor indicative of intention.

This issue should not be derided because it is one of "equal rights". Surely all Australians should have equal rights.

Respectfully and sincerely yours

StephenClark
Parish Priest
St Mary Magdalene's Church
26 Moore Street
Adelaide
SA 5000
frstephenclark@gmail.com
0407718786

Who do our MP's represent?

Today Queensland Member for Cook, just expelled from the ALP, has notified everyone that he is staying on as an independent.
It is his right!  Although elected as a member of a political party (the ALP)...he is actually elected as himself, Billy Gordon!   He is not without controversy.
The Labor Premier called on him first to leave the party, he did ( or was expelled)! And then to do the "right thing" and resign and allow a by-election....even though it might cost her the leadership of the State. 
This is brave of Premier Anastasia Palaszczuk. I am impressed by her integrity and courage. Two virtues which appeal to the Christian heart...integrity and courage.
And, which I would admit, we have not always been good at.
I have met recently with a person who knows her well, his representations to me assure me she is (as 1066 and All That might say....a good thing). I will leave that to you
One of the issues this sets before the electorate, both in Queensland and, throughout the nation at both State and Federal level is whether a person is elected as an individual or as a member of a party ticket.
Inevitably when trouble occurs people frame their answer to meet their own circumstances.
So, Mr Gordon has quite rightly exercised his legal prerogative that he is elected as an individual!
Now he is an "Independent" ie. he has been cut free from the party which no-doubt funded much of his electoral campaign....he can do as his will and conscience require.
Ms Lambie, and Mr Lazarus did this, various others have left their parties after they have been elected.
And it is their right.......Apparently

But is it RIGHT!

Although Queensland does not have an Upper House, the Federal Parliament does and other States do.
We have been, at Federal level, given the option to vote, say, 1 to 16 "Above the line"  or 1 to 133 "Below the line".  
One gets the impression that most people vote Above the line.  Which is decidedly less complex and laborious. That is, they vote for the party and the Party's particular preferential choices.
So when an elected person who may have been elected No. 1 on the Labor or Liberal ticket .....or Palmer United Party....a case referred to above.....decides to jump ship what should happen?
The candidate inevitably says ....I was elected because I was me, and how fabulous am I because of my profile.....and the Party inevitably says .....They should resign because they were elected  on the Party Ticket.
Ms Palaszczuk was rather suggesting this about Mr Gordon...and Mr Palmer certainly wants Senators Lazarus and Lambie to capitulate to his strident influence, I draw short of calling it bullying!

In the end I think ABOVE THE LINE VOTING is iniquitous. It is a ploy of the Party System to manipulate numbers. So it serves them right when it backfires...as, increasingly, it seems to do

Interesting nonsense

There is an interesting toing-and-froing about my previous entry concerning the visit of the latest monarchist heartthrob (here).

I make the point in comments that having seen "Invictus" last night that some countries do manage to get good leaders (eventually) and cite Mandela as case in point.

My issue (from the previous post) about the monarchy is that it is essentially unjust, and unfair to give people authority and power on the basis of "accident of birth".

It seems to be nonsense to entrench injustice at the highest level of government.

There are of course many injustices and corruptions that flow into leadership struggles, not the least of which is the influence of big money and political parties.

My combatant suggests that Mandela is good because he is actually 'royalty' of the African kind.

The truth is, whether royalty or not, he was still elected.

It seems ludicrous to me that a country like ours should even consider having as head of state someone who is not a citizen of our land. (Whether 'royal' or not, Mandela was a South African...the Windsors are not Australians).

A person, even with dual citizenship, is excluded from being a Senator in the Federal Parliament unless they renounce their citizenship of the alien land. And rightly so.

I do not see monarchists even faintly suggesting that anyone of Aboriginal royal descent should be promoted as potential King or Queen of Australia! The idea has certain appeal!

Putting all that aside, it is easy to get distracted by seductive niggling arguments which divert us.

But, fundamentally, I cannot see that any nation should have as its leader someone who is the citizen of another country.

Whilst allowing for the fact that most systems have deep flaws I also cannot see that the leader should just become so because of accident of birth. At the very least the particular candidate, whether monarch or president or governor, should have some sort of popular approval...probably by a majority of votes in favour (whether of the populace or the Parliament)

The Elementary History of Detention

Most of us who have read a smattering of Dickens, or done a little history of the 19th century and before will no doubt have wondered about the curious practice of making those who are jailed pay for their imprisonment!
Yes this was indeed the practice. It is of course a practice which victimises the poorest of the poor.
And it seems bizarre!
Bizarrer still when you realise that until today those in the detention centres of Australia have been required to reimburse the government. Even more bizarre when we appreciate that many 'ordinary' citizens seem to think that the practice of making refugees pay for the privilege of being in Baxter, or Villawood, and latterly Nauru (now closed) and Christmas Island; has been on our statute books.
Praise God that today the Senate has voted to remove it. (here)
I take my hat off to Senator Troeth, who voted against the majority of her (Liberal) party to do the right thing

PS In a small footnoote: Senator Fielding, wanting a bet both ways says these laws went too far but voted for them any way...and then wonders why people think he is......

Striking the balance

While by and large I am happy that the Senate is acting as a House of Review because no one party has an absolute majority, I can't help but feel that Senator Fielding of Family First has made a serious error of judgment with regard to the alcopops tax. 

(see one story here about the liquor industry allegedly not wanting tax already taken back!!! 

I'll believe that when I see it).

The issue about "alcopops" is not just and/or only about how alcohol products might be taxed, but also about whether we are the sort of society that wants to make the 'acquired taste' more readily and easily 'acquired' by those who presently have no stomach for it and who by and large are young, immature and at risk.

This is just bizarre. Why would you actually want to encourage those who don't like the taste of alcohol (basically because their palates are too immature) to start drinking by making it available in disguise.

Fielding is right on one level to say that the issue is bigger than alcopops but not taking this small step will not actually address that larger issue.

Stepping out

Get Up notes that over 100 laws were passed by the Senate last night to remove discrimination against same-sex couples. It is worth thinking what these 'discriminations' might be. Some are horrendous, like people being denied equity with regard to superannuation because they happen to have lived with a same, rather than different, sex partner. So, when your partner dies if you are married or have been in a defacto relationship superannuation consideration involve workign out what your entitlement to that might be. It would seem inequitable that people who have supported each other, perhaps bought property together, shared common goals and so on should be denied equity without costly litigation.
More emotional has been an understanding who 'next of kin' might be. Numerous stories abound of same-sex partners being denied any say in funeral arrangements, often cut out completely by families who have been antipathetic to the deceased person's lifetstyle.
What ever we may personally feel about people's lifestyle choices, we have no right to discriminate against what are essentially personal and/or private decisions.
The Attorney, Robert McLelland, has reasserted that same-sex marriage is not on the books (here) . This is to be expected, if not a bit lamentable. In time it will come I suspect.
In the meantime any steps forward are to be welcomed.

X marks the spot

I don't think we should get too thingy about Xenophon deserting the SA Legislative Assembly. For heavens sake the other parties do it all the time. Wait until the Liberals are trounced and see what Howard does!
Xenophon is such a quality performer that the Senate seems an ideal place for him to weave his spell. His ability to catch the popular imagination is so effective that he must stand a good chance of getting in.
Those of us who feel that it is important for the Senate to hold the two major parties in check and to deny either one the exercise of autocratic power will see that he is probably just the one to do that.
Well done. I bet everyone, just everyone; is spitting chips!

Get up to that Senate

I have been interestedted to be included on Get Up's mailing list largely because I am pretty disillusioned with traditional party politics.
Get Up is an interesting phenomenon (and may yet prove to be more partisan than it claims to be), in our two party system neither of the major parties likes the suggestion that there should be a genuine third, fourth or fifth voice.
This seems to me be undemocratic!
Democracy is not about hearing two voices, it is about hearing the voice of the people who comprise the democracy. Some of those voices are easy to hear. They are articulate, dominant, rich. They are privileged, educated and entrenched.
Some, many certainly, perhaps even most, find it difficult to make their voice heard. The infamous Richard Nixon used the term "silent majority" and perhaps that is a good way to characterise what is a political reality.
In such a system a bicameral (two chamber) parliament has its part to play. In Australia the Senate has been touted as protecting States' Rights. Though in latter years it has perhaps given a voice to the disillusioned, who find that neither of the major parties adequately expresses their position.
The two major parties seemingly hate the Senate, because it has so often stood in their way. Such a possibility occurred when the Coalition fluked a majority in bth houses at the last election. They then presumed to pass their raft of IR laws which they had not (it would seem to me) put to the people!
This, I suspect, will play no small part in their downfall if and when the next election is called.

Pray it may be today or tomorrow...but surely no longer!

Any way, into this comes the innovative Get up. Who have with innovative aplomb invited us to share in the democratic process in a way never before seen. Explore their site and see if it apeal to you (here) It must have the Rudds and the Howards quaking.
So we might just go along on Friday:

You're invited GetUp's "Save Our Senate" Town Hall Forum at the Adelaide Museum
at 12:30pm this Friday 5 October, including Senators Natasha Stott-Despoja and
Bob Brown in a frank discussion of the importance of our house of review and how
it has changed since the Coalition won control. Seats are limited so be sure to
RSVP now - and invite your friends and family:

Farewell to the destroyer

When I was at theological college the mother of the good senator Natasha Stott-Despoja, was a much loved journalist at The Advertiser. One of my colleagues would refer to her as "Shirley the Destroyer".
Soon the young Senator came to prominence and we understood that the epithet had passed from mother to child.
It was wonderful to see the stuffed shirts get so cross that Natasha the Destroyer could get so much press coverage simply because she was young and a woman. They who lusted after the media would seethe about how unjustified this was. In reality they were just jealous!!
She had much substance, not a little style...and was the source of inspiration to a generation of young voters who were about ready to slough off the dead skin of the political process.
I am pleased that I hear no one today saying that she should not quit politics.(here) She, quoting her health concerns and the need to properly care for her husband and young family, has no doubt made the right choice.
Though cynics will no doubt suggest she is deserting the sinking Democrat ship, she has more than adequately contributed to "vitam politicam". Though I am sure she will not be silenced completely, she will be missed.