Comments for The Little Rev Goes Blogging

Comment on An angry note about Manus Island by HarryS

HarryS — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 09:04:09 +0000

I totally agree! Absolutely disgusting!
However I don’t really agree that we “shouldn’t listen” to the opposition just based on their previous policies. That’s a bit wrong to just simply disregard them as “hypocrites” due to their past record.
Besides that – i totally agree

Comment on An angry note about Manus Island by fredeika steen

fredeika steen — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 11:40:50 +0000

I suspect that it is intended that innocent asylum seekers will be detained behind razor wire on Manus Is, not free in the community even as the foreign underclass they are in the Malaysian community. What does this debasement of human rights do to the locals? It might be an economic stimulus package for PNG, but what a cost in terms of integrity and ethics! A challenge to their own constitution should succeed because it is a breach to deny habeas corpus and imprison people without charge. What a sickness permeates our politics. Gillard and Abbott really do not care what they are doing to human beings .”Smugglers” be damned, its people who matter!

Comment on A few words on the assassination of Osama bin Laden by a time to reflect, not rejoice « MUSIC.MUSINGS.MEANDERINGS

a time to reflect, not rejoice « MUSIC.MUSINGS.MEANDERINGS — Tue, 03 May 2011 23:16:43 +0000

[...] then this posting (I’ve include the text in its entirety) from a ministry friend of mine, Elenie [...]

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by The Little Rev

The Little Rev — Mon, 02 May 2011 08:47:56 +0000

I agree Avril. A few conversations have already been had. I will follow it up. Thanks for your comment.

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by avrilhj

avrilhj — Mon, 02 May 2011 08:26:36 +0000

“I cannot unilaterally issue a public statement in the name of the Uniting Church. In fact, no-one can, not even the President or the synod (state) Moderators.” – No, but surely the President or Moderators can make public statements based on decisions of Assemblies and Synods? And there have been decisions made about the inclusion of GLBT people in the Uniting Church and the Church’s opposition to discrimination. Couldn’t something based on those be said?

I’m sure that you, like me, have had conversations with young GLBT people who are worried that God hates them. I used to be puzzled by why people who didn’t attend church worried about that. But it’s because the views of people like Jim Wallace are presented in the media as ‘the’ Christian position, and vulnerable young people take that on board. We need to do more to challenge that perception.

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by daiskmeliadorn

daiskmeliadorn — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:47:49 +0000

Hi Elenie

Great post. On this point:
“I have been concerned for some time that while ACL says that it does not represent all Christians or speak for all the churches, the continuing engagement of many church leaders in ACL organised events feeds perceptions that ACL does. I am also concerned that our political leaders find it too easy and too convenient to regard it as some kind of de facto peak body. It is not.”

What do you think we can do about this? I find it very frustrating. My (previous, liberal Anglican) church put on a screening of the leaders’ debate that ACL organised at a recent election (maybe 2007). I was really disappointed but felt like I was the only one. I just can’t see how Christians (unless they share Jim Wallace’s narrow theology) can participate in ACL things _at all_.

Sounds like you otherwise had a great holiday
Bron

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by Anthony Baxter

Anthony Baxter — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:24:48 +0000

The problem I have is that the more moderate and mainstream christians _don’t_ speak up. As I said to you on twitter, if you’re silent, you let the Wallaces and Pells and Niles of the world claim the public mandate of Christianity in Australia. While I am a non-believer, I pretty much feel that the ethos of Jesus is actually not a bad way to live. Look after the weaker and more disadvantaged and all that. But right now, the extremists are the only ones with a public voice. I _know_ the Uniting Church does great work. But I’d like to see them also speak up against the hatemongers.

(disclaimer: I attended a Uniting Church Sunday School as a child for quite a few years, am now a solid atheist, but would love to see more believers who actually stand up for the beliefs of the Gospels stand up and call out the crazies)

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by becker

becker — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:29:35 +0000

Jim Wallace is wrong plain and simple. The ANZACS didn’t fight so I could have lamb on my barbie or shrimp or salmon for that matter. They fought so we would be free to live life as we choose to live it. So we would be able to have our say and not risk going to jail for it. So if someone is pushing for Gay marriage then all they are doing is exercising their right to free speech and the right to live their life the way they choose. Funny thing is the ANZACS also fought so Jim could be free to have his opinion even if it annoyed a hell of a lot of people.

Comment on Thoughts on that ANZAC Day Twitter controversy by Paul Dyson

Paul Dyson — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:49:07 +0000

I was urging for some sort of statement from the mainstream churches on Twitter. We do ourselves a disservice when ACL statements go unchallenged and get reported as if they are *the* Christian position. Maybe we need to fund a progressive Christian lobby group that would not need to trace every statement back to an Assembly resolution, as is rightly the case for those speaking on behalf of the UCA.

Comment on About Me by Grace Stubee

Grace Stubee — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 01:30:05 +0000

sorry- endyouthhomelessness.com.au.