... because !!!

Wow, it's uncanny.  Last night I had a quick visit from my parents (81 & 80) who had come down to see a concert at Laycock Street Theatre (just around the corner).

Despite my early entry into computers (since 1979) they've never really picked up the can, and still haven't gotten one, despite now having a few devices (digital camera, personal video recorder, etc) where a computer would be handy to organise the output.  So no, they don't have the internet yet.

I've often encouraged them to get a computer, but they've resisted the offers, and my wife keeps reminding me that if they did actually get one, then I'd be getting a lot of calls to offer support and troubleshooting (and yes, I can exactly see her point).

Yesterday you'd have thought they had read my last blog post on promulgating same-sex marriage!!

But, much to my horror, IN REVERSE!

It was an almost throwaway line just as they were leaving from Mum: "oh, and all the palava about gay marriage..."  After which I replied my standard "Why not?".  Wow, sometimes you are extremely proud of your parents and want to thank them for all they've done for you in the past, but in this situation I am rather horrified at the bigoted nature of their views on this issue.

Essentially they believe gays should not marry - "because".  When pressed they ask "Why should they be able to marry?".  When pressed even further my Dad (who usually has less prejudiced views than Mum) asked me "What do two men do when they get married"  (the unspoken answer, of course, was to commit buggery.  "Filthy pigs!!" he cried.  "Filthy pigs!  If it wasn't for poofters, we wouldn't have AIDS."

My wife was strongly urging us to drop the subject as she could see the conflict we were heading for, and she was right.  We did manage to leave it at that (although it unseated my father enough for him to leave his jacket here - he was trying to make a quick exit at this point).

But Dad, may I say what I was prevented from saying yesterday.  They are (in your opinion) filthy pigs already.  We don't have gay marriage now and that sure doesn't prevent fornication between same sex couples.  Perhaps if we offered them marriage it'd be like the rest of us and it'd PREVENT the fornication.

But it's amazing how I am the progeny of a couple from an earlier generation and our views are so diametrically opposed on this topic.  We couldn't disagree more.

What's more is the whole crux of this issue.  None of us are gay, so it really has absolutely no bearing on us whatsoever.  How can we judge people for doing something we basically have no concept of and do not participate in?  Logical analogy: I try to correct spelling in a text wrtitten in Swahili.  I have no idea how to speak the language (let alone spell it) but I wish to impose my beliefs on native speakers of that language and correct their behaviour.  I've thought long and hard about this analogy, and yes, from what I can see, it is precisely congruent to the situation.  So if me correcting spelling errors in a text in a language I don't speak sounds weird, that's exactly how non-homosexual people imposing conditions on homosexuals is.

Same-Sex Marriage

Two words - why not?

Why on earth not?

How can anyone justify their belief that same sex couples cannot marry except by appealing to definitions like our Prime Minister does ("I believe marriage is between a man and a woman" - yes, Julia, but WHY?) or by hanging on to outdated religious clap-trap that went out of date centuries ago.

If everyone obeyed what it says in Leviticus, our gaols would be full, and public executions would be commonplace.  For instance for working on a Sunday you need to be stoned to death; or if a child curses his or her father, that father is permitted to kill the child.

I cannot see how the world is going to fall apart around us by allowing same sex couples to marry.  In fact when you think about it, the number of people availing themselves of the service will be minusculely tiny compared to heterosexual marriages.

We are not proposing churches are forced to carry out the ceremonies; we are not imposing the requirement on anyone to either get married, be married or carry out the marrying.

Christians note:  what do you REALLY think Jesus would say.  Jesus, mind you, not Moses.

Please have some sense and wakeup to yourselves; this is a minor sociological change that is a storm in a teacup.  Our politicians are simply too gutless to do what they know is right.

Barry's Folly - an open letter

Dear Barry,

Your deal with the Shooters' Party re the electricity sell-off absolutely stinks.

Of course there will be safeguards in place to prevent shooters in National Parks from killing people. Exactly. There are safeguards in place preventing people from driving whilst drunk or using mobile phones. and we all know how rare it is for the courts to see drunk drivers in front of them...

The two New Zealand deaths should have served as a warning to you as to what can happen when targets are mis-identified. At least with the current situation, professional shooters can be expected to be able to identify targets much more accurately than a bunch of rank amateurs who are never intoxicated whilst pig-shooting.

On tonight's 7:30 programme on the ABC your response was that many 4-wheel-drivers and timber-getters currently co-exist with shooters in areas surrounding national parks. Be aware that the two deaths in New Zealand were simply pedestrians. If you're in a 4WD or have a chainsaw then you're probably NOT a feral animal and even the most basic of shooters can figure that out. Get into the National Park and there are no 4WDs or chainsaws, making target identification a lot more difficult. And when the shooters are a bunch of drunken yobbos in the back of a 4WD with a spotlight in the night (probably also talking on their mobile phones), what faith do your realistically place in their abilities to identify targets correctly 100% of the time?

You're a smart man, Barry, but this action is dumb. I think it should be up to you to tell the first victim's relatives of their death when they've been mistaken for a wild dog in a National Park and been shot.

And what's with your environment minister Robyn Parker? Is she so heartless that when asked about the two New Zealand deaths she completely IGNORES the point and keeps spouting her line? And she fails to even answer the question whether she was aware of the deaths or not? Her actions on this, and (yes, I remember) the fertiliser plant on Kooragang Island indicate she's basically, how can I say this without being insulting, a thickhead? (Yes, a thickhead is the least insulting term I can come up with). Although my private theory is that she's going to be your sacrificial lamb this parliament - get through a few unpopular changes and then get rid of her. Well I endorse the latter action at least. Do it now and save us all the grief.

But Barry, please consider. You are desperate to sell off the power stations I know, but with the sort of majority you got at the last election do you want to at least want to keep enough political capital to maintain three terms? The way it's going that's not likely to happen.

Regards,
-Peter Deane

Princess Cruises Internet access

Well, it was $55 per 100 MINUTES of internet access via satellite from the ship.  So we didn't bother.  So no reports of the travels, which were fantastic (obviously apart from the internet access price).

Princess Cruises are a slick operation providing excellent value for money in their cruises.  They do aim to upsell and provide luxury services whilst on the ship, but it's completely up to you and you can spend as much or as little as you like in the process.  Our shipboard account was $261 - but we had $125 each complimentary credit, so we were really spending to use up this amount.

One clue to any Princess customers who get complimentary credit on each account - it's NOT consolidated.  So if you have, like we did, $125 each, make sure you spend $125 on each of your shipboard accounts.  IE evenly spread your purchases over both your accounts.  If you (like we initially did) spend mainly on ONE account, we had to get entries voided and re-posted evenly over both the accounts.  Would have been easier if we had known this at the start rather than the second last day when we checked the shipboard folios.

We'd go on Princess Cruises again WITHOUT HESITATION.

Ahoy and Away

Well, it has been since 1978 when I last went on a cruise, but here we go on the Sun Princess this weekend for two weeks to New Zealand.  We sail out of Barangaroo, under the Harbour Bridge, out the Heads over to the Bay of Islands as the first stop three days later.  We skip down the east coast, visiting Auckland, Tauranga, Napier, Wellington, Akaroa (80km south of Christchurch), and Dunedin.  We also sail through Fiordland National Park at the lower left-hand corner of the South Island before returning to Sydney.

It's not a very adventurous cruies, but I hope it to be relaxing, which I really need at the moment.  As I was mentioning I last cruised back in 1978 on the second last trip ever done by the P&O Arcadia (at that time - there have been namesakes christened since).  Back then it was pretty primitive.  This one looks extremely luxurious - probably not really my environment, really, but hell, I can live up to it!

I've made this post - the first I've done for about 9 months, let's hope I get time to post from NZ again!

Twitter

Okay guys, I've just signed up for a Twitter account.  The ID is "Peter_Deane" - not bad that it was available, eh? Might be a good sign.

Problem is, what the HELL does one do with a twitter account.  I'm following a few political tweeters such as Malcolm Turnbull, Kevin Rudd, Latika Burke and so on.  I went to follow the ABC's QandA, or course.  I'm still not real familiar with how it all works, and the 140 character limit is (as you'd be aware, dear readers) not something I'm going to be enamoured with.   Let's see what goes on, however.

What we really can't afford

Again we hear the empty rhetoric.  Barnaby Joyce on the carbon tax: "we can't afford this toxic tax".  "Australia cannot afford this tax right now".

Here's what we cannot afford, people:

We can't afford extra energy in weather events leading to the largest cyclone to ever hit Queensland

We can't afford an increase in temperature leading to more frequent bushfires

We can't afford extreme weather events leading to 150mm of rain in an hour (unprecedented in Australia)

We can't afford more frequent wild weather events such as the tornadoes in Joplin, Missouri

We can't afford to have the sea levels rise - just ask anyone in Kiribati!

This is the gravity of the situation.  Do nothing now, and in fifty years it will cost so much more to act urgently.  We are merely complaining about a tax we don't like.  Consider the alternatives above.  THAT is the real cost.