i wasn't well enough to put up a link to this post i wrote last night for the hand mirror earlier today regarding international cleaner's day. i spent the day in bed with a cold - lots of coughing and a bad headache. it's my body telling me to slow down i guess, which is a difficult message to listen to when there's so much to be done.
i'll have another post up at the hand mirror about difficulties in seeing a woman doctor tomorrow morning.
Monday, 15 June 2009
Saturday, 13 June 2009
victory!
yay!! we've done it, an emphatic victory in mt albert and pretty well deserved too. i went up and helped with door-knocking. and the campaign organisation was really strong, there were so many people out there to help. it's a campaign i've been proud to be part of, even though it wasn't a big part.
i do feel sorry for melissa lee though. she wasn't the right person for the job, she didn't have the experience, training or support that she needed for this campaign. that was emphasised by the fact that her leader is on holiday. that is incredibly unbelievable, and shows he has absolutely no strength of character. he should have been there standing by his candidate and supporting her, regardless of the result. but when the chips were down, he ran away. he's not a person i have much respect for anyway, but i'm pretty appalled at that.
ms lee is understandably shattered, and it will be interesting to see where she goes from here. after this experience, she must seriously be thinking about whether or not she wants to continue in politics. again, i suspect it will depend on what support she gets from her party.
i had an interesting encounter with an iranian man today. it turns out he's a sunni arab, and it turns out that there are a significant number of arabs in southern iran. we had a discussion about the iranian elections, and came to the conclusion that neither of the candiadates were particularly great. for more (brief thoughts on that), see my comment here.
i do feel sorry for melissa lee though. she wasn't the right person for the job, she didn't have the experience, training or support that she needed for this campaign. that was emphasised by the fact that her leader is on holiday. that is incredibly unbelievable, and shows he has absolutely no strength of character. he should have been there standing by his candidate and supporting her, regardless of the result. but when the chips were down, he ran away. he's not a person i have much respect for anyway, but i'm pretty appalled at that.
ms lee is understandably shattered, and it will be interesting to see where she goes from here. after this experience, she must seriously be thinking about whether or not she wants to continue in politics. again, i suspect it will depend on what support she gets from her party.
i had an interesting encounter with an iranian man today. it turns out he's a sunni arab, and it turns out that there are a significant number of arabs in southern iran. we had a discussion about the iranian elections, and came to the conclusion that neither of the candiadates were particularly great. for more (brief thoughts on that), see my comment here.
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
ethnic communities listening forum
i've just come back from hamilton city council's fifth ethnic communities listening forum (see here for reports on forums held in previous years). i've been going to these every year, and they're a good opportunity for members of ethnic minority communities to give direct feedback to councillors and staff regarding issues of importance to them.
discussions are usually held in five groups, centred around education, employment, health, social connectedness, and general issues. this year i sat in the education group, and there was a lot of discussion around the cutting of ACE funding (see my post of yesterday).
one of the issues brought up was that ACE classes are important for migrants, not only because they provide an opportunity to upskill, but also because it provides a social connection with the community. these classes enable them to develop friendships and contacts with locals, which in turn serves to develop a connectedness to the community and can smooth the settlement process.
there was also anger at the cut in funding to ESOL assessors. i just can't understand this cut. it's only 6-8 jobs around the country, it was hardly costing a fortune. however, the job that these assessors are doing is crucial, particularly to the refugee community. the assessors, on request, will provide a full assessment of the language skills of a person. that assessment can be used for job applications, and it's useful in terms of connecting the person to the right level of english education if further education is required.
but more than that, the assessors end up providing a social service role. they become aware of problems in the household, and are able to connect these people to any social services they might need.
i also sat in with the employment group for a while, and there continue to be concerns around discrimination in hiring practices. as well as the lack of recognition of overseas qualification and experience.
i left early, so didn't hear the report back from other groups. but i find this particular forum really positive, because there is real engagement, and there is accountability in terms of a report back each year on the issues raised from the year before. it's also the hard work of ethnic communities advisor, philip yeung, that makes the forum a success.
discussions are usually held in five groups, centred around education, employment, health, social connectedness, and general issues. this year i sat in the education group, and there was a lot of discussion around the cutting of ACE funding (see my post of yesterday).
one of the issues brought up was that ACE classes are important for migrants, not only because they provide an opportunity to upskill, but also because it provides a social connection with the community. these classes enable them to develop friendships and contacts with locals, which in turn serves to develop a connectedness to the community and can smooth the settlement process.
there was also anger at the cut in funding to ESOL assessors. i just can't understand this cut. it's only 6-8 jobs around the country, it was hardly costing a fortune. however, the job that these assessors are doing is crucial, particularly to the refugee community. the assessors, on request, will provide a full assessment of the language skills of a person. that assessment can be used for job applications, and it's useful in terms of connecting the person to the right level of english education if further education is required.
but more than that, the assessors end up providing a social service role. they become aware of problems in the household, and are able to connect these people to any social services they might need.
i also sat in with the employment group for a while, and there continue to be concerns around discrimination in hiring practices. as well as the lack of recognition of overseas qualification and experience.
i left early, so didn't hear the report back from other groups. but i find this particular forum really positive, because there is real engagement, and there is accountability in terms of a report back each year on the issues raised from the year before. it's also the hard work of ethnic communities advisor, philip yeung, that makes the forum a success.
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
throwing away the ACE
another post up at the hand mirror today about cuts to funding for adult and community education.
and yes, i should have taken the first sentence out of my quote of yesterday. just for the record, iran is definitely not an arab country.
and yes, i should have taken the first sentence out of my quote of yesterday. just for the record, iran is definitely not an arab country.
Monday, 8 June 2009
influencing iran
i have a couple of posts up at the hand mirror today, one on asian women's cancer screening rates and the other on a new study being carried out on pre-trial and trial processes in sexual violence cases.
going back to yesterday's topic, there was some good discussion (initially, deteriorated to some pretty nasty islamophobic ranting later on) about mr obama's speech at larvatus prodeo. i found this comment particularly interesting:
...Iran would be considered an Arabic Muslim country yes, it just happens to be Shiite rather than Sunni. And yes, he was most definitely talking to the Iranians, from the blunt speech on anti-semitism & holocaust denial & nuclear non-proliferation, to the clever but nevertheless startling admission that the USA had a hand (although Obama rather modestly described what was essentially a CIA led coup) in the 1953 overthrow of the Shah.
I’m thinking Katz [a previous commentor] would say all that was aimed at influencing Iranians towards more moderate candidates in the upcoming elections in Iran, by undermining the whole ‘great satan’ premise of the USA put forward by the current Iranian pres (or is he PM, I forget).
which is indeed a possibility, and it will be interesting to see whether or not the speech has an impact on the iranian elections.
going back to yesterday's topic, there was some good discussion (initially, deteriorated to some pretty nasty islamophobic ranting later on) about mr obama's speech at larvatus prodeo. i found this comment particularly interesting:
...Iran would be considered an Arabic Muslim country yes, it just happens to be Shiite rather than Sunni. And yes, he was most definitely talking to the Iranians, from the blunt speech on anti-semitism & holocaust denial & nuclear non-proliferation, to the clever but nevertheless startling admission that the USA had a hand (although Obama rather modestly described what was essentially a CIA led coup) in the 1953 overthrow of the Shah.
I’m thinking Katz [a previous commentor] would say all that was aimed at influencing Iranians towards more moderate candidates in the upcoming elections in Iran, by undermining the whole ‘great satan’ premise of the USA put forward by the current Iranian pres (or is he PM, I forget).
which is indeed a possibility, and it will be interesting to see whether or not the speech has an impact on the iranian elections.
Sunday, 7 June 2009
the cairo speech
i've put up a post at the hand mirror about president obama's speech in cairo, covering the section on women's rights. i'd like to put some thoughts on other aspects of the speech here.
to start, i'll copy a comment i made on the other post: "this is a speech... that understands he is speaking in an environment gifted to him by his predecessor, where there is a huge gap between america and the muslim world. his first purpose is to begin to bridge that gap, to get the other side to start listening, then to start talking. in that way you begin to have a dialogue and some movement in a positive direction."
on the whole, i find it positive and refreshing. it certainly signals a new direction, a much more positive direction that involves engagement and seeks to build relationships that are much more equal and based on mutual respect, for example:
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.
I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.
the speech is not particularly hard-hitting, but does strike a nice balance between recognising the positives elements of arab history and culture, and the negative actions by america against the need for change in the middle east. he doesn't shy away from the key issues, but he doesn't say anything particularly startling either. he raises the issues without being overtly critical and confrontational. i think that's a good thing.
this bit was nice, it was good to see the contribution of american muslims recognised:
The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.
there were a few things of concern. i'm not sure that the position on afghanistan is a great one. a lot of the bombing there has created enmity and bred extremism. in areas that were already very poor, the attacks which have often killed civilians, have caused more psychological than physical damage (and the physical damage is pretty extreme). so continued military action of that nature is hardly going to be helpful.
however, this was a promising sign:
We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.
let's hope it actually happens. promises were made to pump money into afghanistan soon after the 2002 invasion, but very little of that money made it into the country. and even less of it was spent on key infrastructure and social services. that has simply got to change, this country desperately needs stability after decades of warfare.
on iraq, this is brilliant:
I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources.
it's impossible to hope that the missing $3 trillion will somehow be accounted for, but even if iraqis can get the full income from their own natural resources, that country will start moving towards recovery.
on palestine, on the whole pretty positive. i feel a little annoyed at this bit:
Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.
while i totally condemn violence that has been targetted towards innocent israeli civilians and totally agree with the sentiments in this paragraph, it would be nice if mr obama would recognise that palestinians have tried and continue to try peaceful resistance and all diplomatic means available to them. it would be nice to recognise that for many, many years, no-one was listening to those peaceful efforts, rather than to leave the impression that no peaceful efforts were being made.
still, it was good to see the commitment to the two-state solution. there was this on settlements:
At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.
but that needs to go further. not only do the settlements have to stop, they need to be dismantled. even condoleeza rice spoke strongly against settlement building, but never did anything to stop them. and so they have proliferated at an increasing rate in recent years. all of those settlements must be dismantled and the land returned, and i would have liked to see that clearly stated.
on iran, this was brilliant:
I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.
yup, i'd give a standing ovation for this paragraph alone. if mr obama can achieve this, it will be the work of a great human being. and this on democracy was also very nice:
And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.
This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.
i'm conscious that this is getting to be an extremely long post, so i'll leave the rest for you to read. my last thoughts echo those of one young egyptian woman interviewed after the speech, when she said that she hoped these words would translate into action.
to start, i'll copy a comment i made on the other post: "this is a speech... that understands he is speaking in an environment gifted to him by his predecessor, where there is a huge gap between america and the muslim world. his first purpose is to begin to bridge that gap, to get the other side to start listening, then to start talking. in that way you begin to have a dialogue and some movement in a positive direction."
on the whole, i find it positive and refreshing. it certainly signals a new direction, a much more positive direction that involves engagement and seeks to build relationships that are much more equal and based on mutual respect, for example:
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.
I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.
the speech is not particularly hard-hitting, but does strike a nice balance between recognising the positives elements of arab history and culture, and the negative actions by america against the need for change in the middle east. he doesn't shy away from the key issues, but he doesn't say anything particularly startling either. he raises the issues without being overtly critical and confrontational. i think that's a good thing.
this bit was nice, it was good to see the contribution of american muslims recognised:
The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.
there were a few things of concern. i'm not sure that the position on afghanistan is a great one. a lot of the bombing there has created enmity and bred extremism. in areas that were already very poor, the attacks which have often killed civilians, have caused more psychological than physical damage (and the physical damage is pretty extreme). so continued military action of that nature is hardly going to be helpful.
however, this was a promising sign:
We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.
let's hope it actually happens. promises were made to pump money into afghanistan soon after the 2002 invasion, but very little of that money made it into the country. and even less of it was spent on key infrastructure and social services. that has simply got to change, this country desperately needs stability after decades of warfare.
on iraq, this is brilliant:
I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources.
it's impossible to hope that the missing $3 trillion will somehow be accounted for, but even if iraqis can get the full income from their own natural resources, that country will start moving towards recovery.
on palestine, on the whole pretty positive. i feel a little annoyed at this bit:
Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.
while i totally condemn violence that has been targetted towards innocent israeli civilians and totally agree with the sentiments in this paragraph, it would be nice if mr obama would recognise that palestinians have tried and continue to try peaceful resistance and all diplomatic means available to them. it would be nice to recognise that for many, many years, no-one was listening to those peaceful efforts, rather than to leave the impression that no peaceful efforts were being made.
still, it was good to see the commitment to the two-state solution. there was this on settlements:
At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.
but that needs to go further. not only do the settlements have to stop, they need to be dismantled. even condoleeza rice spoke strongly against settlement building, but never did anything to stop them. and so they have proliferated at an increasing rate in recent years. all of those settlements must be dismantled and the land returned, and i would have liked to see that clearly stated.
on iran, this was brilliant:
I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.
yup, i'd give a standing ovation for this paragraph alone. if mr obama can achieve this, it will be the work of a great human being. and this on democracy was also very nice:
And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.
This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.
i'm conscious that this is getting to be an extremely long post, so i'll leave the rest for you to read. my last thoughts echo those of one young egyptian woman interviewed after the speech, when she said that she hoped these words would translate into action.
Thursday, 4 June 2009
inheritance
i've decided that i'm against inheritances, altogether, completely against it. to the extent that i think nothing should be passed on to one's children. why should it, after all? it's not like the children "earned" the assets, in the sense that they won't be receiving these assets in return for work done or risk taken. it's simply a passing on of wealth that is in no way deserved.
the fact that you are born to rich and/or hard-working parents is merely a matter of fate. and each individual is responsible for making their own way in the world. why should you be waiting around for someone to die in order to inherit wealth? make your own money, as much as you are able. and if it's not much or you are not able, then the state is there as a back up for you. and the state should provide a fair and sufficient back up so that you have enough for your needs.
and i'm particularly against family wealth that is passed down through the generations. which in effect means that one child (usually the oldest male child) inherits the bulk of the family inheritance and the others have to survive on their own talents. this seems to be preposterously unfair - why should one child inherit due to an accident of birth? or if the most deserving child is chosen, why should the others be totally left out? it makes no sense, and with modern laws, is not seen much at all.
but i would rather see those assets widely dispersed to those who have most need of them, who are usually not the children of the deceased. said children have often had a pretty good upbringing with access to the best education, and they have the ability to earn a decent income of their own. they don't need the wealth as much those who weren't so lucky in the circumstances of their birth.
i'm feeling more strongly about this today because i've seen yet another instance of families wrangling over wealth and an old person being pressured to do something that is highly unfair. by children who show nothing but greed and entitlement to something that they personally have done nothing to deserve. and i recall one particular person who moved all his assets (worth several millions) into a trust of which only his son was a beneficiary. this was done solely to prevent the daughter from splitting up the family wealth, and i can't even begin to imagine how she feels.
unfortunately this is the way of the world, and our cultural customs are so strong that i don't realistically believe it would in any way be possible to do away with inheritances. even though we would all be so much better off without them - well maybe not economically in each individual case, but in other ways.
someone asked me what would happen to all the wealth if we followed this particular proposal. and so on one of my flights of fancy, i said it should be put into a massive fund to be used for eliminating child poverty, so that no child ever died of starvation on this planet. it's nice to dream a little, isn't it?
the fact that you are born to rich and/or hard-working parents is merely a matter of fate. and each individual is responsible for making their own way in the world. why should you be waiting around for someone to die in order to inherit wealth? make your own money, as much as you are able. and if it's not much or you are not able, then the state is there as a back up for you. and the state should provide a fair and sufficient back up so that you have enough for your needs.
and i'm particularly against family wealth that is passed down through the generations. which in effect means that one child (usually the oldest male child) inherits the bulk of the family inheritance and the others have to survive on their own talents. this seems to be preposterously unfair - why should one child inherit due to an accident of birth? or if the most deserving child is chosen, why should the others be totally left out? it makes no sense, and with modern laws, is not seen much at all.
but i would rather see those assets widely dispersed to those who have most need of them, who are usually not the children of the deceased. said children have often had a pretty good upbringing with access to the best education, and they have the ability to earn a decent income of their own. they don't need the wealth as much those who weren't so lucky in the circumstances of their birth.
i'm feeling more strongly about this today because i've seen yet another instance of families wrangling over wealth and an old person being pressured to do something that is highly unfair. by children who show nothing but greed and entitlement to something that they personally have done nothing to deserve. and i recall one particular person who moved all his assets (worth several millions) into a trust of which only his son was a beneficiary. this was done solely to prevent the daughter from splitting up the family wealth, and i can't even begin to imagine how she feels.
unfortunately this is the way of the world, and our cultural customs are so strong that i don't realistically believe it would in any way be possible to do away with inheritances. even though we would all be so much better off without them - well maybe not economically in each individual case, but in other ways.
someone asked me what would happen to all the wealth if we followed this particular proposal. and so on one of my flights of fancy, i said it should be put into a massive fund to be used for eliminating child poverty, so that no child ever died of starvation on this planet. it's nice to dream a little, isn't it?
Wednesday, 3 June 2009
the real world
i'm feeling better today, though not quite 100%. i have a post up at the hand mirror about the importance of a strong academic sector.
but mostly today, i'm thinking of the lives lost as result of the airplane crashing into the atlantic. over 200 people killed, that's a lot of grief and my thoughts are with their families.
but mostly today, i'm thinking of the lives lost as result of the airplane crashing into the atlantic. over 200 people killed, that's a lot of grief and my thoughts are with their families.
Tuesday, 2 June 2009
notes from my sickbed
unfortunately not any kind of a decent post today, as i'm still struggling with a cold that had me in bed for the whole of the long weekend. which is probably part of the reason why i was feeling a little depressed at the time of my last post. so all the things i was planning to do over the weekend didn't get done but at least i didn't have to take time off work. don't worry, i have my own separate office so wasn't spreading germs everywhere.
i attended a ministry of women's affairs meeting last week, which i wanted to write about. maybe tomorrow. also am concerned about the attacks on indian students in australia, and good to see that amitabh bachchan has turned down an honorary degree in protest. a lot of the media (and particularly talkback) in australia has a hand in creating a very negative attitude in that country, and sometimes i think they should be tried alongside the perpetrators. this kind of stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum.
i'm also really saddened at the death of dr tiller who was murdered because he carried out late-term abortions. regardless of what you think of his work, this man did not deserve to be gunned down in his church. and he was providing life-saving services, as late term abortions are only performed when the mother's life is at risk or the baby is so severely deformed that there is little chance of them surviving for long. there had been no killing of persons providing abortion services during the bush regime at all, but were several during the clinton term. this killing appears to be more than what it seems - it's just as much a statement of outrage that the democrats are now in power.
and as usual, the media have been avoiding the "T" word. this was nothing more than a calculated act of terrorism, an act intended to cause fear to many more people than the intended target.
in any case, i'm going to hunker down & have an early night in my warm bed and hope this cold goes away really fast.
i attended a ministry of women's affairs meeting last week, which i wanted to write about. maybe tomorrow. also am concerned about the attacks on indian students in australia, and good to see that amitabh bachchan has turned down an honorary degree in protest. a lot of the media (and particularly talkback) in australia has a hand in creating a very negative attitude in that country, and sometimes i think they should be tried alongside the perpetrators. this kind of stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum.
i'm also really saddened at the death of dr tiller who was murdered because he carried out late-term abortions. regardless of what you think of his work, this man did not deserve to be gunned down in his church. and he was providing life-saving services, as late term abortions are only performed when the mother's life is at risk or the baby is so severely deformed that there is little chance of them surviving for long. there had been no killing of persons providing abortion services during the bush regime at all, but were several during the clinton term. this killing appears to be more than what it seems - it's just as much a statement of outrage that the democrats are now in power.
and as usual, the media have been avoiding the "T" word. this was nothing more than a calculated act of terrorism, an act intended to cause fear to many more people than the intended target.
in any case, i'm going to hunker down & have an early night in my warm bed and hope this cold goes away really fast.
Friday, 29 May 2009
not making sense
isn't amazing how many different ways people find to make life hell for others. i find it so difficult to understand really, this lack of empathy or concern about the effects of one's own actions. the inability to see beyond one's own experiences and imagine what life must be like for another. the willful decision to put one own's happiness above everything else, with a total disregard of the impact it will have.
which is not to say that i've never hurt anyone else. i know that i have, and there are some things that i would change if i could. but i can't think of a time when i deliberately carried out an action with an intent to cause pain. it's usually more of a lack of care on my part, a lack of sufficient thought as to consequences or how things would be interpreted.
but how to explain deliberate acts of cruelness or selfishness. i'm not a psychologist, so don't have at my fingertips any behavioural theories or particular knowledge of human development. i guess a lot of it is because of upbringing, and a result of nasty experiences. a cycle of misbehaviour as it were.
i'm rambling here, i know, because i've had a difficult day and am finding it hard to make sense of things. the best thing no doubt is to accept that things just don't make sense and there are no easy answers. i'm sure a good night's sleep will help.
which is not to say that i've never hurt anyone else. i know that i have, and there are some things that i would change if i could. but i can't think of a time when i deliberately carried out an action with an intent to cause pain. it's usually more of a lack of care on my part, a lack of sufficient thought as to consequences or how things would be interpreted.
but how to explain deliberate acts of cruelness or selfishness. i'm not a psychologist, so don't have at my fingertips any behavioural theories or particular knowledge of human development. i guess a lot of it is because of upbringing, and a result of nasty experiences. a cycle of misbehaviour as it were.
i'm rambling here, i know, because i've had a difficult day and am finding it hard to make sense of things. the best thing no doubt is to accept that things just don't make sense and there are no easy answers. i'm sure a good night's sleep will help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)