Showing posts with label Religion & Public Debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religion & Public Debate. Show all posts

Monday, 26 February 2018

The Not-So Holy Comedy Debate : Arranged marriage is better than dating




The Third Jewish - Muslim Comedy Debate is being held at 7:00pm on Mon 19 March in Swanston Hall.  The very cheeky Father Bob as Moderator again and we have a great, very funny panel, featuring Michael ShafarJustine SlessJacob SacherRana HussainLouise Baring and Hamsa Farah

The topic is ‘Arranged marriage is better than dating!’ – It will be a very funny night!!

Yes, Jews and Muslims can get together and have fun!  In fact, a lot of fun!


Please find the flyer with details attached.

Special thanks to the State Government and Melbourne City Council for their support.

Best regards,

David Marlow

Executive Director I Jewish Community Council of Victoria
80 Years as the Voice of Victorian Jewry
p. 03-9272 5579 I f. 03-9272 5560 I m. 0407 389 919
e. david@jccv.org.au I www.jccv.org.au I @davidhmarlow
You can follow us on: Description: Description: Description: Description: C:\Documents and Settings\vernon\Application Data\Microsoft\Signatures\JewishCare (mobile) (Claire Vernon)-Image02.jpg  

Appeal

Tuesday, 28 November 2017

Peacemakers invade an American defence facility in Australia and stand trial



An American Spy Base Hidden in Australia’s Outback

The Joint Defense Facility Pine Gap, photographed in 2014. Born at the height of the Cold War, the base near the town of Alice Springs was originally presented to the Australian public as a space research facility. Kristian Laemmle-Ruff

By JACKIE DENT
November 23, 2017
ALICE SPRINGS, Australia — Margaret Pestorius arrived at court last week in her wedding dress, a bright orange-and-cream creation painted with doves, peace signs and suns with faces.
“It’s the colors of Easter, so I always think of it as being a resurrection dress,” said Ms. Pestorius, a 53-year-old antiwar activist and devout Catholic, who on Friday was convicted of trespassing at a top-secret military base operated by the United States and hidden in the Australian outback.
From the base, known as the Joint Defense Facility Pine Gap, the United States controls satellites that gather information used to pinpoint airstrikes around the world and target nuclear weapons, among other military and intelligence tasks, according to experts and leaked National Security Agency documents.
As a result, the facility, dotted with satellite dishes and isolated in the desert, has become a magnet for Australian antiwar protesters. Over the past two weeks, Ms. Pestorius and five other Christian demonstrators were convicted in two separate trials of breaching the site’s security perimeter last year. They could face seven years in prison.

cid:image008.png@01D36567.1ED3CBF0
Margaret Pestorius, a 53-year-old Catholic peace activist, was arrested last year for trespassing at Pine Gap. The base’s role in U.S. military operations has made it a magnet for antiwar protesters. David Maurice Smith for The New York Times
“In terms of actions like this, it’s pretty basic: We are called to love our enemies,” said Jim Dowling, 62, a member of the pacifist Catholic Worker Movement who was one of the protesters. “Do good to those who persecute you. To turn the other cheek. Put up our swords. All the teachings of Jesus on nonviolence.”
The trials — and the Australian government’s uncompromising prosecution of the protesters — has put a spotlight on a facility that the United States would prefer remain in the shadows.
Born at the height of the Cold War, Pine Gap was presented to the Australian public in 1966 as a space research facility. But behind the scenes, the station was run by the C.I.A. to collect information from American spy satellites about the Soviet Union’s missile program.
Since then, American spies, engineers, cryptologists and linguists have flocked to Alice Springs, the small town closest to the base, to work at the facility. At least 599 Americans lived there in 2016, according to the latest census. Though their presence in town is low-key, there are some telltale signs: a baseball diamond at a local sports complex, Oreo cookies and Dr Pepper in the supermarket, and beef brisket on sale at a butcher shop.
“Americans, from the time they came here, have never been isolated from the rest of the community,” said Damien Ryan, the mayor of Alice Springs, who could remember a time when Americans in left-hand-drive cars were frequently seen on the town’s roads. “They’ve been part of the community the whole time.”

cid:image009.png@01D36567.1ED3CBF0
A satellite image of Pine Gap from October. Inside the white spheres, called radomes, are antenna systems that send and receive information from dozens of satellites.
TerraServer / DigitalGlobe
The base is reached by a dead-end road, marked with a sign warning away visitors. Without clearance, the only way to see Pine Gap is by air, or by climbing the craggy ridges of the MacDonnell Ranges that surround the site.
Photos taken from the air show a sprawling campus punctuated by white geodesic domes that look like giant golf balls. Inside these spheres, called radomes, are antenna systems that send and receive information from satellites in constant orbit above the earth.
The staff at Pine Gap was predominantly American until the 1980s, when the two governments, responding in part to public pressure here, made it about half Australian. Today, more than 800 people from both countries are believed to work at the base. But the United States is firmly in control.
“Pine Gap has changed and developed enormously,” said Richard Tanter, a senior research associate at the Nautilus Institute and honorary Melbourne University professor who has investigated and criticized the base for years.
In documents leaked by Edward Snowden, the American intelligence contractor turned whistle-blower, Pine Gap is described as playing “a significant role in supporting both intelligence activities and military operations.”
cid:image010.png@01D36568.651FBFA0
Defendants with supporters this month in Alice Springs, where their trials were held. 
The proceedings have put a spotlight on a facility that the United States 
would prefer remained in the shadows. 
David Maurice Smith for The New York Times

What that actually means, Professor Tanter said, is that the station is involved in real-time contributions to the United States’ global military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
Pine Gap, he added, also “contributes data for C.I.A. drone operations in countries in which the United States is not at war — Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and so forth. It is also critically important in whatever the United States is going to do on the Korean Peninsula.”
Professor Tanter has gleaned information about the secret site from unexpected public records, including the LinkedIn profiles of Pine Gap contractors and satellite photos that reveal new construction at the site.

Professor Tanter, who is president of the Australian board of the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, said he wanted the government to “make a very clearheaded assessment” of whether it is in Australia’s best interest to contribute data for drone assassinations and targeting nuclear weapons.

Other experts, however, said that hosting a base like Pine Gap helps maintain the country’s alliance with the United States, and that other partners of the Americans carry considerably larger burdens.
cid:image011.png@01D36568.651FBFA0
The defendant Jim Dowling, 62, of the pacifist Catholic Worker Movement, appeared in court barefoot. “In terms of actions like this, it’s pretty basic: We are called to love our enemies,” he said of the protest at Pine Gap last year. 
David Maurice Smith for The New York Times

Australians are “not doing a lot of things that our allies are doing,” including permanently hosting American nuclear weapons and soldiers, said Stephan Frühling, a professor at the Strategic and Defense Studies Center of the Australian National University.

Last year, in the early hours of a cold, dark September morning, Ms. Pestorius, Mr. Dowling and three other “peace pilgrims,” as they call themselves, breached Pine Gap’s security perimeter.

As the activists scrambled up a rocky hill to get closer to the base, and with the police moving in, Ms. Pestorius picked up her viola. Another protester strummed his guitar. As they played a lament for those killed in war, Mr. Dowling held up a large, laminated photograph showing a bloodied young woman with her foot missing.

A sixth activist, Paul Christie, 44, carried out his own protest at Pine Gap days later; he was tried separately and convicted last week, charged, like the others, with entering a prohibited area. During the activists’ back-to-back trials this month, a modest band of supporters gathered at the courthouse. Many were members of the country’s antiwar movement, parts of which are religion-infused.

A Quaker knitted flower brooches. A Buddhist brewed coffee from the back of his van. A collection of colourful banners tied to fences read “Close Pine Gap” and “End the U.S. Alliance and Pine Gap Terror Base.”
cid:image012.png@01D36568.651FBFA0
The base is reached by a dead-end road, marked with a sign warning visitors away. David Maurice Smith for The New York Times
Mr. Dowling, who said he had been arrested between 50 and 100 times, was found guilty once before of trespassing at Pine Gap, in 2005. The conviction was later overturned.
One of his co-defendants this time was his 20-year-old son Franz, the guitar player at the protest last year. The younger Mr. Dowling and two other defendants — Andrew Paine, 31, and Timothy Webb, 23 — live together in a Dorothy Day Catholic Worker House in Brisbane, where they regularly take in homeless people.
All five were found guilty of entering a prohibited area, and Mr. Paine was convicted of an additional charge of possessing a photographic device.
During their trial, the five — who acted as their own attorneys — tried to argue that they had acted in the defense of others, but Justice John Reeves did not allow it.
Pine Gap has “to bear a big responsibility for all the murder and mayhem that has taken place in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Jim Dowling, who appeared in court barefoot.
Mr. Dowling seemed unperturbed by how few activists had traveled to remote Alice Springs to support him and the other defendants.
“There’s not a huge number engaged in nonviolent resistance in the name of their faith, but numbers don’t matter, do they?” he said. “Just follow your conscience, you know?”
     Source from the New York Times: 
         

Tuesday, 1 March 2016

Archbishop Philip Freier, Rabbi Fred Morgan and Dr Hass Dellal discuss religion's power for peace.

Editor's comment: This sounds like a wonderful event - but what a pity that women have no voice in such an important topic!


Harnessing religion's power for peace: Anglican Diocese of Melbourne

From March 16, 2016 07:30 until March 16, 2016 09:30
Harnessing religion's power for peace: Anglican Diocese of Melbourne
The Anglican Diocese of Melbourne along with other supporters invite you to:
Harnessing religion's power for peace | Anglican Archbishop of Melbourne's "Conversations with the Archbishop" series
Date: Wednesday 16 March 2016         Time: 7:30am
Location: Deakin Edge, Federation Square, Melbourne
The world's religions have a mixed record when it comes to war and peace - sometimes complicit and sometimes providing a powerful narrative for peace and understanding. What can people of faith do to combat violence, reduce tensions and promote peace?
Join Archbishop Philip FreierRabbi Fred Morgan (Rabbi Emeritus of the Temple Beth Israel) and Dr Hass Dellal (executive director of the Australian Multicultural Foundation since 1989) as they consider the positive impact religion can have on building peace and tolerance around the world and in Australia. The public conversation will be facilitated by ABC Radio's John Cleary.
Attendees will also have a chance to ask questions, with a Q&A session for the final 20 minutes of the event. The conversation will be recorded and broadcast on ABC Radio after the fact.

Admission is free, and bookings are not essential. For more information, click here.

Wednesday, 10 February 2016

From Transcend Media Service - Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence

Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence

EDITORIAL, 8 February 2016
Johan Galtung, 8 Feb 2016 - TRANSCEND Media Service
To navigate these difficult conceptual waters we need some rules. Here are three suggestions (the violence can be direct–as sometimes prescribed by the Abrahamic religions–or structural as by Hinduism):
  1. Anchor “religious fundamentalism” in religious scriptures taken literally according to the fundamentalists, not as “interpreted”;
  2. Anchor “extremism” in violent action, verbal or physical;
  3. Anchor “religious extremism” in violent action justified-legitimized by religious scriptures, by fundamentalists or not.
Fundamentalism has to do with inner faith, belief. Extremism has to do with outer violence against Other, and against Self (like flagellation for being a sinner). Keep them separate. And be careful.
We can have fundamentalism without extremism. The fundamentalist may believe much, beyond the beliefs of others, yet not cross the border to violence. We may say: let him-her do so; it is not obvious that fundamentalists are more violent than non-fundamentalists.
We can have extremism without fundamentalism. Most people exercising violence believe in nothing, beyond “doing their job”.
There are two criteria for “religious extremism”: violence and religious legitimation. That legitimation may be fundamentalist or not; could also be well-know quotes from the Scriptures. We might even speculate that for the fundamentalist faith may be sufficient.
The combination in “religious extremism” is vicious if it implies that violence will be supported by divine forces and/or that failure to be violent will incur their wrath. Probably a declining category.
Today’s secularizing, “enlightened” world brought us statism, nationalism, and their combination; secular fundamentalists and extremists, and their combination. They have given the world more violence for victory for whatever cause they design than religions. But with a rationality that may open for solving underlying conflicts.
How about the traditional “world religions” in this perspective?
The three Abrahamic and Hinduism with divine forces; and Buddhism, Daoism-Confucianism and Shinto without? Where do we find religious extremism as defined above; and where not? Obviously, some of it everywhere, nothing somewhere, but generally speaking?
Judaismn has religious extremism as right and duty to conquer and defend the Promised Holy Land (Genesis 15:18, wrath of divine forces in Deuteronomy, for structural violence Isaiah 2:1-4).
Christianity has religious extremism built as violence against non-believers (Luke 19:26)–hence also to spread Christianity–but has rules against retribution (turning the other cheek).
Islam has norms against spreading Islam by the sword, but uses violence against infidels, particularly against apostates, and uses violence for “retribution with moderation”.
Summary: Judaic religious extremism is territorial, Christian is missionary, Islamic is punitive. SUM: ex occidente bellum.
Hinduism has internal structural violence built into the caste system, with a history of direct violence to establish it and keep it. Nonviolence to cows serves as an opening to nonviolence in general.
Buddhism has violence in obscure texts but generally prescribes nonviolence. If Buddhists are violent (Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand) it is not qua Buddhists, but as defenders of a state with Buddhism.
Daoism is ambiguous: every human holon has forces-counterforces, not necessarily violent; but a rising yin or yang may be “helped”.
Confucianism deplores “bad emperor” violence, but is feudal structural violence, with rights and duties both high up and low down.     Shinto is peaceful, but state Shinto was a construction inspired by Christian state religions justifying warfare external violence under Sun Goddess Amaterasu-o-mikami and Her offsprings, the Emperors.
Conclusion: not good enough to declare ex oriente pax.
How about the secular counterparts to religions, the ideologies, the isms? Backed by human forces of rationality and compassion, and by social forces across the domestic and global faultlines nature-gender-generation-race-class-nation-territory. Religions see them as parts of the divine order; secularism sees them as changeable, for worse (slavery, colonialism, war), for better (human rights, Art 28).
Enlightenment came with capitalist growth against nature and the working classes; with the rule of Men, Old/middle-aged, White; class with competitive mobility; nationalism and statism. Isms emerged, as dualist-manichean as God vs Satan, promising Paradise vs Hell, pitting Self- good vs Other-evil, with mechanisms for picking winners-losers.
Nature fights back, now possibly winning. Women, young and old, non-whites struggle nonviolently for parity. Afterlife Paradise and Hell no longer available, political parties fight for paradise=upper class rewards from capitalist growth against hell=poverty-misery; meaningful only if inequality prevails over distribution. Nationalism and statism struggle for parity and dominance, even globally; the mechanisms being war by the military and negotiation by the diplomats.
Secular fundamentalism means strong attachment to one side in the one faultline seen as fundamental: with this issue (gender, race, class, nation, state) solved, the others will follow automatically!
Secular extremism, fundamentalist or not, uses violence against the Other in gender, race, class, nation, state; if fundamentalist for the salvation of humanity, with paradise on earth around the corner.
Secularism is Western. It is rejected by Islam and Hinduism. Buddhism focuses on means: nonviolence; China on process: yin-yang. Only Japan under Abe follows US war logic. Western secularism may actually turn out to be an episode, yielding to religious revivalism.
Rather work nonviolently on very many conflicts and traumas than on one giant step toward salvation-paradise, even with violence.
____________________________________
Johan Galtung, a professor of peace studies, dr hc mult, is founder of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace, Development and Environment and rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University-TPU. He has published 164 books on peace and related issuesof which 41 have been translated into 35 languages, for a total of 135 book translations, including ‘50 Years-100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives,’ published by the TRANSCEND University Press-TUP.

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 8 February 2016.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source,TRANSCEND Media Service - TMS: Religious Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence, is included. Thank you.

Monday, 7 October 2013

Oh to be in New York just when Eagleton is there!

The title of this post expresses how I felt when I saw this information.  For those readers of Beside The Creek who are not familiar with Terry Eagleton, this post serves to provide a starting point for your introduction to him and his work.

~~~~~~~~~~

Dawkins, Hitchens and the New Atheism

Eagleton has become a vocal critic of what has been called the New Atheism. In October 2006, he published a review of Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion in the London Review of Books. Eagleton begins by questioning Dawkins's methodology and understanding: "Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology". Eagleton further writes, "Nor does [Dawkins] understand that because God is transcendent of us (which is another way of saying that he did not have to bring us about), he is free of any neurotic need for us and wants simply to be allowed to love us."[14] He concludes by suggesting Dawkins has not been attacking organised faith so much as a sort of rhetorical straw man: "Apart from the occasional perfunctory gesture to ‘sophisticated’ religious believers, Dawkins tends to see religion and fundamentalist religion as one and the same. This is not only grotesquely false; it is also a device to outflank any more reflective kind of faith by implying that it belongs to the coterie and not to the mass. The huge numbers of believers who hold something like the theology I outlined above can thus be conveniently lumped with rednecks who murder abortionists and malign homosexuals."[15]

Terry and Gifford Lectures

In April 2008 Eagleton delivered Yale University's Terry Lectures with the title of his subject being, Faith and Fundamentalism: Is belief in Richard Dawkins necessary for salvation? constituting a continuation of the critique he had begun in The London Review of Books. Introducing his first lecture with an admission of ignorance of both theology and science Eagleton goes on to affirm, "All I can claim in this respect, alas, is that I think I may know just about enough theology to be able to spot when someone like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens—a couplet I shall henceforth reduce for convenience to the solitary signifier Ditchkins—is talking out of the back of his neck."[16][17] His "Terry Lectures" were published in 2009, in Reason, Faith, and Revolution.

Now if that is insufficient to whet your appetite, please pop over to the Wikipedia entry from which the above paragraphs have come. If you scroll to the bottom, you will find the Eagleton book list.  For some other Eagleton information, please go this site.

Monday, 30 September 2013

JCMA Event - Religion in the media - Sunday 6 October 2013 - 2.30pm - Richmond


Sunday 6 October, 2.30 pm - 5 pm: Religion in the media. 
 
This Forum will have panelists: 
 
 
(Director, The Centre for Advanced Journalism, University of Melbourne)
 
 
Barney Zwartz (Religion Editor, The Age)
 
 
Dr Nasya Bahfen (Journalist & Communications, Lecturer, RMIT)
 
 
MC: Margaret Coffey(ABC Radio National)
 
Venue: Richmond Town Hall333 Bridge RoadRichmond VIC 3121. (Stairs only access). Costs: $15 per person; $10 students or concession; $30 family. 
Please book and pay: www.trybooking.com/DNGU (Preferred) or Pay at Door.
Contact: Helen Heath. Tel: 9287 5590; Email: executiveofficer@jcma.org.au; Website:  jcma.org.au

Friday, 20 September 2013

An atheist has his say: Politics in the Pulpit : Religious Lobbying & Australian Politics

Over at Only The Sangfroid, Mark - who says he is an atheist - has a view on religious leaders taking part in public policy debates.  You might like to comment on what Mark has to say.

~~~~~~~

20 September, 2013

The picture below is from here

Quick Post: Politics in the Pulpit: Religious Lobbying & Oz Politics

Over on the ABC Religion & Ethics Twitter stream, there’s an open discussion about the extent to which religious leaders should take specific policy positions on issues like climate change and gay marriage. For various reasons, I have a locked down Twitter account at the moment, so I thought I’d scratch out my thoughts here.

As an atheist, I am strongly in favour of religious leaders taking strong policy positions in public debate.

The point of opinion writing, as I’ve argued before, is to translate the bellyfeel intuitions of the broader community into political discourse. Good opinion writers will translate those feelings into useful political language, giving people greater ability to express their own views about important political problems. Opinion writers can only go so far. Not only is it unfashionable for opinion writers to express strong religious convictions, it’s also ineffective. We don’t look to opinion writers to express religious convictions. We look to religious leaders.

Religious leaders have a responsibility to translate the religious intuitions of the various faiths into useful, productive political language. It’s not good enough to abandon their flocks to lay-theological notions about the sanctity of life, for example, or inter-faith relations.

If religious leaders are formally excluded or socially discouraged from entering into political discussions, then we don’t open up an acceptable outlet for religious expression in politics. When that happens, we get the America effect: people turning their homes into Westborough Baptist Churches, starting weird fruitloop cults to troll the legal system.

It also has the effect of domesticating and socialising religious groups. When religious leaders enter the political arena, they’re criticised by everybody — including adherents of their own religion. Thus, if religious leaders want to hold socially inappropriate, backwards, and odious prejudices, they end up being judged by the broader community and younger generations of religious people can affect change within their institutions.

We see this a lot in the Catholic Church, much to their credit. Although I have a lot of time for him and his theological views, Pell’s social views are a remnant of an older age. Already, we’re seeing a new generation of Church leaders come up through the fold who are finding ways to be theologically conservative while socially liberal. Why is this? Because we included Pell in the political discussion and gave him all the rope he needed.

Is it a problem that groups like the Australian Christian Lobby go about their business unchecked? Yes, but no more so than any other lobby group. Australia has a longstanding problem with ensuring that it’s political dealings are in the public space. But this is a secular — rather than a religious — problem.

Atheists should not only be happy for religious leaders to express political opinions, they should encourage them. Encourage the best theologians to enter the public debate and watch the quality of our religious communities improve.

~~~~~~
And after those thoughtful remarks you might want to tune into this (this is an embedded Tweet):