Wondering Pilgrim

Same sex marriage – a mugwump’s perspective

This one is hotting up for parliamentary attention next week, with both the Australian Christian Lobby and Getup! campaigning from opposite sides. It looks like it’s going to be high noon at the OK Corral as these two shape up to each other in their lobbying for support. Funny thing is that, in the past, I have sided with each on different occasions on various issues.

I have held back on this one because I’m not satisfied with the arguments of either side. I’m aware this puts me in “no man’s land” the place where one wins suspicion of being a person of no conviction, where one becomes a target for rotten tomatoes from both sides.

The “againsts”, I fear, are guilty of hyperbole. They say that only the traditional nuclear family can offer the solid building block for society. If the world was a black and white version of “Pleasantville” that might be the case. My experience of family units who display all sorts of variations on the proverbial norm says it is not so. Some of the most solid folk I know were brought up in nurturing environments that were anything but ordinary. Some of the most damaged people I have encountered describe a traditional mum-dad-and-kids environment. Whatever the arrangement, it seems to me that loving, respectful, nurturing relationships, whatever the age, gender or cultural mix, are what engender that much sought after solid family unit.

Again I find myself hesitant to cast my lot with the “fors”, as sympathetic as I am with the case for equal recognition of a coupled relationship without discrimination and the legal rights appended to it. My dilemma is, that many couples, regardless of sexual orientation, have a high regard for marriage, and it is right that that they pursue the removal of blocks that prevent the fullest expression of what it can mean as the highest level of spiritual and practical commitment to each other. The thing is that “marriage” itself has become the rallying point, thus altering the subtle nature of what all, in non combative mode, might appreciate as its subtlety, mystery and sanctity. I fear these things are lost in the heat of battle. Of course, some would argue that this is a temporary turbulence and it must be endured for the sake of the long term goal.

I feel there needs to be a reframing of the question of what constitutes marriage and that the wisdom of tradition, culture, and contemporary anthropology need to be in play, not as combatants, but seeking partners.

I am also aware it has been too long for those alienated by the current system and that a measure of justice is crying out for satisfaction.

And so I remain a mugwump, sitting on the barbed wire fence in no man’s land, a place of ambiguity, until a better way forward emerges.

At last – a candle lit in the darkness!

A top immigration official recommends more community based schemes for processing asylum claims and raises questions about the effectiveness of unnecessary detention.
Will our politicians listen? Doesn’t take much to blow out a candle.
I’m indebted to Jack Smit of SafeCom for posting the following transcript. Check out SafeCom, by the way – it’s one of the most regular and comprehensive monitors of social justice issues in Australia I have come across.

Immigration Dept head raises questions about mandatory detention

ABC Radio Current Affairs – AM
Naomi Woodley
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 08:03:00

TONY EASTLEY: The head of the Immigration Department says politicians should be questioning the value of mandatory detention for asylum seekers.

Andrew Metcalfe also told the start of another parliamentary inquiry into Australia’s detention system that he’d personally like to see more community-based programs.

The top-ranking public servant has posed a series of questions for MPs and Senators.

From Canberra, Naomi Woodley reports.

NAOMI WOODLEY: In June, Parliament voted to set up a select or ongoing inquiry into Australia’s immigration detention network.

The secretary of the Immigration Department Andrew Metcalfe opened its first hearing last night by outlining the areas he thinks politicians should focus on.

ANDREW METCALFE: There are a range of policy conundrums. How should we manage the issue of asylum? What is the balance between our international obligations to protect refugees and our need for strong border controls?

NAOMI WOODLEY: And he had some more pointed suggestions on the treatment of asylum seekers who reach Australia.

ANDREW METCALFE: Is immigration detention a deterrent? Does immigration detention facilitate case resolution?

What range of facilities should be utilised? For how long is an immigrant arrival and status determination process in a detention centre environment required?

There are many questions for you as parliamentarians to consider.

NAOMI WOODLEY: None of the MPs or Senators at the inquiry directly asked Mr Metcalfe to expand on what he meant.

Instead the Opposition’s immigration spokesman Scott Morrison was focusing on the sharp increase in the number of serious incidents in detention centres this year.

SCOTT MORRISON: At what point in this escalation of these quite serious indicators were you instructed by the Minister to say, look, something’s not working here?

Basically, when did you get to the Houston-we-have-a-problem stage?

ANDREW METCALFE: Ah, I think that I wouldn’t describe it as there being one specific date in which I woke up or the Department woke up and see the Minister – we have a problem.

NAOMI WOODLEY: Andrew Metcalfe says it’s partly explained by a significant number of people who’ve been in detention for a long time because their initial claims have been refused.

He also says the inquiry should be looking at whether detention is contributing to the rates of self-harm amongst detainees.

Late in the three-hour hearing he again suggested that policy makers should be look at alternatives to mandatory detention. He says he’d personally like community programs to be expanded.

ANDREW METCALFE: It hasn’t been entirely without incident as you would not expect anything involving hundreds of people to be entirely without incident, but we believe it does provide the Department with the necessary access to our clients in terms of status determination without their being required to be held in detention facilities, often in fairly remote locations.

NAOMI WOODLEY: He says since last October, 1765 people have been placed in community detention including 841 children.

The committee’s next hearing will be on Christmas Island in September.

TONY EASTLEY: Naomi Woodley reporting.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3295098.htm
.

Nothing personal!

The High Court of Australia has several interesting cases before it right now.
I’ve already pinpointed the challenge to the federally funded School Chaplaincy Program.

Rocking the boat is a very succinct article on the current injunction to halt the Malaysia refugee swap scheme on the basis that the Australian government does not have the power to enact it.

Our legal system often gets sledged because it tends to operate in a rarified atmosphere – indeed justice is never so blind as when it fails to deliver the verdict we think is right. However both these cases show how, in the High Court at least, this “second tier of government” protects us from the emotions of the zeitgeist and political opportunism.

The outcomes of both these cases will leave some parties unhappy. At least it won’t be personal!

A weak question…

It is occasionally suggested for interviews…”What is your greatest weakness?”

I occasionally sit in on job interview or performance review panels as well as having been subject to my own annual performance reviews. I am glad, for the right reasons, that this question never arises. It seems to appear frequently in interview guides, however.

My answer, if asked, would be “The ability to see the hidden agenda behind such a question and play it to my advantage.” Some would see that as a strength, not a weakness. If you’re looking for solid, open and honest teamwork, however, the question sets both the interview panel and candidate/colleague up for something less than the team can be.

What is the purpose of the question? If to encourage improved performance there are a range of more collaborative questions that lead to goal setting, skill acquisition and self-management.

It is a lazy question – best crossed out of the HR literature.

Correcting the Teacher

Image via Wikipedia

We’ve all done it in our student days – or held our breath as others have been foolhardy enough to attempt it – correcting the teacher. We learned a lot from how the teacher responded, particularly when the student was actually right.

Adolescent joy abounded if the teacher blustered and blundered and obfuscated around his error. Power had momentarily transferred from the master to the great unwashed!

Respect and awe occurred when the teacher owned the mistake and thanked and praised the student for their astuteness. We gladly ceded deserved authority.

We see something like that happening on a deeper and broader scale in today’s lection from the Gospel of Matthew, where Jesus, seemingly beholden to his identity as Jewish Messiah with restricted scope, almost dismisses the Canaanite woman seeking his help.

She is persistent and bold – a real tiger mum (John Shea). Matthew means us to keep our attention focused on her as she turns out to be the real teacher in this instance. It seems that the end result is the expansion of Jesus’ own self awareness, expressed in his awed response at the wit and singlemindedness of the woman considered by all present to be an “outsider” who has claimed her place within.

The best teachers have always been those who are open to correction.

The joys of being a railway tragic…

Railway siding — Image by Leonard John Matthews via Flickr

I went through a boyhood phase of wanting to be a train driver (when I wasn’t wanting to runaway and join a circus). I don’t think the desire ever left me.
Then I came across this full length silent Buster Keaton movie:

Heaven on a stick!

Monkeying Around with Genetics

Important scenes in the Planet of the Apes ser... — Image via Wikipedia

Another cinematic prequel has arisen. Many may remember the fascination we had with the late 60s TV series and eventual movie Planet of the Apes. The plot explored what it might be like to consider a kind of reversed evolution process, where humans were a subspecies to the intelligently superior ape. Rise of the Planet of the Apes purports to demonstrate the feasibility of such a scenario, introducing a range of contemporary contentious issues and treating none with more depth than simple recognition via a single line of dialogue raised in the form of a question and the exchange of glances. The result is that one could use it as a discussion starter on such things as human genetics, animal experimentation, corporate greed, and species-ism – or one can just thoroughly enjoy a “chewing gum for the mind” movie treat.

‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ Too Scary? Here Are Memorable Monkey Movies for Your Kids (moviefone.com)

One thing my training never equipped me for…

… is IT troubleshooting.

For a small, ageing congregation, we’re very wired up. We digitally record our services, network with one another through email and a few are even braving Facebook and Twitter. This week I ventured into Android tablet territory and began teaching myself its various idiosyncracies and exploring the wonders of syncing it with my phone and desktop. Until a couple of years ago, I was the church’s “go-to” guy for computer difficulties. Pastoral visits invariably included fixing something that had gone awry on someone’s PC. Thankfully we have some IT savvy folk in the congregation now, but we still occasionally get our heads together and scratch them to sort out a solution to one pressing tech problem or another.

When I did my basic ministry training in the ’70s, this practical area was not even dreamed of, let alone covered in our administrative subjects. Like most of my generation, we just learned it (or not) as we went along. I was fortunate in being on the ground floor in a congregation containing several computer engineers when IT began to make inroads on the SOHO market, so could begin to learn in an amateurishly, largely intuitive way from first base. Who would have thought how ubiquitous and accessible it would all become?

It’s still a delight, however, to receive a “first email” from an 87 year old who has just gone online for the first time!

Jumping to conclusions and landing on our faces…

We are quick to name the culprits if there’s a possibility of reinforcing our prejudices.
Two instances are apparent today:

the London riots – in this far flung outpost of the old empire we hear alarmed predictions of “how the same will happen here if we don’t stop the boats” and “just as Enoch Powell predicted.” Yet nothing I have seen or heard attributes the riots to ethnic unrest. On the contrary, I hear interviews where disaffected young people name a range of issues that affect their sense of empowerment. It has reached powder keg stage and it doesn’t take much to cause an explosion. History is replete with this sort of scenario. Kudos, by the way, to the thousands of “riot wombles” – volunteers who have appeared with broom in hand to clean up the streets and reclaim their neighbourhoods. There is always a better way than revenge and confrontation. And I must say, how wonderfully British!
a local primary school, as a result of a survey showing 24% parental opposition, has ceased the practice of reciting the Lord’s Prayer at assemblies while it seeks further advice. Public response has been, again, to vilify foreign interlopers who “threaten our culture and way of life.” Most opposition to Christian based religious exercises, in my encounters, comes from those representing a “no faith” stance than an “other faith” position. And, whatever the reason for their disquiet, their voice needs to be heard and addressed reasonably, not hysterically.

Either side in a polarised community can fall into the trap of creating straw men to set on fire, thus diverting attention from the central issues that require further talking and listening with the purpose of finding common ground.

Of course, I could be jumping to a conclusion that common ground is common desire, couldn’t I?

Census night

The choice tonight is to catch up on this blog or fill out the census forms. My son with eagle eye already discovered a discrepancy in the registration number on our form and rang up about it. Sure enough, the number was ‘invalid’ and we had to arrange for the census office to SMS a new number and access code for web entry. Never knew we had a natural bureaucrat in the family. Perhaps I should just get him to fill out the whole form!

Related articles