Ivory Coast

I have made the early New Years resolution to blog more or maybe broadcast my thoughts via Ustream…but we’ll see how long that lasts.

Anyway, today’s story comes from Africa.

When a person has seized control of a country, open fired on UN troops and demanded that they get out, are they really going to pay attention to sanctions?

The UN, toothless as it is, needs to play a more prominent role in ensuring that it’s values are adhered to. This means that it cannot be hijacked by bigoted countries looking to curtail human rights of gays or those who wish to speak out about religion. It also means that when it see’s something like this happen, it has to act in a meaningful way.

The sanctions will not work as from all appearances, the only language that Gbagbo knows is violence. I’ll go on record now and say that if the UN presences diminishes in anyway whatsoever this will become yet another sad and unnecessary conflict on the African continent.

What’s needed to overcome this is a show of force from the international community under the direction of the UN. Without this, Gbagbo will continue to have his way in direct opposition to the values that the UN stands for.

Adoption rights for gays is tantamount to ‘child abuse’, says the Catholic Church

While on Twitter today I was sent a link by @Denyreligion to this site. It made me angry and here’s why.

As you may be aware, the Catholic Church has been ordered to pay millions of pounds in settlement for the crimes it committed in abusing children in Ireland. Since this information has become public the Catholic Church is yet to apologise. The closest it has come is saying that and this is not a direct quote but something very close to it: “Child abuse is bad but there are x thousand abortions happening every year and that is much worse since those children die”.

And that’s it. No sorry, no we will reform our ways simply justifying what they have done by saying that there are worse things (I refuse to use the word crime when speaking about abortion) happening in the world.

Given this rationale, I think I might just visit my local Aston Martin dealer and steal a DBS because we all know that there are people being murdered out there.

Furthermore, no one has been charged with anything. So the perpetrayors of all the abuse that took place seem to have gotten away scott free. That disgusts me.

In this article, it is clear and no attempt has been made to hide the discriminatory nature of the Vatican. The Vatican issued a directive saying that children should not be adopted out to homosexual couples. They claim that this is tantamount to child abuse. Given the record of the Catholic Church in relation to looking after children, that disgusts me as well.

When the San Francisco board claimed this to be: “An insult to all San Franciscans when a foreign country, like the Vatican, meddles with and attempts to negatively influence this great City’s existing and established customs and traditions such as the right of same-sex couples to adopt and care for children in need.” The resolution viewed a claim from the Vatican that, “allowing children to be adopted by persons living in [homosexual] unions would actually mean doing violence to these children” as defamatory in nature and “absolutely unacceptable to the citizenry of San Francisco.”. The Board said such defamatory language was: Insulting and callous, and shows a level of insensitivity and ignorance which has seldom been encountered by this Board of Supervisors.

I applaud the San Francisco board in this action.

But not to be outdone, the Catholic Church has hit back saying that this: “The policy of San Francisco is one of totalitarian intolerance of Christians of all denominations who oppose homosexual conduct. My concern is that if this ruling is allowed to stand, it will further embolden anti-Christian attacks.”

They then went on to say that “Our constitution plainly forbids hostility toward any religion, including the Catholic faith. In total disregard for the Constitution, homosexual activists in positions of authority in San Francisco have abused their authority as government officials and misused the instruments of the government to attack the Catholic Church. Their egregious abuse of power now has the backing of a federal circuit court. This decision must be reversed …”

The Law society continued that: The Anti-Catholic resolution sends a clear message to plaintiffs and others who are faithful adherents to the Catholic faith that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message that those who oppose Catholic religious beliefs, particularly with regard to homosexual unions and adoptions by homosexual partners, are insiders, favored members of the political community.”

I for one, am actually very against the Catholic church or any religion for that matter having any role in politics. If someone speaks to an imaginary being, then they are simply not fit for public office. End of story.

The sad truth is that in this day and age the Catholic church can issue a brazenly discriminatory order and then claim that by no following it their rights are being violated. I stand utterly amazed that there are supposedly so many “intelligent” people who actually do not speak out against it.

It leaves me feeling both disgusted andthat much more passionate about speaking out against religion and the evil that it fosters.

UNICEF ‘deeply concerned’ about marriage of 8-year-old

As stated in my “About” section, I strongly believe that children should be able to grow up in an environment free from religion, fear and persecution. Somehow I don’t think I would like to live in Saudi Arabia.

This link details how a Saudi judge has refused to annul the marriage of an 8 year old girl to a 47 year old guy. In my opinion this is legalised abuse.

I do not know if the relationship is sexual in nature, being marriage I assume that it is but have been told by defenders of child Marriage that it is not, so will just throw it out there that Paedophilia should be punished without any leniency what-so-ever.

What I do know is that this is typical of the clash of cultures that the technology age brings to our attention. The defenders of these acts call it a cultural tradition which these people are entitled to.

The western world calls this abuse.

Which is right?

In instances like this we need to look at the facts. UNICEF has documented studies that show that child brides suffer from much higher instances of depression than “normal” children.

Further more, following the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan, it was discovered that Afghan females had a very high rate of depression and exceedingly low levels of education. These statistics having been brought about by the regime and “system” that was in place at the time.

In response to the scientific studies, the response is “this is what the Koran teaches”. This is our culture.

My thoughts? – Crucifixion used to be our culture but then we got civilised. As our technology advanced and our thinking evolved, we have looked at things differently and have the benefit of hindsight to show that the way we do things now is a much better way for society as a whole.

I say this as a citizen of the western world as it would appear that many Muslim countries have not yet made these advancements in social education and development.

I condemn these acts as the barbarous, uncivilised and backward thinking acts that they are.

Females are not “property” and have the natural rights of freedom which they are being deprived of. That is completely unacceptable and more Governments need to acknowledge the elephant in the room and call this for the backward, uneducated thinking that it is!