In a lecture on 3 March 2008 in Brisbane, Professor Tariq Ramadan, senior research fellow at St Antony's College Oxford, said that the mainstream Muslims are reformists.

[T]he 'Islamic' universal reference is as complex as the Christian one, and you show respect to the people when you accept from the beginning that they are as complex as you are. So I think that yes, you have literalists, you have people in this country saying, 'We don't have to mix. This is not our country.' You have literalists and you have also traditionalists. That's fine. The problem is for us to have this intra-community dialogue, to accept the different trends. But you should know that the mainstream is for the Muslims to be faithful to the principles and at the same time facing the challenges of our world.

Similarly, Associate Professor Shahram of Melbourne University comments in Eureka Street (1 Apr 08):

The literalist reading is widely assumed to be correct, by people on both sides of the argument. This reading presents Islamic law as fixed and static. In the best case scenario . . . some aspects may be palatable and reconcilable with United Kingdom or Australian laws, while others are not. In the worst case scenario, all aspects of Islamic law are antiquated and unpalatable to secular democratic societies. This is a very simplistic depiction of Islam, and ignores its profound internal dynamics.

Some Muslim intellectuals, notably Tariq Ramadan in United Kingdom, have rejected the literalist approach. Instead Ramadan points to the essence of Islam. If Islam is a living religion, as Muslims believe it to be, then its laws and dictums need to evolve and keep up with the contemporary issues that face Muslims. If Islam is a religion for all times, it needs to have a real and organic relevance to all times. It needs to be evolutionary and adaptive. This line of reasoning has led reformist-minded Islamic thinkers to emphasise the spirit, as opposed to the letter, of Islam. Notions of unity between the Creator and the created and justice, for example, are timeless and guiding principles which can be codified differently at different times. In other words, the essence remains true for all times, but not its codification in Islamic law.

. . . This is a serious challenge. But it can be met. And the best way to meet it is to keep going back to the essence of Islam and what it once stood for. Muslims are proud of what Islam achieved in the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century because it brought a more just system to the region. The essence of that experience, and what Islam stood for, is important today.

Work has already begun. The Turkish religious authorities announced recently a major project to re-interpret existing records of the Prophet Muhammad's sayings and deeds (known as Hadith), to discern what they mean in the contemporary setting. This is promising, as Muslims are taking responsibility for trying to grasp what Islam means in the 21st Century.

So it is not so strange that a conference last week in Jakarta, reported in the Jakarta Post (29 Mar 08), makes plain that even in Islam, there is no single view of homosexuality.

Homosexuals and homosexuality are natural and created by God, thus permissible within Islam, a discussion concluded here Thursday. Moderate Muslim scholars said there were no reasons to reject homosexuals under Islam, and that the condemnation of homosexuals and homosexuality by mainstream ulema and many other Muslims was based on narrow-minded interpretations of Islamic teachings.

Siti Musdah Mulia of the Indonesia Conference of Religions and Peace cited the Koran's al-Hujurat (49:3) that one of the blessings for human beings was that all men and women are equal, regardless of ethnicity, wealth, social positions or even sexual orientation. [49:3 -- Surely, those who lower their voices at the messenger of God are the ones whose hearts are prepared by God to become righteous. They have deserved forgiveness and a great recompense.] "There is no difference between lesbians and nonlesbians. In the eyes of God, people are valued based on their piety," she told the discussion organized by nongovernmental organization Arus Pelangi. "And talking about piety is God's prerogative to judge," she added. "The essence of the religion (Islam) is to humanize humans, respect and dignify them." Musdah said homosexuality was from God and should be considered natural, adding it was not pushed only by passion.

Mata Air magazine managing editor Soffa Ihsan said Islam's acknowledgement of heterogeneity should also include homosexuality. He said Muslims needed to continue to embrace ijtihad (the process of making a legal decision by independent interpretation of the Koran and the Sunnah) to avoid being stuck in the old paradigm without developing open-minded interpretations.

Another speaker at the discussion, Nurofiah of the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), said the dominant notion of heterogeneity was a social construction, leading to the banning of homosexuality by the majority. "Like gender bias or patriarchy, heterogeneity bias is socially constructed. It would be totally different if the ruling group was homosexuals," she said.

Other speakers said the magnificence of Islam was that it could be blended and integrated into local culture. "In fact, Indonesia's culture has accepted homosexuality. The homosexual group in Bugis-Makassar tradition called Bissu is respected and given a high position in the kingdom. "Also, we know that in Ponorogo (East Java) there has been acknowledgement of homosexuality," Arus Pelangi head Rido Triawan said.

Condemnation of homosexuality was voiced by two conservative Muslim groups, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and Hizbut Thahir Indonesia (HTI). "It's a sin. We will not consider homosexuals an enemy, but we will make them aware that what they are doing is wrong," MUI deputy chairman Amir Syarifuddin said. Rokhmat, of the hardline HTI, several times asked homosexual participants in attendance to repent and force themselves to gradually return to the right path.

Christians are not supposed to pray for the death of their enemies. Perhaps I might be excused in two cases: Kim Jong-Il and Robert Mugabe.

Mugabe may yet be deposed, despite best efforts to delay/deny the wishes of the Zimbabwean people, allowing him to go to dishonourable retirement.

Kim Jong-Il is often described as an absolute dictator, but perhaps all is not as it seems. Perhaps his death would change little.

Following a recent visit to North Korea, US senatorial aide Keith Luse reported to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , that the North Korean military was resisting efforts by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to complete a deal. "Chairman Kim's best efforts to orchestrate a balance among competing interests within the North may be a 'stretch too far' for North Korean military hardliners," Luse wrote. "Discarding the jewel of their arsenal will be difficult."

In an associated visit report, Siegfried S. Hecker of Stanford University noted that North Korean officials asserted they had resolved all queries on uranium enrichment, even allowing U.S. experts last year to visit a missile factory using the tubes and permitting them to take samples home. When Hecker asked to see the factory, he was told that North Korean "military and industrial officials were extremely unhappy with the access the Americans were granted and with the fact that they were given samples of the aluminum tubes. . . . I was told that neither I, nor anyone else, will get access again."

Meanwhile in addition to conflict over Pyongyang's nuclear weapons, there is an escalating war of words. There is argument over a fishing and resources demarcation line in the West Sea that has never been recognised by North Korea: officials in Pyongyang said on Friday that "armed conflict may break out at any moment" over the boundary.

James and I were in Korea when on 29 June 2002, North and South Korean warships exchanged artillery and small-arms fire in the West Sea. One South Korean warship was sunk and one North Korean warship was heavily damaged, with loss of life and injuries likely on both sides. People were quite worried.

A few days ago, the DPRK test-fired a salvo of short-range missiles, provoking outrage in Seoul and testing the mettle of the South's new president, Lee Myung Bak, who is less conciliatory than his predecessors.

The head of South Korea's military vowed to conduct a pre-emptive strike on the suspected North Korean nuclear weapons site if Pyongyang tried to attack with atomic weapons. In response the North Korean news agency reported an official saying "Our military will not sit idle until warmongers launch a pre-emptive strike," the official news agency in Pyongyang reported, "everything will be in ashes, not just a sea of fire, if our advanced pre-emptive strike once begins." A subsequent North Korean note on said that "these outbursts are the gravest challenge ever in the history of the inter-Korean relations and a reckless provocation little short of a war declaration against the DPRK." Pyongyang said that it would suspend all cross-border dialogue unless the remarks were withdrawn and an apology issued.

I read poetry, but much of it is a mystery to me, dense and impenetrable; especially so when metaphors and images convey to me no meaning at all and sentences are written that simply aren't in English.

Many times, I have tried to read T.S. Eliot's famed Four quartets. Parts of it are brilliantly expressive, but when the metaphors and images crowd in, meaning vanishes. This passage, however, from part V of "East Coker" evokes superbly the dilemna that confronts me when I try to write. I love words and writing, but what is there that has not been said before by better men than me?

So here I am, in the middle way, having had twenty years--
Twenty years largely wasted, the years of l'entre deux guerres--
Trying to learn to use words, and every attempt
Is a wholly new start, and a different kind of failure
Because one has only learnt to get the better of words
For the thing one no longer has to say, or the way in which
One is no longer disposed to say it. And so each venture
Is a new beginning, a raid on the inarticulate
With shabby equipment always deteriorating
In the general mess of imprecision of feeling,
Undisciplined squads of emotion. And what there is to conquer
By strength and submission, has already been discovered
Once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope
To emulate--but there is no competition--
There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
And found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions
That seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.

On 12 February 2008, in the town of Oxnard, north of Los Angeles, a 15-year-old student, Lawrence King, was in his school computer lab when a 14-year old classmate shot him in the head at close range. Apparently Lawrence described himself as gay and, in the weeks before his death, had increased his use of make up and feminine accessories. He may have expressed romantic feelings toward the accused shooter.

The local community responded strongly to Lawrence's death, with a student-organized 1000-strong march, vigils, and a memorial fund. The death of Lawrence King has been described as "a wake-up call to the community not only about gay rights, but about the morals and values held by young people." Staff writer Ashley Surdin writes in the Washington Post (29 Mar 08) of calls for tolerance.

With his school uniform, eighth-grader Lawrence "Larry" King wore purple eye shadow, nail polish and pink lipstick. In the weeks before he died, he added purple boots with three-inch heels.

Classmates at E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard, Calif., mocked his makeup and slung anti-gay slurs at him in the halls. Sometimes, the words transformed the expressive teenager into a wallflower. Still, rumor spread that King, openly gay, was trying to find the courage to ask another student, Brandon McInerney, to be his valentine. On Feb. 12, McInerney allegedly approached King in a computer lab and shot him in the head. King, 15, died two days later.

The crime -- for which McInerney, 14, has been charged as an adult -- horrified parents, educators and students in the community and across the nation. But according to gay rights groups and experts on adolescent sexuality, it is the extreme consequence of a growing but often-ignored phenomenon.

Reassured by changing pop culture and easy access to information on the Internet, the age of sexual identification has dropped over the last few decades to the early teens and as young as 10, experts say.

I find it extraordinary that children as young as 10 could self-identify as gay. But when I think back, I realise that I was very fond of a couple of my classmates when only 12 (not that I had even heard of such a thing as homosexuality).

King's death has drawn international attention and outraged many. Many remember Matthew Shepard, killed in Wyoming.

Schools are often brutal places of bullying. Mine was. They must become places where acceptance of difference is the norm.

We have less access to guns, thank God. I do not fool myself that such things happen only in America.

To me, this is scary stuff. The scale is huge.

Scientists from the British Antarctic Survey recently announced that there has been an enormous fracture on the edge of the Wilkins Ice Shelf, which started breaking up last month. The shelf is a body of permanent floating ice on the western edge of the Antarctic Peninsula, the part of Antarctica most vulnerable to climate change.



A 41 by 2.5 km berg has already broken away and is moving. Scientists have observed huge, geometrically fractured slabs of ice and, among them, the rubble of a catastrophic breach. It will not cause a sea-level change, as the ice is already afloat. However, Wilkins is the largest ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula yet to be threatened and this cracking is another identifiable impact of climate change on the Antarctic environment.

The BAS says that the breakout is the latest of many in a region of Antarctica that has experienced unprecedented warming over the last 50 years. Several ice shelves have retreated, six of them collapsing completely (Prince Gustav Channel, Larsen Inlet, Larsen A, Larsen B, Wordie, Muller and the Jones Ice Shelf.)

As the IHT comments in an editorial,

What matters isn't just the scale of this breakout. Changes in wind patterns and water temperatures related to global warming have begun to erode the ice sheets of western Antarctica at a faster rate than previously detected, and the total collapse of the Wilkins ice shelf is now within the realm of possibility.

It also comes as a reminder that the warming of Earth's surface is occurring much faster at the poles than it is in more temperate regions.

Nothing dramatizes the dilemma of global warming quite like a fracture of this scale. There is nothing to be done about a collapsing polar ice sheet except to witness it. It may too late to stop the warming decay at the boundaries of Antarctic ice, yet there is everything to be done. Humans can radically change the way they live and do business, knowing that it is the one chance to find a possible limit to radical change in the natural world around us.

A recent book, The Three Trillion Dollar War: the true cost of the Iraq conflict, by Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz and colleague Linda Bilmes, (Allen Lane, 2007) shows that the war in Iraq will be the costliest war in American history. At today's prices, Stiglitz suggests that the cost for the United States will be nearer US$4 trillion than US$3 trillion dollars by the time the US forces can effect any significant withdrawal. The overall cost of the Second World War from 1941 to 1945 was US$5 trillion on equivalent valuation.

And Australia contribute to this madness?!

America has lost around 4,000 service men and women killed in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the total number of casualties, killed and wounded, including the mentally as well as physically injured, is now running at about 65,000. In the Second World War allies suffered between two and three seriously wounded to every soldier killed; this has gone up to more than 20 to one, due to better battlefield surgery. Fewer die, but many of the survivors are cruelly wounded, needing expert care for the rest of their lives. The real numbers are easily hidden in the official statistics.

Book reviewer Robert Fox recalls Sun Tzu's dictum of 2,000 years ago that getting involved in long wars should be avoided at all costs, especially wars of choice.

It is a pity this sound piece of advice was so blatantly ignored by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Tony Blair, the prime architects of today's long war in Iraq, which shows no sign of ending soon.

. . . The book makes constructive suggestions for reform, such as only using reserve forces for a year at most. The same order of radical rethinking by the American Government and its forces did occur after Vietnam. There are signs, too, that it is happening again -- led by deep-thinking officers like General David Petraeus and Lieutenant General Bill Caldwell who are revolutionising the way the US uses its forces, and in a direction diametrically opposite to the bludgeoning approach of the 'shock and awe' doctrine of firepower before brainpower preached by Rumsfeld, Cheney and their neocon allies.

Changing Attitude England and Nigeria : Press Release : 21 March 2008
Changing Attitude Nigeria leader narrowly escapes death: Changing Attitude calls on the Primate and bishops of the Church of Nigeria to condemn attacks on homosexuals

A shocking story of mob violence has emerged which almost culminated in the death of one of the leaders of the Changing Attitude Nigeria (CAN) group in Port Harcourt. The violent attack occurred in the context of the funeral ceremony being held for the sister of Davis Mac-Iyalla, attended by six members of the Port Harcourt group on Thursday 20 March 2008.

The CAN Port Harcourt leader who was the subject of the attack said: "I am in total shock and living in fear while feeling the pains I suffered in the hands of a mob group that attacked me at the Service of Songs for Davis's late sister. While hymn singing was going on a muscular man walked up to me and asked me for a word outside the compound.

"The next thing I saw was a mob group who were there to attack me. They started slapping and punching me, kicked me on the ground and spat on me. I have never known fear like I knew when they were brutalizing me. I thought they were going to kill me there and then. While beating me they were shouting: 'You notorious homosexual, you think can run away from us for your notorious group to cause more abomination in our land?' Those who attacked me were well informed about us so I suspect an insider or one of the leaders of our Anglican church have hands in this attack."

Colin Coward, Director of Changing Attitude England, said: "The attack on one of the CAN leaders in Port Harcourt is a terrifying indictment of the attitude of the Church of Nigeria to LGBT people. Violence against LGBT people has been encouraged by Archbishop Peter Akinola and the leaders of the Church of Nigeria. They have attacked the presence of LGBT in church and society, and supported a bill which would reinforce prejudice against LGBT people.

"Changing Attitude calls on the Church of Nigeria to denounce violence against LGBT people. We challenge the leaders of the global south coalition to repent of their un-Biblical views which fuel prejudice against LGBT people in our Communion."

Davis Mac-Iyalla, Director of Changing Attitude Nigeria, learning of the attack, said: "Please hold the Port-Harcourt group in your prayers as we seek God's guidance on this ugly and sad period of testing in our life."

The thugs who attacked the Port Harcourt leader told him: We will not rest until we silence you and any who join you to pollute the land with the abominable act of homosexuality. You are perverts who go around corrupting and inducting young people into our evil society. We will kill you and it will be a favour to the country. Nigeria will not contain you or any other person that practises homosexuality.
END

Contact: Revd Colin Coward, Director of Changing Attitude England; Davis Mac-Iyalla, Director of Changing Attitude, Nigeria.

Retired German truck driver Karl Szmolinsky breeds the world's biggest rabbits. Der Spiegel (22 Mar 08) says he has overcome the hurt of last year when, it appears that North Korea's leaders ate the prize rabbits he sold them to set up breeding farms. Last year Szmolinsky accused North Korea's rulers of eating a consignment of rabbits he had sold their country at a discounted price to set up a breeding program to provide food for the population. Szmolinsky had been due to fly to Pyongyang to provide advice on rearing rabbits, but was told just days before his departure that he was no longer needed.

North Korea denied the allegation but there has been no sign of the rabbits since a birthday banquet was held for North Korean leader Kim Jong Il in February 2007. The delivery to North Korea included Germany's largest rabbit Robert I. "I heard that the animals were eaten at a state banquet and I was outraged. If they'd told me they planned to slaughter the rabbits I would never have given them 'Robert I'." The North Korean incident turned Szmolinsky into a media celebrity and prrompted an American filmmaker to produce a documentarywhich was featured at the Berlin Film Festival.

It had been unclear from the start how Szmolinsky's rabbits would help, given their own voracious appetite for top-quality vegetables.

In more nonsense, FIFA has ordered that the two Koreas must play a keenly contested World Cup qualifying match in Shanghai today, following refusal by North Korean officials to let the South use its flag and anthem in Kim Il-Sung Stadium. The two sides have never played a World Cup qualifier together on Korean soil and have not met in the competition since 1994, though they drew 1-1 at last month's East Asian Championships. The return leg is set for June 22 in Seoul, where North will be able to use its flag and anthem.

Mr Petro Georgiou MP, Liberal member for the Federal seat of Kooyong in Victoria is regarded by many Liberals as a vital voice for 'small-l liberalism' within the party. He stood up to the Howard government's policy of mandatory detention for unauthorised refugees and has campaigned strongly on human rights and civil liberties issues--including on equality for same-sex couples. At the last election, he had the best result of any Liberal MP in Victoria, increasing the Liberal vote by 0.48% against the national trend and achieving the fourth-best Liberal result across the nation.

Yet, press reports say that Mr Georgiou will be strongly challenged for party preselection for the seat by investment banker Joshua Frydenberg--a former senior adviser to Mr Howard and foreign minister Alexander Downer--who is supported by the powerful Costello-Kroger faction. At his first attempt to win preselection for Kooyong in April 2006, Mr Frydenberg lost 62-22. Frydenberg's renewed efforts have infuriated state Liberal leader Baillieu and some others, but some right-wing power brokers in the party have switched to supporting him.

Most Liberals just don't get it. Australians do not want a return to the illiberalism of recent years.

On 11 March 2008, Georgiou gave notice of the following question to the Attorney-General (Qn no. 34)

Does the Government intend to implement the recommendations in the report: Same Sex: Same Entitlements (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, May 2007, page 382) that would involve amending the discriminatory laws (identified by the inquiry) to ensure that same-sex and opposite-sex couples and families enjoy the same financial and work-related entitlements; if so, by when; if not, why not?

Hopefully, can I look forward to the answer.

Liberal Leader Dr Brendan Nelson is not the dinosaur that some of his party members are. Speaking at the National Press Club on 18 March, he said:

I make no apology for saying that a man and a woman is a marriage and that forms a family. I don't support gay marriage, I don't support gay adoption and I don't support gay IVF. I sure as hell believe very strongly that no Australian should pay a dollar more in tax or receive a dollar less in social security by virtue of his or her sexuality and I will do everything I possibly can from opposition to see that those and other things are delivered.

Rodney Croome sees in this

a politician who has decided that he will fight tooth and nail for change within the parameters his Party has set and which are largely shared by the Government.

When it comes to accounting for Nelson's strong views, many people will cite his attachment to his late gay brother. What is not widely known is that Nelson understands first-hand the pain of homophobia. He was subject to awful homophobic slurs and threats when, as President of the Tasmanian AMA, he supported decriminalising same-sex relationships.

Whatever Nelson's motive the effect will be a good one. No-one in the Government is willing to speak so forcefully about the need for reform of financial entitlements. The attitude on the Treasury Benches is disappointingly defensive. Nelson's fighting words will hopefully embolden his opponents.

In a country of abject poverty, where millions have died of malnutrition and starvation and where large concentration camps can be found, North Korea's 'Dear Leader' Kim Jong Il lives well. Outside Pyongyang, a facility known as 'Residence No. 55' is the official residence of North Korea's leader. While Kim has other residences, this, say U.S. and Japanese officials, is the main one.

It is unlike other dictators' residences -- neither as grandiose as Saddam Hussein's various palaces with their monumental architecture and statues of mythical animals, nor as simple as Punto Cero, the Castro family compound west of Havana, with its small, tasteful residences for Fidel and his family, set in a park-like area.

The main residence apparently is a large building set aside a man-made lake with tiny islands connected by walkways. But also visible is a large security building with a running track and athletic field (Castro has one as well) and a private parade ground and stand, apparently for reviewing the North Korean Praetorian Guard. Nestled in nearby woods are smaller residences for favored members of the Kim family (Castro has those as well, while Saddam's family had separate palaces). The two buildings with green roofs look like theatres to the uneducated eye (Kim is a film buff with encyclopedic knowledge of American movies). And of course, there is the requisite helipad.

Inside, according to those who have had the privilege, are ornate furnishings, deep plush carpets and fancy chandeliers.

Source: Robert Windrem, MSNBC (18 Oct 06)

Each year, my local church celebrates Maundy Thursday with a passover-style meal, foot-washing, the eucharist and the stripping of the sanctuary. Some feel that this is not an authentic Christian tradition. Perhaps not, but our celebration was thoroughly Christ-centred, while respectful and honouring of our Jewish brothers and sisters, whose tradition nourishes ours. It was a quiet, beautiful and worshipful evening.

The roast lamb was delicious so I prevailed on the cook for her recipe. The secret is slow cooking, more slow than the people of the Exodus would have had time for.

Sandra's Passover Lamb

2 large legs of lamb
2 tablespoons Moroccan spices -- Hoyt's Moroccan spice mix is suitable
Zest of one orange
Pepper and salt
Toasted pine nuts

Place lamb legs in a roasting tray and roast slowly for 6 hours at 75°C - 100°C.
Remove lamb from tray and let it cool covered in baking paper and a cloth.
Pour the juices into a container and place in the refrigerator until the fat has set white, then remove the fat.
Slice/break up the meat when cooled and place into presentation/serving dish.
Return the jellied meat juices to the stove and add spices, salt and pepper and orange zest.
Boil until juices have reduced by half then pour over sliced meat.
Sprinkle pine nuts over the meat.
Cover dish with aluminium foil and return to oven at 50°C to keep warm until served.

Serves 24 people or so, with vegetables, tabouli, potatoes, etc.

Even American bishops who opposed his consecration have supported Bishop Gene Robinson's full participation in the Lambeth Conference. The bishops of The Episcopal Church agree that "Even though we did not all support the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire, we acknowledge that he is a canonically elected and consecrated bishop in this Church. We regret that he alone, among bishops ministering within the territorial boundaries of their dioceses and provinces, did not receive an invitation to attend the Lambeth Conference."

The bishops are "mindful of the hurt that is being experienced by so many in our own Episcopal Church . . . While the focus of this hurt seems centred on issues of human sexuality, beneath it we believe there is a feeling of marginalisation by people of differing points of view."

The bishops are courteous and correct.

There are just two connected reasons why Bishop Robinson has not been invited. He has not been invited because he is homosexual and because some who may attend the Conference cannot not tolerate equal fellowship with a homosexual . . . or with those who fellowship with homosexuals.

Simple . . . and utterly unacceptable. There is nothing more to say.

The Howard Government's disallowance of the Australian Capital Territory's Civil Union Act 2006 was opposed by the Labor party when in opposition. Yet, since Prime Minister Rudd took office in December 2007, ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell and federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland have been discussing 'policy differences' regarding recognition of relationships in the ACT, including the content of the proposed Civil Partnerships Bill, tabled in the Legislative Assembly in late 2006 to fill the gap left by the disallowed Act.

The Civil Partnerships Bill differs from the Civil Union Act 2006. It states that a civil partnership is a type of domestic partnership and provides for couples to solemnize their partnership by making a public declaration before a notary. It appears that the Rudd government is unwilling to support the bill due, particularly, to its 'ceremonial' component. It prefers a 'nationally consistent approach' based on registry scheme operated by Tasmania. The ACT Government is unwilling to compromise on the principle of ensuring legal equality for all relationships, regardless of gender.

A survey is being conducted by Good Process, a community-based law reform group based in the ACT, in collaboration with Dr. Ken Mavor of the ANU. Good Process formed in 2002 in response to the ACT Government's commitment to removing discrimination against GLBTI people and seeks to facilitate consultation between the territory government and Canberra's GLTBI community. It now seeks the views of the community on a way forward. The survey closes 26 Mar08.

In practice, the ACT Government may be faced with a number of potential trade-offs in deciding which kind of scheme will minimise the risk of federal intervention. Three potential areas of diagreement are the ceremonial component, equality with marriage, and accessibility to couples outside the ACT.

If a trade-off is required between a legal ceremony which may be disallowed by the Commonwealth and a scheme without a legal ceremony that is likely to be accepted, I prefer the latter. An ACT scheme will have little impact unless and until a the relationship registered (or whatever) in the ACT is recognised by the Commonwealth for superannuation and other purposes. Commonwealth recognition would have a huge impact. ACT recognition alone is almost meaningless, as the ACT has already abolished most discrimination. It is critically important to overcome all practical and legal discrimination in matters of property, money, etc. (Especially superannuation!) Ceremonial recognition would be nice. But let's do whatever possible to overcome the practical inequalities a.s.a.p.

Last November, I wrote of dismay that the Australian National Botanic Gardens in Canberra, home to Australia's biggest living collection of native plants, is in crisis and was to cut jobs, research capacity and garden maintenance in a bid to find funds to pay its water and electricity bills. Walking in the Gardens recently, I could see that some parts are very dry.

In his report to the recent Annual General meeting of the Friends of the Australian National Botanic Gardens (of which I am a member) the Friends' President, Alan Munns, has some good news.

As media reports towards the end of 2007 highlighted, government funding for the Gardens has, for some years, not kept pace with increasing costs. Staff numbers have fallen. Towards the end of last year an internal organisational review was commenced which looked as though it would lead to more staff cuts and reduced maintenance for areas of the Gardens.

. . . we felt compelled to mount a public campaign to demonstrate to government the very high levels of community support for the Gardens. . . . [W]e have been told that the organisational review will not proceed further, that existing staff numbers will be maintained, that additional funding will be provided for higher water costs, and that reforms will be pursued in the context of revising the Gardens' Management Plan. The Friends have been promised a role in that process and we look forward to participating.

This has been an emotionally stressful year for all Gardens' staff and the Friends have admired their positive approach to the challenges we have all faced. We look forward to continuing our constructive and productive relationship into the future.

I am glad that the Government has understood the importance to the nation of the gardens.

You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them. (Deuteronomy 5.7-9a)

I wrote a little while ago about the emotion of the NY Philharmonic's concert in Pyongyang and the contrasting repressiveness of the North Korean regime. Jeff Jacoby in the IHT (3 March 08) is scathing of the failure of the orchestra's leader to admonish the regime even a little.

Pyongyang overture

The big news in the music world last week was the New York Philharmonic's visit to North Korea, the first time an American orchestra has appeared in Kim Jong Il's Stalinist dictatorship. Under music director Lorin Maazel, the philharmonic performed Wagner's prelude to Act III of Lohengrin, Dvorak's New World Symphony, Gershwin's American in Paris, and, as a closer, the Korean folk song Arirang. While Kim did not attend the performance, nearly everyone in the hand-picked audience of apparatchiks was wearing lapel pins depicting his face or that of his father, Kim Il Sung, who founded the tyrannical regime in 1948.

Maazel characterized the concert as a triumph, and speculated that it would "do a great deal for Korean-US relations." But the only clear beneficiary of last week's trip was Kim, whose propagandists will portray a performance by one of the world's preeminent musical ensembles as a gesture of tribute to the Dear Leader. In totalitarian North Korea, as Melanie Kirkpatrick noted in the Wall Street Journal, "the purpose of music, like that of all the arts, is to serve the state."

A few years ago, Maazel composed an opera based on George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. It was an experience, he says, that sensitized him to the horrors of tyranny--"brutal torture, systematic injustice, contempt for any human dignity." Where was the evidence of that sensitivity during last week's trip to North Korea? Defending the decision to visit one of the planet's most horrendous slave states, Maazel had insisted that "human rights are an issue of profound relevance to us all." But not profound enough, apparently, for Maazel to actually defend them in the presence of North Korea's jailers. Indeed, while the maestro hasn't hesitated to condemn the United States, he brushes off as mere "errors" the savageries of Kim's regime.

"Is our reputation all that clean when it comes to prisoners and the way they are treated?" he demanded in an interview, when asked whether the philharmonic should be making music for a police state. "I think we can . . . stop being judgmental about the errors made by others." Which just goes to show that one can be blessed with perfect pitch yet be devoid of moral judgment. At least in that regard, Maazel's decision to program Wagner was only too apt.

Music in North Korea? Maazel ought to meet Ji Hae Nam, a one-time government propaganda officer who spent three years in prison for singing a popular South Korean song. There, she later testified at a U.S. Senate hearing, she was beaten so severely that she couldn't stand for a month. After prison guards subjected her to sexual abuse "that cannot be imagined," Ji tried to commit suicide by swallowing sewage and cement. Ji eventually escaped North Korea, but there are an estimated 200,000 political prisoners still locked up in Kim's gulag, where inmates are routinely murdered through starvation, torture or brutal forced labor. North Koreans are condemned to these hellholes for such "crimes" as complaining about living standards, practicing Christianity or neglecting to dust a picture of Kim Il Sung.

"Through our music, through our art, we will be able to express our friendly feelings to North Korean artists and the North Korean people," Maazel said in a toast at the People's Palace of Culture in Pyongyang last week. Even assuming that ordinary North Koreans heard of the philharmonic's visit--the main government paper reported it below the fold on page four--they were not likely to have drawn much solace from it. To someone who can be executed for possessing a Bible or tuning a radio to a foreign station, of what importance is it that a famous American orchestra performed for a group of government loyalists? It is not news to Kim's subjects that Communist Party cronies enjoy foreign luxuries most North Koreans are denied.

Maazel says that concerts like last week's have "the potential to nudge open a door that has been closed too long" and that "the presence of foreign artists, especially American," reassures the victims of totalitarian despots that they have "not been forgotten." So what will he and the philharmonic do for an encore? Play Darfur? Zimbabwe? Would they have entertained Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge inner circle? Adolf Hitler and the leaders of the Gestapo?

The way to let the citizens of unfree nations know they have not been forgotten is to speak in their defense: to reproach, not play along with, the dictators who oppress them; to broadcast the names of the jailed and abused; to publicly proclaim solidarity with the victims. Maazel had the opportunity to strike a blow for decency and freedom. All he did was strike up the band.

An analysis by Philip Bowring is (IHT 10 March 08) sums up well the dangers and opportunities offered by the recent Malaysian election result. It's what I would have said myself, from my own knowledge of Malaysia, if I has not been too lazy to write. It seems surprising that Sarawak and Sabah supported the Barisan National, but this is because all the local parties of substance in those states are members of it. Will they reamain so? Extracts:

The elections on Saturday have not quite broken the mold of Malaysian politics as it has existed since independence 50 years ago. But the scale of the setback for the governing coalition of race-based parties raises opportunities for the country to move away from a system that has provided stability but become little more than a patronage machine that has failed to respond adequately to a changing society.

Most remarkably, the swing to the opposition occurred among both rural and urban Malay voters, and among the Chinese and Indian ones. Though it still has a substantial majority in Parliament, thanks to a skewed system, the governing coalition, known as the National Front, got barely more than 50 percent of the vote. It now has control of only 8 of the 13 states.

Malay voters migrated more to the multiracial but predominantly Malay party of the former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and to the main Islamist party. Indians and Chinese deserted coalition parties in hordes.

The result was a particular triumph for Anwar. His People's Justice Party, known as the PKR, now has more seats than the Democratic Action Party (DAP), which has long been the main, predominantly Chinese opposition party, and the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party, known as the PAS.

But the opposition triumph carries dangers as well as opportunities. The most immediate danger [his party] will try to heap the majority of blame on Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. . . . The track records of his likely successors in the UMNO hierarchy show that they are even less likely to try to reform the patronage system or address the grievances of the non-Malays.

Another danger is that UMNO will now attempt to regain Malay voters by appealing to baser race and religious instincts in order to try to outflank PAS and PKR. Thus, with these results, it's possible that Malaysian politics could become even more racially polarized, exposing the divides among the three opposition parties that must now manage to cooperate. That will not be easy given that PAS is a religion-based Malay party, the DAP a left-of-center, mainly Chinese party, and PKR a middle of the road but mainly Malay one.

. . . Beyond the dangers are opportunities. . . . Among all races, there is now a realization that preferential policies intended to bring the Malays to socioeconomic equality have in many cases just become a way of enriching the UMNO elite. Among all races, perhaps there is also a recognition that government must make more effort to focus on Malaysian rather than communal or religious identity.

. . . It is too early to tell whether there has been a fundamental change in the mainsprings of Malaysian politics. But there is now some prospect that issues other than race and religion will take more prominence; that class, quality of administration and economic issues will play a larger role. . . . The old mold needs to be broken.

Decades ago friend of mine, a budding theology student, cautioned me on the dangers of 'Biblioatry'. At the time, I scarcely understood what he meant. The endless troubles of the Anglican Communion have shown just how troubling disagreement on the right use of the Bible can be--on sexuality certainly, but other matters as well.

On one famous occasion, Bishop George Browning proclaimed in a sermon "The Bible is not the Word of God!" (There was a heavily pregnant pause.) "Jesus is the Word of God, and he is revealed to us in the Bible!" Just so.

In their 1997 Pastoral Letter on Human Sexuality, the Bishop of the Anglican Episcopal Church of Brazil showed the wisdom of acceptance when there cannot be agreement. Now the wisdom of 1997 is repeated in a new statement by the Brazilian Bishops. They understand that if we cannot receive from the Bible the self-revelation of God, we can receive nothing from it all. And if what we purport to understand Bible contradicts the foundational truths of God's self-revelation, we are mistaken.

Second Bishops' Pastoral Letter on Human Sexuality, 2007

"If your dreams are in the clouds, do not worry, for they are in the right place; now, build the foundations". (Shakespeare)

"A sexual relationship does not exist in its full potential if it does not take into account love and justice towards the other person". (First Bishops' Pastoral Letter, 1997)

Ten years ago the Bishops of the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil released their First Pastoral Letter on Human Sexuality. The Bishops' statement issued in that First Letter is still relevant for the Church today. However, because of developments that have occurred in the Church since the release of the First Pastoral Letter, including the desertion of a Bishop and many clergy in Northeastern Brazil and in other parts of the Worldwide Anglican Communion, we have decided to readdress this subject by releasing that letter again for careful reading and study.

The respect for differences of opinion related to questions that are not essential to the principle of Divine Revelation is embroidered into our Communion. This principle defines that "God was in Christ reconciling the world in Himself." Anything the Bible says that is not related to the essence of such Revelation is secondary, which means it is part of the culture and customs of those who were instruments of God for writing Scriptural texts. To us, the Bible is the Word of God in the sense of a message from God and not something dictated by God. And that is why, throughout the centuries, the Church discerns what is essential and what is secondary--what is Divine Revelation and what is human mediation, always connected to each time and culture. This discernment is not simply done through the opinions of individuals or groups. This discernment occurs as all the people of the Church are called to collaborate using its "sense of reality" and "good common sense" formed by faith and by life experience. This is Tradition: the Bible being read, throughout the centuries, according to the life of the People of God, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Reason's light is also very helpful. It is necessary to examine Scripture with the aid of theological and scientific reflection to discern, in each time, what God wants to tell us, so that we can experience in life the Divine work of reconciliation.

We see among us schismatic and disaggregating elements that cannot admit that there are in the Anglican Communion streams that diverge from their way of thinking. We understand that there are those who have authentic convictions; to those, we express our respect, and reaffirm that they are our brothers and sisters. There are those, however, who are dedicated to fomenting division for non-theological reasons, such as pride, power hunger, et cetera. This generates perverse distortions, related both to the nature of the Church and Communion (Ecclesiology), and to the nature of interpreting the Bible (Hermeneutics). We call both to union and common sense. Any kind of submission to a Curia or other authoritarian organism for doctrine or practice is alien to our Tradition. We believe in the freedom of thinking, because "the truth will set us free". We believe in the virtue of tolerance, so characteristic of Anglicanism, which is capable of supporting communion around the Lord's Table and companionship in God's mission. This is a process that is developed and matured slowly, with dialogue and patient listening to others, with the result that the Church calls sensus fidelium, which is the common sense of the body of believers.

We reaffirm that we believe in inclusion. The creation of frontiers or divisions among people or groups and nations is the fruit of exclusion, which limits our vision, and fanatic dogmatism, which inhibits human freedom. Under the boundless love of God, we should build the foundations so that our dreams might come true. The Holy Spirit acts through these foundations and constructs a new humanity. This new humanity is based on the prayer of Our Lord Jesus Christ that "all may be one".

Our First and Second Congresses on Human Sexuality had their conclusions following the guidelines of our First Pastoral Letter. We recognize that there are still many doubts concerning human sexuality among our people. Because of that, we recommend clergy to deepen their knowledge of this subject, so they will have pastoral instruments which will be adequate to attending to their congregations' needs.

PORTO ALEGRE, December, 2007

The Most Rev. Maurício José Araújo de Andrade, Primate
The Rt. Rev. Edmund Knox Sherril
The Rt. Rev. Clovis Erly Rodrigues
The Rt. Rev. Luiz Osório Prado
The Rt. Rev. Almir dos Santos
The Rt. Rev. Glauco Soares de Lima
The Rt. Rev. Jubal Pereira Neves
The Rt. Rev. Orlando Santos de Oliveira
The Rt. Rev. Celso Franco de Oliveira
The Rt. Rev. Naudal Alves Gomes
The Rt. Rev. Sebastião Armando Gameleira Soares
The Rt. Rev. Filadelfo Oliveira Neto
The Rt. Rev. Hiroshi Ito
The Rt. Rev. Saulo Maurício de Barros
The Rt. Rev. Renato da Cruz Raatz
The Rt. Rev. Roger Douglas Bird

---

First Bishops' Pastoral Letter on Human Sexuality, 1997

"Sexuality is a gift from God. Sexual relations which happen under a loving and mutual respect context are considered good things God created. As bishops, we recommend dialogue, common sense and pastoral concern towards the people who happen to have a homosexual orientation in faith communities."

1. We affirm that sexuality is a gift from God and that sexual relations, when under a context of love and mutual respect, not only should be accepted, but also considered as good things God created. On the other side, sexual promiscuity between people of the same, or opposite genders, must be fought, since it is contrary to the teachings of Scripture. The Church must receive with love people of any race, culture, social upbringing or sexual orientation. After all, as Christians, we possess the promise of the Holy Spirit, who conducts us to the Word made flesh, who cares about the abandoned, the left behind, the marginalized, who shows love and compassion to the adulterous woman, who speaks to the Samaritan woman and who affirms the sanctity of men and women in Holy Matrimony.

2. Sexuality is an integral part of the human being. This blessed reality is expressed in conduct acts, which become affection acts, mutual relationships and knowledge between man and woman. This always happens within a community. That is why the biblical people established a determined pattern of conduct. Since sexual relations do not fulfill all their potential unless if they take into account love and justice towards the others, sexual violence acts are evil.

3. The 1988 Lambeth Conference, regarding family and matrimony, was not able to reduce the confusion regarding human sexuality. Some provinces affirm that homosexuality is sinful, while others adopt a contextual pastoral attitude. The sexual question, which encompasses all social and individual life aspects, is not at all clarified. Studies aimed at understanding how homosexuality developed continue; and, as bishops, we recommend dialogue, common sense and pastoral care with people who happen to have a homosexual orientation in faith communities. We cannot assume final positions on homosexual ordination or blessing of same-sex unions, because in the Anglican Communion, the subject is still being matured. The Bible, in some passages, explicitly condemns homosexual relationships, although, in most of them, what is really condemned is promiscuity, orgies or profanity. However, we must understand that the Bible was not dictated by God. It is God's Revelation, within its authors' interpretation, and subject to their culture and time influences (they lived in a sexist and patriarchal society).

4. It is necessary that the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil includes in its educational programs and pastoral studies guidelines on human sexuality, taking into account the teaching of Scripture, the knowledge from human sciences, the Anglican tradition, experience and a contextual comprehension of this controversial subject, so the people of the Church will be able to assume the gift of sexuality, without preconceived ideas and within a healthy Christian sexuality, in the context of their faith communities and respecting the others.

The Most Rev. Glauco Soares de Lima, Primate
The Rt. Rev. Sumio Takatsu
The Rt. Rev. Cláudio V. de Senna Gastal
The Rt. Rev. Clóvis Erly Rodrigues
The Rt. Rev. Sydney Alcoba Ruiz
The Rt. Rev. Luiz Osório Pires Prado
The Rt. Rev. Almir dos Santos
The Rt. Rev. Jubal Pereira Neves

I am saddened by the death in Canberra yesterday of one of Australia's most eminent scientists, Professor Peter Wray Cullen AO, who collapsed at his home in Gunning, NSW last Friday.

Professor Cullen was a widely respected freshwater ecologist, and a commissioner of the National Water Commission. He had worked in natural resource management for more than three decades, including a leading role in the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality.

Peter Cullen was a founding member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, a prominent organisation which advised governments on how to address a dwindling water supply and the ongoing drought.

I knew Peter a little, through his wife, the Reverend Vicki Cullen, who is a good friend to James and me. She is Rector of St. Edmund's Anglican Church in Gunning and was one of the first women to be ordained an Anglican priest in Canberra & Goulburn. Vicki was also one of my teachers in theological college. I know that Peter strongly supported his wife in her determination to enter the Christian ministry and fulfill her vocation.

An eminent friend, Prof Paul Perkins, said of Peter that "He towered above everything. He was a big man in intellect, in size, in appetite for new things. He wasn't just an environmentalist or an agricultural scientist. He covered the whole spectrum." Peter’s health had not been good for a long time. "Like many people who have such an appetite for doing the things that need to be done, sometimes you don't balance out your life" Prof. Perkins said to a newspaper. "There was no doubt Prof Cullen, almost single-handedly, significantly influenced the former Howard government to see the big issues on water management. He didn't live to see the results of much of his work, but it will come."

---

Hundreds farewell 'deep water dreamer'
by Rosslyn Beeby, The Canberra Times (20 Mar 08).

The richly varied life of Professor Peter Cullen gifted scientist, man of deep spiritual faith, national water policy reformer, mentor, fastidious home cook and garden-shed woodworker was celebrated yesterday, just a stone's throw from the shores of Lake Burley Griffin.

It was a big turn-out to honour a big man, who was a towering figure in the debate driving Australia's national water reform policies at federal and state levels. More than 500 people attended the service at the Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture, spilling across the courtyard and lawns overlooking the lake. The size of the crowd prompted Canon Simon Wooldridge to quote pop star Neil Diamond, joking about "the tree people up the back", sheltering from the hot noonday sun under the gum trees.

Professor Cullen, the rivers systems ecologist regarded as the architect of national water policy reform, died at Canberra Hospital last Thursday, aged 64. He is survived by his wife, the Reverend Vicky Cullen, daughters Michelle and Belinda, and grandson Joshua.

During the service, colleagues praised his fierce independence as a scientist "who could not be bought, silenced or intimidated" by political agendas in speaking his mind on controversial issues such as land clearing and the over-exploitation of Australia's rivers.

Members of the Anglican Church, in which Vicky is a minister, revealed another side to his character a deeply spiritual man, who believed the intricacy of nature revealed the wonder of a divine presence. His daughters painted a vivid, loving portrait of a father who enjoyed making pizzas and building kitchen cupboards, loved music and as a fan of folk singer Eric Bogle, "dragged us everywhere to see Eric perform." Bogle's haunting song Safe in the Harbour, with its tribute to the fearless "deep water dreamers" of the world, was played during the service.

Former CSIRO chief of Land and Water John Williams described his long-time friend as " a scientist with mud on his boots and his head underwater", recalling Professor Cullen's early years as an agricultural scientist working on farm irrigation channels in Victoria. He was a great environmental reformer and brilliant intellect, but also "a rogue" who loved to debunk arguments and put politicians on the spot. "Tim Flannery once described Peter as a kind of jolly hangman he could tell politicians what they didn't want to hear, and they still liked him," he said.

It was a moving service, but far from solemn. There were frequent bursts of laughter as speakers recalled examples of Professor Cullen's quick wit and ability "to speak truth to power" in the corridors of Parliament House. Dr Williams recalled in the weeks prior to his death, Professor Cullen had experienced difficulty walking. "I asked him how he was going, getting about, and he replied, 'I'm moving like a startled gazelle'." His daughter Belinda, a financial planner, drew the loudest laugh when she quoted her father as saying in his opinion, good financial planning was "when the cheque for your funeral service bounces".

Dr Williams praised Professor Cullen's tireless energy in pursuing national water reform "for a such big man, he was everywhere" and his leading role in moulding the land and water policy blueprints of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, which went on the shape state and federal environmental policy."Tim Flannery said that among the group, he was the best of us, and he was." he said. Scientists travelled from as far as Darwin and Perth to pay their respects.

A storm blew up in a very small teacup as, a few days ago, police in Virginia Beach VA dropped a misdemeanor obscenity charge against the manager of an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store that displayed this picture among others in his shop.

The manager was cited for displaying "obscene materials in a business that is open to juveniles," and for not taking down the poster when asked to do so by the police. However the Deputy City Attorney said that although the photos might technically be the basis of a prosecution, they did not meet the tests in law that they appeal to prurient interests, lack redeeming artistic merit and be offensive to prevailing community standards. Meanwhile, daily papers reproduced the image in full and other stores displayed the poster without challenge. After I stopped laughing, I remembered the Pear's ads of long ago. I wonder whether viewers of this old poster were shocked?

This morning (Wednesday 12 Mar 08) on motion by Prime Minister by leave (that is without notice), the House of Representatives agreed:

That the house:

1. celebrate and commend the achievements of the State of Israel in the 60 years since its inception;
2. remember with pride and honour the important role which Australia played in the establishment of the State of Israel as both a member state of the United Nations and as an influential voice in the introduction of Resolution 181 which facilitated Israel's statehood, and as the country which proudly became the first to cast a vote in support of Israel's creation;
3. acknowledge the unique relationship which exists between Australia and Israel; a bond highlighted by our commitment to the rights and liberty of our citizens and encouragement of cultural diversity;
4. commend the State of Israel's commitment to democracy, the Rule of Law and pluralism;
5. reiterate Australia's commitment to Israel's right to exist and our ongoing support to the peaceful establishment of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue;
6. reiterate Australia's commitment to the pursuit of peace and stability throughout the Middle East;
7. on this, the 60th Anniversary of Independence of the State of Israel, pledge our friendship, commitment and enduring support to the people of Israel as we celebrate this important occasion together.

The resolution is regrettable while Israel continues to occupy Palestinian land and does too little to bring justice and peace. Israel practices violent means of occupation and segregation in Gaza and the West Bank. The illegal separation wall continues to be maintained and extended, annexing 9% of the occupied Palestinian territories. How could Prime Minister Rudd support a resolution that celebrates this? Surely we should urge Israel to acknowledge what has been done to the Palestinians and to work with them to establish a future with hope.

Palestinian violence and chaotic governance stand as significant barriers to any conflict resolution. They cannot be ignored and Israel has some legitimate military and security concerns in the territories. Yet Jewish settlements within the Palestine territories are perhaps the most significant obstacle to peace and reconciliation. In a recent article, Australian Dr Phillip Mendes shows that "there are overwhelming political, legal, moral, ethical, economic, demographic, military and public relations arguments against the settlements." The number of Jewish settlers in the West Bank has grown steadily to over a quarter of a million (not counting East Jerusalem). Dr Mendes argues that the withdrawal of settlers from Gaza in 2005 suggests that significant evacuation is possible, and that the settlement process can be reversed, at least in part. The security barrier leaves about 70,000 settlers on the eastern Palestinian side of the fence who may be ripe for evacuation.

Meanwhile, more than a dozen ministers and backbench Labor MPs were absent from Parliament yesterday when Prime Minister Kevin Rudd moved the motion to congratulate Israel on its 60th birthday. Some Liberal MPs also snubbed the event, but the absence of Labor MPs was notable in the chamber.

Labor's Julia Irwin said she boycotted the Prime Minister's speech in protest against Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. She questioned Mr Rudd in Tuesday's caucus meeting on his reasons for the unprecedented motion. She was refused permission to table the last 10 years of reports from Amnesty International on the Middle East. "I urged caucus members to read the reports, especially the 2007 report, on the human rights violations by Israel against the Palestinians," she said.

The union movement was also equivocal about the motion. ACTU secretary Jeff Lawrence distanced himself from union-sponsored ads opposing the parliamentary motion. But last Wednesday, the ACTU condemned military attacks against Palestinian and Israeli civilians and the ACTU's international humanitarian agency is running an emergency appeal for the 1.5 million people in Gaza.

Two unions, the Maritime Union of Australia and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union joined a large group of individuals and organisations which sponsored nationwide advertisements urging Parliament to abandon the birthday motion. Headed "Not in our name, Prime Minister", the advertisment said that "Australia and Australians should not give the Israeli people and its leaders the impression that Australia supports them in their dispossession of the Palestinian people."

Later on the same day as the pparliamentray resolution, 12 March 2008, Ms Ley, Liberal member for Farrer, a conservative rural electorate, spoke up bravely for a more balanced view.

Today the parliament passed a motion honouring Israel's 60 years. My purpose tonight is not to diminish the achievements of the state of Israel but to note the interests and legitimate aspirations of the people of Palestine. Israel has many friends in this country and in this parliament; the Palestinians, by comparison, have few. Theirs is not a popular cause. But it is one I support, in part out of knowledge that the victors in World War II, including Australia, wrote a 'homeland' cheque to cover the sins of the holocaust and centuries of anti-Semitism in Europe, but it was the Palestinians who had to cash it.

Israel has much to celebrate after 60 years. It has built a modern, accomplished and intelligent society on the shores of the Mediterranean, one whose scientific and technological expertise offers a great deal to the world. It has a robust democracy, a free press, a secular state with freedom of faith and an unfettered opposition--regrettably rare in the Middle East. If there were peace between Israelis and Palestinians, one can only imagine the achievements of these two cultures today.

Israel's 40-year occupation of the Palestinian territories, its continued expansion of settlements and its refusal to allow the return of expelled refugees have caused deep resentment in the Arab world. Palestinian corruption in government and failure to abandon violence against civilians as a political tool have meant that Israel does not feel secure behind secure borders. Sixty years have seen a great deal of bloodshed, Arab and Israeli and others, including 34 US soldiers killed by Israeli forces on the USS Liberty during the 1967 war. I do not find it helpful to engage in a forensic apportionment of blame--each side has legitimate grievances.

The current blockade of Gaza, confiscation of Palestinian land and the expansion of settlements must be mentioned in the context of today's motion. Gaza is besieged, contained and on the brink of starvation. Rockets are fired into Israel every day and Israel has a right to self-defence. But the crushing economic embargo feeds fury and resentment both in Gaza and the West Bank. Two thousand six hundred and seventy-nine Palestinians have been killed by Israeli security forces in the Gaza Strip since September 2000. An Israeli human rights organisation reported that 1,259 of those were not participating in hostilities when they were killed and 567 were minors.

On her most recent trip to the region Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reminded Israel that it needs to be very cognisant of the effects of its operations on innocent people. International law only allows the seizure of occupied territory for military needs. According to a report in Israel's newspaper Haaretz, more than one-third of West Bank settlements have been built on private Palestinian land.

We ought not to be naive or simplistic about the challenge faced by the Israelis in moving towards peace with a counterparty, in Hamas, that is funded and supported by a foreign power and which retains an explicit commitment to the use of terror as a political instrument. But may I remind the House of the example of the Northern Ireland peace process, which showed how a liberal democratic government entered into peace negotiations with a terrorist group. The Provisional IRA was neutralised after a more than 40-year struggle.

There are signs that the Israeli people are developing a renewed hunger for peace. A recent Tel Aviv University poll indicates 64 per cent of Israelis believe the government must hold direct talks with the Hamas government in Gaza, towards a ceasefire. Military occupation, blockades and hostility against civilians in the name of security will result in violence and breed terror. We must think about what we can do to improve the lives of ordinary Israelis and Palestinians to give them some faith in the peace process. This is seriously under threat--again--with further attacks by Palestinian rockets into Israel and with Israel's recent announcement that it will expand more settlements, referred to by the Palestinian Chief Negotiator as 'a stick in the wheels of peace'.

The 'road map' for peace established in 2003 by the Mideast quartet is still referred to, by both sides, as a blueprint for a two-state solution. The road map calls for Palestinians to denounce violence and dismantle militant groups and for Israel to halt settlement activity in the West Bank.

We are the leaders of our generation and we are accountable for results. If the principal protagonists, and the rest of the world community, hand Palestine on to the next generation as a twisted mess of grievance, hatred and retribution, then we have failed. The last two generations of leaders have failed to produce peace. Our job is to improve the opportunities and quality of life of those within our sphere of influence and control. That mission cannot be fulfilled without peace. Let us renew our efforts.

Today we much enjoyed Hall of Mirrors an exhibition at theNational Portrait Gallery of works by Anne Zahalka. As the Gallery notes, "Zahalka works in series form, rigorously establishing an idea across a number of works." The show was limited to portraits gathered from thirteen discrete series. This example is from the series, Resemblance (1987) created whilst Zahalka was on a residency in Germany, immersing herself in seventeenth-century Northern European painting

In the series Bondi: Playground of the Pacific, Zahalka restages iconic Australian images, such as The sunbather by Max Dupain.

The Rt Revd George Browning recently retired as Bishop of Canberra and Goulburn. He has been my Bishop for the whole of my 15 years or so of formal membership of the Anglican Church and I shall miss his passionate and compassionate leadership. In his sermon in the Cathedral on 2 February 2008, for a service in which he laid up his staff of office, Bishop George spoke of two great concerns of his, the care of the environment, especially in the context of climate change, and the celebration of diversity and difference in the church.

This is an age in which difference needs to be celebrated, and embraced, within the communion and fellowship of believers. As you know, one of the legacies that I hope I have left the Church in the Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn is a culture of mutuality and respect across a variety of traditions in our Church. It is absolutely necessary for this culture to not simply continue, but be strengthened in the years to come. It needs to happen not simply for the Diocese, but for the sake of the whole Anglican Communion, and indeed Christendom itself. It is a cause of great concern that within our own beloved Anglican Communion the trend to seek communion only with those with whom we have complete agreement is growing. I hardly need to remind you that huge differences of opinion on almost everything prevailed in the early Church, a trend that has continued through 2,000 years, not withstanding discouragement, threat, punishment, and martyrdom.

I am personally in profound need of the insights of others, as I respectfully suggest others are in need of the insights I can bring. No-one glimpses more than a small insight into the many splendoured face of God. May this Diocese always rejoice in its capacity to embrace difference, and in its capacity to treat others with profound respect? May the Anglican Communion resist attempts by some to cause division and to act in judgement; may Christendom itself rejoice constantly in the knowledge that Christ is a light to the Gentiles, and the glory of his people Israel.

Earlier, on 25 January 2008, the feast of the Conversion of St Paul, Bishop George said

[N]either Paul, nor the Jewish based faith community, nor the community of faith today, should consider it necessary to abandon its commitments of the past in order to embrace faith in Jesus, on the contrary, these commitments were to be renewed and transformed in the light of the encounter with Jesus.

[T]he Law of Moses . . . was not to be abandoned, but to be "re membered", re configured, when understood against the background of the knowledge of God in the face of Jesus Christ. . . . The Law of Moses in its original intent was global in its reach and life giving in its intent. It became increasingly exclusivist, especially as the post exilic scribes went to work on it, and ensured that through the priestly code we were left in no doubt as to who was in and who was out, who was clean and who was unclean, who was to be rewarded and who was to be punished. It is little wonder the scribes and Pharisees were so infuriated by Jesus. He made it abundantly clear to them that they were wrong about the Law of Moses. They had made statements of life into statements of slavery. They had got it all wrong. No, the disabled, the sick, the paralysed, and leprous were not unclean. These were exactly the ones who were first to be members of the household of God. No, women were not unclean, nor were they some man's property, nor were they to be excluded from the sacred rituals of faith. Indeed, at the most significant of all moments of faith, the resurrection, it was the women who were the witnesses. No, harlots, tax collectors and publicans are not to be excluded from the invitation list; in fact, those who think they are important, or are offended by the presence of such people, should be the ones to leave, not the other way around. No, even dead bodies do not make you unclean; indeed, all bodies are sacred for they have been the house, the dwelling, of one who carries the spirit of God.

No, the law of Moses is not to be abandoned, but it is definitely to be 're membered' . . . It is a source of enormous frustration and embarrassment to me that the Law of Moses, un remembered, has become a source of contention, division, and exclusion amongst people of faith worldwide and of course especially within our own beloved Anglican Communion. Worldwide, nothing is more dangerous to the global family of nations than religious law interpreted in an exclusivist manner. . . . I want for a moment to turn to our own Anglican Communion. It is a very sad, and a sorry state of affairs, that we could be moving towards a loosening of the ties of friendship and fellowship between us, because of the insistence by some that we be committed to the law of Moses "unremembered", a commitment that apparently does not appreciate, or understand, that it is be understood and fulfilled in the life of Jesus.

Let me be quite specific. Of course homosexuality is a contentious issue in the community at large, and in the community of faith. Of course the issue is understood differently in different cultures across the world. Rightly, or wrongly, the Anglican Church of Australia, holds the position of the last Lambeth conference, a conservative position in relation to those who can be ordained and in the matter of the blessing of same sex unions.

In the light of all of this, it is incomprehensible, and I believe inexcusable, that the Archbishop of Sydney should be one of those in the forefront of anticipating division within the Anglican Communion, and has gone on public record as one who is sponsoring the proposed "alternative Lambeth" in Jerusalem in the middle of this year.

He is reported to have said the matter is much more serious than simply a matter of sexuality; it goes to the heart of the authority of scripture itself. On this I absolutely agree. It does go to the heart of scripture itself. But read the scripture: the Law of Moses is to be remembered in the light of the revelation of nature of God in Jesus.

I say to Peter Akinola and Peter Jensen, "Come with me and the Church to the Damascus Rd, come and be confronted by the voice of the Living One, the one who walks on the water and raises the dead. Come with me into the presence of the one who re-members the Law of Moses, and offers it as a tool of life, not a weapon of exclusion and death." I have written to Archbishop Peter Jensen urging him to reconsider his proposal. He has absolutely no right to impose his agenda without consultation upon the Church in the Middle East, and if he is genuine about a debate on scripture, let us have it, for I am one who rejoices in the knowledge that all scripture is to be exposed on the anvil of revelation, which is Jesus Christ.

Graham Downie, religion correspondent for The Canberra Times did not mince words on 24 February 2008:

Prelates such as Sydney's Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen demonstrate considerable arrogance by holding their protest conference in Jerusalem against the wishes of its bishop, Suheil Dawani.

Jensen, his five regional bishops and others of a similar mind, including bishops from several African dioceses, will boycott the Lambeth Conference in July, because it will include bishops who support the ordination of clergy in same-sex relationships. Jensen's boycott is wrong, not least because it denies the conference his input and denies him the possibility of a better understanding of another view.

Jensen said last October that the Lambeth Conference format had been changed to help bishops by discussing the interpretation of the Bible. He now says he will not attend because to do so would overlook the importance of the issues at stake. Many bishops who hold a less rigid view on the place of homosexuals in the church have also been critical of the consecration in the US of an openly gay bishop. This was not in the spirit of an agreement of the 1998 Lambeth Conference and was bound to increase division.

Jensen is entitled to decide whether or not to attend the conference, but to organise what will effectively be a rebel conference in Jerusalem, against the wishes of its bishop, demonstrates a lack of respect. In Canberra last week, Bishop Dawani politely but firmly said he had told Jensen and the conference co-host Archbishop of Nigeria Peter Akinola that the place to discuss homosexuality was Lambeth, not Jerusalem. Dawani is closely involved with efforts to achieve peace in the Middle East, to which he gives a higher priority than the theological squabble over homosexuality.

. . . Jensen . . . believes there is a single truth and of course he believes he has it. In 2002, he said it was time the church stopped fighting over lost battles. He was speaking then of the ordination of women. Though he did not believe it was inevitable there would be female bishops in Australia, he said that would be the last big test. "Meantime, we all have to practise speaking the truth in love to each other," he said then. Now, instead of following his advice, he has chosen to speak with people of similar mind, at least as far as the theology of homosexuality is concerned. God alone knows what differences Jensen and his five loyal regional bishops might discover from their African colleagues at their Jerusalem meeting in June.

One of my great delights is good writing--essays especially. I aspire to be a clear and succinct writer myself. A fine example is Delight as small collection of by pieces J.B. Priestly, in which he tells of things that delight him, as if to contradict what he supposes to be his reputation for grumpiness. One of his delights is clear well crafted writing, of which he writes in chapter Twenty Six of the book. I also like the presentation and typography of British books from the 40s and 50s. They're more compact and economical that what we often have today, with interesting fonts.

At the end of a long talk with a youngish critic, a sincere fellow whose personality (though not his values) I respect, he stared at me and then said slowly: 'I don't understand you. Your talk is so much more complicated--subtle--than your writing. Your writing always seems to me too simple.' And I replied: 'But I've spent years and years trying to make my writing simple. What you see as a fault, I regard as a virtue.'

There was now revealed to us the gulf between his generation and mine. He and his lot, who matured in the early 'thirties, wanted literature to be difficult. They grew up in revolt against the Mass Communication antics of their age. They did not want to share anything with the crowd. Writing that was hard to understand was like a password to their secret society. A good writer to them was one who made his readers toil and sweat. They admired extreme cleverness and solemnity, poets like political cardinals, critics who came to literature like specialists summoned to a consultation at a king's bedside. A genuine author, an artist, as distinct from hacks who tried to please the mob, began with some simple thoughts and impressions and then proceeded to complicate his account of them, if only to keep away the fools. Difficulty was demanded: hence the vogue of Donne and Hopkins. Literature had to respond to something twisted, tormented, esoteric, in their own secret natures.

In all this there was no pose; and here their elders went wrong about them. They could be accused not unjustly of narrowness and arrogance, but not of insincerity. They were desperately sincere in believing that the true artist must hide from the crowd behind a thicket of briers. They grew up terrified of the crowd, who in this new Mass Age seemed to them to be threatening all decent values.

But I was born in the nineteenth century and my most impressionable years were those just before 1914. Rightly or wrongly, I am not afraid of the crowd. And art to me is not synonymous with introversion. (I regard this as the great critical fallacy of our time.) Because I am what is called now 'an intellectual'--and I am just as much 'an intellectual' as these younger chaps--I do not feel that there is a glass wall between me and the people in the nearest factories, shops and pubs. I do not believe that my thoughts and feelings are quite different from theirs. I prefer therefore a wide channel of communication. Deliberately I aim at simplicity and not complexity in my writing.

No matter what the subject in hand might be, I want to write something that at a pinch I could read aloud in a bar-parlour. (And the time came when I was heard and understood in a thousand bar-parlours.) I do not pretend to be subtle and profound, but when I am at work I try to appear simpler than I really am. Perhaps I make it too easy for the reader, do too much of the toiling and sweating myself.

No doubt I am altogether too obvious for the cleverest fellows, who want to beat their brains against something hard and knotty. But then I am not impressed by this view of literature as a cerebral activity. Some contemporary critics would be better occupied solving chess problems and breaking down cyphers. They are no customers of mine, and I do not display my goods to catch their eye. But any man who thinks the kind of simplicity I attempt is easy should try it for himself, if only in his next letter to The Times. I find it much easier now than I used to do, but that is because I have kept this aim in view throughout years of hard work.

I do not claim to have achieved even now a prose that is like an easy persuasive voice, preferably my own at its best; but this is what I have been trying to do for years, quite deliberately, and it is this that puzzled my friend, the youngish critic, who cannot help wanting something quite different. And this habit of simplification has its own little triumphs. Thus, I was asked to pay a birthday tribute, on the air, to C. C. Jung, for whose work and personality I have a massive admiration. To explain Jung in thirteen-and-a-half minutes so that the ordinary listener could understand what the fuss was about! My friends said it could not be done. The psychologists said it could not be done. But I can reasonably claim, backed by first-class evidence, that I did it. It was a tough little task but when I had come to the end of it, I found, like honey in the rock, a taste of delight.

Each year, debating the merits of the Archibald Prize for portraiture is something of an Australian national sport. This year's winner is Del Kathryn Barton for her You Are What Is Most Beautiful About Me, a self portrait with her five-year-old son Kell and two-year-old daughter Arella.

Always, though, it is the Wynn prize for best landscape painting of Australian scenery that fascinates me. This year's winner is Joanne Currie Nalingu for The river is calm. The concept is derived from her ongoing work and research into Maranoa cultural material and designs from the Mandandanji people of the Mitchell area in South West Queensland. She grew up in there in the 1960s, by the banks of the Maranoa River. Her painting captures the beauty and colour of the river and the desert. Ms Currie Nalingu has also worked on numerous public art projects.

I like The river is calm, its deep simplicity and, yes, calmness. Ms Currie Nalingu began painting in 1988 and has been a core member of the Campfire Group since the mid 1990s, developing skills and her professional profile. Her works are widely exhibited, including by the Fire-Works Gallery. While her style can be recognised as Aboriginal, her work is personal and individual, moving within cultures, honouring tradition and the present.

Perhaps many of us dream of where we would live if we were billionaires. An apartment in NY, in Paris or London (or all of them!) Maybe something like this one I spotted in an online advertisment just now. This condo on the 72nd floor has just 6 rooms, 2 bedrooms, and 4 (!) bathrooms, with "incredible views" of Central Park, the Manhattan skyline and the Hudson, concierge service, health club, pool, roof garden and garage. It's a snap at $US19.8million, maintenance of $6,000 and monthly real estate tax of $7,500; 3,920 sq ft at a mere $5051 per sq ft. That's about 10 times the price per sq ft. of my place in Canberra--and much bigger as well.

The Defence (Special Undertakings) Act 1952 makes it an offence to enter, without government approval, a place used for a special defence undertaking. Such an undertaking was defined as one for the defence of Australia or 'some other country associated with Australia in resisting or preparing to resist international aggression'. The penalty is up to seven years' gaol. An overkill? Before Philip Ruddock became Attorney-General under John Howard, no one had ever been charged under this law.

The Australia/US Joint Defence Facility at Pine Gap is a highly secret centre for signals intelligence. Protesters against the Facility protesters have been dealt with by magistrate for trespass and wilful damage to property; usually they have been fined or put on good behaviour bonds. Protesters against the Iraq war and Australia's participation claim that Pine Gap is integral to the US war effort. Possibly so.

In 2005 four Christian peace activists broke through the security fence at Pine Gap to conduct a 'citizens' inspection'. Lawyer and priest Frank Brennan SJ AO characterises
this as an "act of civil disobedience--the deliberate breaking of a law in order to protest some other law or policy."

Civil disobedience can be justified when citizens have tried all lawful means to reverse the offending law or policy, when they do not threaten the health or safety of others, when they are prepared to pay just compensation for any property damage caused, and when they are willing to pay the penalty justly imposed by any court. Civil disobedience can be an honourable means of political protest.

Attorney-General Ruddock authorised prosecution under the 1952 law. The jury convicted the four but the trial judge refused to impose prison terms, observing that they were 'very genuine in the cause they sought to espouse'. Instead she imposed fines, as 'their actions--no matter for what cause--cannot justify the breaking of the law'. The Commonwealth appealed the leniency of the fines, and the accused appealed the convictions because they had not been able to offer evidence about the operation at Pine Gap. The Court of Criminal Appeal has now quashed the convictions and indicated that no purpose is to be served by a retrial. As Brennan comments

Mr Ruddock was foisted on his own petard. If he had wanted these civilly disobedient protesters to go to jail, he would have needed to provide the judge and jury with details about the purposes of Pine Gap. Parliamentary committees, juries and the citizen's ultimate right to civil disobedience are necessary safeguards for liberty when government is tempted to use the legal sledgehammer to crack the nut of political dissent.

Well yes and no. In my view, the government would have done better to have acted under paragraph 12(2)(c) of the Public Order (Protection of Persons and Property) Act 1971 (Cwlth) which says that

a person who . . . being in or on Commonwealth premises, refuses or neglects to leave those premises on being directed to do so by a constable, by a protective service officer, or by a person authorized in writing by a Minister or the public authority under the Commonwealth occupying the premises to give directions for the purposes of this section; is guilty of an offence, punishable on conviction by a fine . . .

This and related provisions allow reasonable and legitimate protection of Commonwealth officers and property, without the heavy handedness of criminal prosecution and imprisonment.

I have been "a person authorized in writing by a Minister" under this law to give directions to people such as demonstrators to leave a government building. It is not pleasant when dozens of people with smoke bombs invade one's workplace. Ordinary Government workers should be able to go about their work without the harassment of invading protesters. On the other hand, protesters have a right of free speech and demonstration outside a government facility.

A recent rise in HIV infections shows that no one can be complacent about their sexual health and that education campaigns must continue. Dr David Penington AC is a former head of the Australia’s AIDS Taskforce. He writes that a new report from Australia's National Centre for HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research predicts a strong surge in new infections in Victoria (but not New South wales) if nothing fresh is done to curb the spread of HIV.

On the other hand, Mike Kennedy, Executive Director for the Victorian AIDS Council/Gay Men’s Health Centre (VAC/GMHC) says the report is a "beat-up", and said that as campaigns have already began to combat rising infection figures, the report is now redundant. "All the data we have suggests gay men are just as concerned as they ever were. We don’t see people saying, 'I don’t need to worry about HIV anymore'. It is still an issue."

The predictions for Victoria figures contrast strongly with NSW's stable HIV rates that are predicted to fall by 2015. ACON CEO Stevie Clayton said the NCHECR figures demonstrate the need for a well-funded, consistent and coordinated national HIV prevention strategy.

As many people have little knowledge of the background of the epidemic in Australia . . . Pennington describes the history of HIV/AIDS and Australia’s response.

As the death toll from AIDS rapidly mounted, the gay community, supported by government, staged a vigorous education campaign on the use of condoms, which rapidly reduced the incidence of the disease. The introduction of treatment, also led to a sharp fall in new infections from a peak of 2400 in 1987 to a fraction of that level by 1999.

. . . The Taskforce then followed public health principles, establishing at what stage the infection had reached, placing responsibility on those infected not to place others at risk and for others to protect themselves. . . . Close monitoring of HIV infection enabled strategies to curb the epidemic to be adjusted as necessary. Pragmatic rather than moralistic decisions have been the key.

Now, awareness programs must be reinvigorated.

Men who have sex with men (now classed as MSM) account for more than 90% of reported infections [in Australia], including some married men who engage in intermittent sex with other men. Condoms have proved to be the most important weapon in fighting the virus. Unfortunately, as the number of deaths has fallen and treatment has improved the health lot of those infected, some men at risk have become casual about condom use.

Since 2000, in many Western countries the use of condoms has declined and the incidence of new infections has risen. National statistics reflected the same situation in Australia.

Careful analysis by NCHCR reveals a major increase in concomitant sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and this has almost certainly been the principal reason why the virus has spread more readily. A major rise in the incidence of anal syphilis (up from five cases in 2000 to 200 in 2006), gonorrhoea, chlamydia and other STDs are documented in the report. As in Africa, the MSM population is now at far greater risk of infection. Young men in the early stages of HIV are highly infectious and can readily pass on the infection without knowing that they carry it. Condom use and getting early treatment for STDs is now a central issue in containing the spread of HIV. . . . [T]he support of gay groups is the key to getting the messages through.

After the justifiable euphoria surrounding the NY Philharmonic's recent concert in Pyongyang, it's salutary to note that according to religious freedom watchdog, Open Doors, North Korea remains the worst place in the world to be a Christian. With more arrests last year than 2006, Christians have been jailed, tortured and publicly executed. North Korea is the only country ranked by Open Doors as a "severe persecutor".

Up to half a million Christians secretly practise their faith in North Korea, but at least a quarter of Christians are in political prison camps from which people rarely emerge alive.

The government deals harshly with all opponents, including those who engage in religious practices. A personality cult has been built around the country's leader, Kim Jong-Il, and his late father and founding president, Kim Il-Sung. The North Korean population is cut off and isolated from the rest of the world and dependent on the regime for their needs. It is a widespread North Korean perception that Christianity is 'a bad element' in the socialist country. The North Korean authorities have brutally persecuted and slaughtered God's people. Christians have been beaten, arrested, tortured or killed because of their religious beliefs. Our local source estimates the number of underground Christians to be at least 200,000, and it's likely that there are as many as 400,000 to half-a-million believers. At least a quarter of the Christians are imprisoned for their faith in political prison camps, from which people rarely get out of alive. Raids are made regularly, both in North Korea and China, to arrest refugees and those helping them. However, the Christians are brave and they dream of reopening the churches of their forefathers.

In second place is Saudi Arabia, where not only Christians, but non-Wahhabi Muslims are persecuted. Next come Iran, the Maldives, Bhutan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Laos, Uzbekistan and China. Six are Muslim countries, three communist and Bhutan is Buddhist (and a surprising inclusion in the list). In these countries, the status is described as "oppression". Perceptions of persecution of Muslims are complicated by the "war on terror" which some Muslims see as a synonym for a war on Islam. China savagely persecutes the Falun Gong. In India, Hindus, Muslims and Christians often persecute each other. And so on, and on, and on.

The inclusion of Bhutan is a surprise to me, as its king, Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, is known to have a progressive enlighted approach to his rule and Bhutan is reputed to be among the happiest places on earth. Nevertheless "foreign" influences and tourism are heavily regulated by the government to preserve the country's traditional culture and national identity and Mahayana Buddhism is the state religion.

A key leader says there are approximately 13,000 Bhutanese Christians in the country. Officially, the Christian faith does not exist and Christians are not allowed to pray or celebrate their faith in public. Christians can meet as a family but not collectively with other Christian families. Religious workers are denied visas to enter the country. Christian children are accepted in schools, but they face discrimination if known to be Christian and they face the constant pressure to attend Buddhist religious festivals. It is almost impossible for Christian students to get to university level. For Christians with government jobs, discrimination is also an issue, as there are cases of believers being deprived of government jobs simply because of their faith. The import of printed religious matter is banned, and only Buddhist religious texts are allowed in the country. Persecution mainly comes from the family, the community, and the monks who yield a strong influence in the society. There is discrimination for some Christian workers in the government, but this is not rampant. Cases of atrocities (i.e. beatings) are sporadic. The persecution mainly comes in the form of pressure to reconvert, and this comes mainly from the family and community.

This is an extract from the Amnesty International Report 2007

North Korea (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) Systemic violations of human rights, including the rights to life and to food, continued. The rights to freedom of movement, expression and association were severely curtailed. Access by independent monitors continued to be restricted. There were many reports of enforced disappearances among families of North Koreans who left the country or were forcibly returned. Despite some changes in the criminal law, the political and sometimes arbitrary use of imprisonment, torture and capital punishment continued. [. . . ] Worsening food crisis The UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food announced in October that 12 per cent of the population suffered from severe hunger. Agricultural output was expected to be substantially lower than the previous year following the floods. In May, the World Food Programme (WFP) was reported to be implementing a two-year plan requiring 150,000 metric tons of grain for 1.9 million North Koreans "most in need -- especially women and children". As of October, the WFP had reportedly received only 8 per cent of the US$102 million required. North Koreans in Asia Approximately 100,000 North Koreans were reportedly hiding in China, living in constant fear of deportation. An estimated 150-300 North Koreans were forcibly repatriated from China every week. Most North Korean women in China reportedly faced abuses, including systematic rape and prostitution. There were mass arrests of 175 North Koreans in Bangkok, Thailand, in August, followed by the arrests of 86 in October and a further 50 in November. Over 500 North Koreans were reportedly detained by Thai authorities. Nearly 10,000 North Koreans were reportedly settled in South Korea. Enforced disappearances Hundreds of North Koreans forcibly returned from China were unaccounted for. Several families of North Koreans who left the country without permission disappeared. They were believed to be victims of enforced disappearance, as the North Korean authorities punished whole families for being associated with someone deemed hostile to the regime ("guilt-by-association"). Lee Kwang-soo arrived in South Korea by boat in March with his wife, two children and a friend. In August he discovered that 19 members of his and his friend's families in North Korea had gone missing between March and early August 2006. North Koreans settled in South Korea have been abducted from the China border by North Korean security forces. The North Korean authorities have also abducted nationals of other countries, including South Korea, Japan, Thailand and Lebanon. Denial of access Despite repeated requests, the government continued to deny access to independent human rights monitors, including the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food. The UN relief agencies were reportedly permitted to visit only 29 of the 213 regions. Following government demands to reduce its staff, the WFP cut its international staff from 46 to 10 and reduced the number of monitoring visits. Five of the WFP's regional offices, from which its inspectors monitored distribution of food aid, were closed. These reductions increased concerns about lack of transparency in food aid distribution. Freedom of expression Opposition of any kind was not tolerated. Any person who expressed an opinion contrary to the position of the ruling Korean Workers' Party reportedly faced severe punishment and so did their families in many cases. The domestic news media continued to be strictly censored and access to international media broadcasts remained severely restricted. In October, the NGO Reporters Sans Frontières listed North Korea as the worst violator of press freedom. Any unauthorized assembly or association was regarded as a "collective disturbance", liable to punishment. Religious freedom, although guaranteed by the Constitution, was in practice sharply curtailed. People involved in public and private religious activities faced imprisonment, torture and execution. Death penalty Executions were by hanging or firing-squad. There were reports of executions of political opponents in political prisons and of people charged with economic crimes, such as stealing food. Son Jong-nam was reportedly sentenced to be executed on charges of betraying his country, sharing information with South Korea and receiving financial assistance from his brother, a North Korean settled in South Korea since 2002. In April 2006, according to UN sources, he was imprisoned in the basement of the National Security Agency in Pyongyang and was "practically dead" as a result of torture. Son Jong-nam had left North Korea in 1997 with his wife, son and brother and had become a Christian -- deemed to be a serious crime in North Korea. He was forcibly returned by Chinese authorities to North Korea in 2001 and imprisoned for three years in the Hamgyung-buk do prison camp. He was released in May 2004 and met his brother in China before returning to North Korea. The North Korean authorities learned that he had met his brother and arrested him in January 2006. He was believed to be alive at the end of 2006. Prison conditions Prisoners, particularly political prisoners, reportedly suffered appalling conditions, in a wide range of detention centres and prisons. North Koreans forcibly returned from China faced torture or ill-treatment and up to three years' imprisonment. Their punishments depended on their age, gender and experiences. Women and children were generally sentenced to two weeks in a detention centre, although longer sentences of several months in labour camps were also common. The consequences of repatriation were reportedly most severe for pregnant women, who suffered forced abortions in poor medical conditions. People who confessed to meeting South Koreans or missionaries were punished particularly harshly. Summary executions and long sentences of hard labour were still enforced, although the authorities often released prisoners close to death, who died shortly after their release.

This is from a table produced by Open Doors for its 2008 World Watch List. The scoring is based on a 50-question assessment of each country. North Korea is unique in being described as a place of "Severe Persecution".

	Country	January 2008	January 2007
Severe persecution
1	Korea, North	90,5	85,0
Oppression
2	Saudi Arabia	64,5	66,5
3	Iran	64,0	65,5
4	Maldives	61,0	62,0
5	Bhutan	58,0	57,5
6	Yemen	57,5	59,5
7	Afghanistan	57,5	55,0
8	Laos	56,5	55,0
Severe limitations
9	Uzbekistan	55,0	55,0
10	China	55,0	54,0
11	Eritrea	55,0	53,0
12	Somalia	54,5	63,0
13	Turkmenistan	54,0	52,5
14	Comoros	50,0	52,0
15	Pakistan	48,0	45,5
16	Qatar	47,5	40,0
17	Vietnam	46,0	57,0
18	Chechnya	46,0	47,0
19	Egypt	46,0	45,0
20	Zanzibar	43,0	-
21	Iraq	42,5	43,0
22	Azerbaijan	42,5	42,5
23	Libya	42,5	39,0
24	Mauritania	42,5	35,5
25	Burma (Myanmar)	42,0	44,5
26	Sudan (North)	41,5	43,5
27	Oman	41,0	33,5
Some limitations (from most to least)
Cuba, Brunei, India, Algeria, Nigeria (North), Djibouti, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Morocco, Belarus, Palestinian Territories, Ethiopia, Syria, Bahrain, Tunisia, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Kenya (North East)

Donal Godfrey SJ is Executive Director, University Ministry at The University of San Francisco. He is author of Gays and Grays: the story of the inclusion of the gay community at Most Holy Redeemer Catholic parish, which is to be republished by Lexington Books in a paperback edition this month. In Eureka Street (3 Mar 08), he writes about the the possibility of (Roman Catholic) church apology for gay prejudice.

Some years ago I spent a year in Australia and presided at the Acceptance Mass from time to time. Acceptance is the Sydney gay Catholic caucus. Hence my interest in the 100Revs Statement of Apology to the gay community, the courageous initiative of Baptist pastor Mike Hercock and other Christian clergy. The Statement is carefully worded, and in line with Catholic teaching. It recognises that churches have not been places of welcome for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people.

Indeed churches have often been profoundly unloving toward the GLBT community. Many Catholics and other Christians long for their churches to be places of welcome for all people and commit themselves to pursuing this goal. The 100 Revs Statement adds that signatories are not taking a biblical position on gay and lesbian relationships. It is a pastoral document, rather than a teaching one. It brings together clergy who have very different views on the issue of gay relationships, who nonetheless recognise the value of a church apology to gay people.

For some years, I have been associated with the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic parish in the Castro district of San Francisco. Approximately three quarters of the parishioners are openly gay. One -- Patrick Mulcahey -- spoke to me about his return to the Catholic Church, at Most Holy Redeemer, some years ago. He described the experience as 'what any Catholic would feel after 20-odd years away'.

'It was the church itself, in all its majesty and mystery and ordinary goodness; in the sturdy beauty of a well-wrought liturgy . . . for the first time since I was old enough to understand myself as a sexual being, it was a church that wasn't pushing me away.' He suggested that any Catholic who'd been on a desert island for 20 years would have felt the same thing upon walking into a church where a decent priest was saying mass. But it was something he believed he could not have felt in any other church.

'People don't understand why gay men and lesbians migrate to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, cities all around the world that have flourishing gay ghettos,' he said. 'To be with 'others of our own kind?' To have wild sex and go to great parties? 'The truth is, mostly we come here to forget about being gay, to just drop that burden -- to just be human. For us, Most Holy Redeemer is the church where you can go and just be Catholic.'

Pastoral practices are changing in some places. Nonetheless parishes like Most Holy Redeemer remain the exception. At Acceptance and Most Holy Redeemer I constantly hear the stories of Gay Catholics who were pushed away through a mixture of hostility, ignorance and denial. Usually this homophobia adversely affected their relationship with God. These Catholics are happy to have found a Catholic community that is safe and where the healing, liberating, and unconditional love of Jesus is understood as being for all people, regardless of sexual orientation.

Church teaching is generally condemnatory regarding homosexual acts. But the Catechism, following the practice of Jesus, says this concerning gay people: 'They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.' (2358) The US Bishops echoed this back in 1976, when they said: 'Homosexuals, like everyone else, should not suffer from prejudice against their basic human rights. They have a right to respect, friendship and justice. They should have an active role in the Christian community'.

Around the world gay people struggle to find a place at the table of our churches. In Christian faith, the challenge is to follow Jesus. This means being like him -- a person who spent a lot of time with people the rest of society rejected.

The challenge in this case is for the church to be a community that confesses its own brokenness and reaches out to minister a healing reconciliation between the races, between the young and the old, between liberal and conservative, gay and straight, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. The 100Revs Statement is a commendable response to the alienation many gay Christians experience.

A truly prophetic Christian community can hold firm to the gospel, and at the same time embrace people regardless of difference. The prejudice gay people often experience in church parishes and congregations has nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus.

This year's Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras was a 30th anniversary. The procession of 150 floats was led by the "78ers" a group of 186 of the original marchers and their partners.

Just to be in the parade took courage for Shane Brennan (left) and Craig Gee, who were savagely bashed in Oxford Street, the parade route, just three months ago. McGee had a fractured jaw, an eye socket smashed in three places and a broken right leg. "Unfortunately, homophobic violence will only recede when gay people [decide to] stand up and be counted," he told a newspaper.

The first march was at night on 24th June 1978 as a contribution to the international Gay Solidarity celebrations that followed the Stonewall riots in New York. There was strong police violence, with bashings and arrests. Two thousand people followed a truck with a small PA system down Oxford Street to Hyde Park and then dispersed up to Kings Cross. After harassing the marchers for much of the route the police violently arrested 53 people.

More protests and marches soon followed and in April in 1979 the parliament of New South Wales repealed the legislation that had allowed the arrests, abolishing the need for police permission for demonstrations. (Now the police march proudly in the parade!) The Mardi Gras march achieved an important civil rights milestone.

It wasn't long before the march also became a party! But always with a political edge. (Photograph: William Yang) This year's parade included a theme of standing against abuse, harassment and violence.

This year, gay and lesbian Australian Defence Force people marched together, with the approval of military authorities.

There is still much to be done. A Mardi Gras piece in the Sydney Morning Herald (1 Mar 08) recalls that although leading rugby league footballer Ian Roberts revealed himself as gay as long ago as 1995, he remains as the only footballer in any code in this country to declare himself gay.

Everyone might pretend to have a gay cousin. Everyone might say they're cool with it. But in the cold, hard confines of the professional locker-room, they simply are not. . . . [H]ow many clubs grapple with the mere notion that one of their players -- apart from Ian Roberts in the past 13 seasons -- might be gay? "I'd say none," was the reply of one NRL chief executive when asked this week.

There are still challenges to face. And those challenges are increasingly being met by young individuals at ease with themselves, less in need of community than in the past. Robert Reynolds, author of What Happened To Gay Life? (UNSW Press) writes that "more than gay, the young ones move on".

Far from bemoaning the lack of gay community, these young men are just getting on with creating interesting, full and varied lives. And quite often, being gay is just one element of who they are and how they live.

They are not gay first, but often passionate about the things that make up their lives and careers, socialising in mixed circles, where shared interests rather than sexuality keep the bonds of friendship strong. Many feel little affiliation with stylised gay men, all "haircuts, muscles and tattoos." There’s no need for a "of tribal belonging, a sentiment still fashionable among older gay men and lesbians." Many young gay men "have moved on, and who can blame them? There is no point bewailing that the world has changed. Save that energy for the unfinished battles . . ."

What are the unfinished battles? Well, getting rid of violence, for starters.

And much legal discrimination remains. Robert McClelland, Attorney-General in the recently elected federal Labor government told says that an audit has found the number of anti-gay federal laws figure to much greater than that identified by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. He promises to take action to eradicate all laws that resulted in discrimination, in privacy, taxation, social security, superannuation, workplace laws, privacy and education assistance.

But he refuses to allow the ACT Government to retain clauses in its civil partnerships bill that would allow gay couples to hold a public ceremony marking their union. Meanwhile, the ACT Government says it will introduce legislation into the Assembly by April to allow both partners in a same sex relationship to access parental leave. This is believed to be the last area of discrimination against gay people under ACT law.

Noting the collapse in vocations to the Roman Catholic priesthood in many parts of the world, The Tablet the requirement for priestly celibacy in "A self-inflicted wound", its Editorial of 1 Mar 08. "It would not be difficult to extend the list of countries with a vocations crisis almost indefinitely . . . yet Pope Benedict XVI has said that the issue is not even open for discussion."

Celibacy instead appears as a heavy price to be paid--or, increasingly, not--rather than a joyous symbol of the Kingdom of God. That is failure not just of communication but of theology and of leadership.

The Tablet says that the Roman Catholic Church must "either renew the theology of celibacy so that it becomes convincing again" or have find some other solution, some partial relaxation of compulsory celibacy, for example, allowing some married priests.

Whatever message church leaders want the faithful to receive by continuing with compulsory priestly celibacy, the faithful are not hearing it. Instead they are hearing and seeing all the sounds of a Church slipping slowly into a condition of dysfunction. "Sorry, Kingdom of God closed for lack of clergy" is hardly the Gospel message people want to see outside their parish churches. It would strike many of them as a rather pointless self-inflicted wound.

Permit me to propose another possibility, also ruled out by the Vatican: ordination of women.

Further, if the principal consequence of a shortage of priests is a denial of access to the sacraments, perhaps it is the very nature of sacrament that needs rethinking . . . is it the exclusive role of a priest to celibate the Eucharist? Did not Jesus give the sacrament to all? If, at least in theory, all but the provision of sacrament can be done without a priest, the priesthood is but a hollow shell. If, on the other hand, it is a fully rounded ministry of the presbyter, preaching, teaching, pastoring, leading, how can it be that God is denying such to the church through an absence of vocations? Something is awry.

A failure of theology and leadership indeed.