Geoff Coupe's Blog

Reflections on life at “De Witte Wand”…

Category: Society

  • Two Fathers

    Gelert, over at An Experiment In Normailty, adds his thoughts on the UK adoption row. Worth reading. He mentions the interview on BBC Radio with the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, yesterday. I didn’t hear it, but there’s a telling comment on it in the piece today by the Guardian’s religious affairs correspondent:
    …it is uncomfortable for the archbishops, as anyone who heard the Ugandan-born Archbishop of York equivocating on the Today programme, as he tried to explain why being "in conscience unwelcoming to gays" was entirely different from in conscience discriminating against black people, will have appreciated. 
    Well, quite. A clear example of cognitive dissonance, I would have thought. The article also clarified for me why I thought that Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor seemed uncomfortable in the interview I saw a couple of days ago with him laying out the party line. It seems as though one of the factors playing out here is politics in the Catholic hierarchy, in particular, who gets to succeed the Cardinal when he retires later this year. I suppose one shouldn’t really be surprised that the Catholic hierarchy is stuffed with venal politics just like every other aspect of human life, but still, the hypocrisy does take my breath away at times.
     
    Update: This article is a shortened form of the piece that Stephen Bates wrote for the Guardian’s Comment Is Free section. The full version is here, and is definitely worth a read.
     
    There’s also an article in today’s Guardian about the Rev. Martin Reynolds, who, together with his (male) partner, has been fostering a boy for the past 15 years. The boy has two fathers, which brings us neatly full circle to the song in the link that Gelert refers to: Twee Vaders. It’s nice to end on a positive note.

  • Following Orders

    As you might imagine, the kerfuffle in the UK over Catholic adoption agencies wanting an exemption in the law so that they do not have to consider gay couples as prospective adopters of children does not make me feel kindly disposed towards the Catholic hierarchy. And now, perhaps predictably enough, the Anglicans are closing ranks with the Catholics.

    And, as usual, Ophelia, over at ButterfliesAndWheels, casts some light through the gloom.

    Frankly, it seems to me that the Catholic adoption agencies are swirling in a cesspit of their own making.* They do not appear to recognise that the overriding factor here is the well-being of the children, instead they prefer to focus on their particular cherries that have been plucked from a set of ancient tales by multiple authors. If they do feel obliged to close their agencies, rather than consider all couples as prospective adopters on their own merits, then so be it. Apparently, they only fulfilled 4% of the 2,900 adoptions in the UK last year anyway, and that gap should be able to be filled.

    And I cannot pass without a comment on Ruth Kelly, Minister for Women and Equality. As she is also Roman Catholic, and a member of Opus Dei, one could be forgiven for thinking that the phrase "conflict of interest" might well pass through one’s mind as a particular danger in her case.

    I think that she would be well advised to reflect on the political circumstances of Charles E. Wilson in the Truman administration. He was the CEO of General Motors, before he was tapped to enter the Truman Administration as US Secretary of Defense. He was asked if, as Secretary of Defense, he could make a decision (in his role as Secretary) that would be adverse to the interests of General Motors. Wilson answered affirmatively but added that he could not conceive of such a situation "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa." It was quite rightly pointed out to him that in his role as US Secretary of Defense, his task was to do what was right for the country, and not for General Motors.

    Similarly, Ruth Kelly should take a decision that is right for the children and the country, and not for her particular religion. I await with interest to see the outcome.

    I see also that Martin Newland, in a Comment is Free piece in The Guardian, argues that "in opposing the new law on gay rights and adoption, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor is simply doing his job".

    That’s as may be, but I will run the risk of invoking Godwin’s law by saying that in a very real sense he could also be said to be following orders. I watched an interview on BBC yesterday wherein the Cardinal was clearly uncomfortable about what he had to say, but nevertheless stated the party line.

    When it boils down, then what the Catholic agencies are doing is wanting to turn their backs on people who could help rebuild children’s lives. They can claim conscience all they like, but their conscience, in my view is wanting. Steve Bell points out what, in all honesty, I think lies at its heart.

    *With acknowledgements for that lovely phrase to Sir James Anderton, the former Chief Constable of Manchester.

    Update: Oh-ho! Is Cherie the real Eminence Grise here? Can’t say I’d be surprised.

  • Easy Targets

    Well, of course, editing the film makes it easy to remove those who gave the right answers, but even so, this remains pretty depressing. We’re all doomed, I tell you.

  • Denying Denial

    A statement, signed by more than one hundred Iranians, deploring "that the denial of these unspeakable crimes has become a propaganda tool that the Islamic Republic of Iran is using to further its own agendas", and condemning the Holocaust(-denial) conference organized by the Iranian government last month. Scroll down for the English translation.
     
    (hat tip to Normblog)

  • Going Dutch

    After 23 years living in The Netherlands, I’ve taken the step of obtaining Dutch citizenship. While officially this occurred last month, yesterday was the occasion of the naturalisation ceremony held in the local townhall. It’s an opportunity for the State to recognise those individuals who have become Dutch in a small ceremony. Nothing too serious, but a nice gesture.
    There were a number of us at yesterday’s ceremony. Here we are, together with the Deputy Mayor who officiated.
    20070119-0154-54
    In case you are wondering about the characters in the background wearing orange hats, they are my friends and neighbours who showed up to give their support. I had told the Townhall that I’d just be bringing Martin and one other friend, but Martin surprised me with this large group. Fortunately, there was enough coffee and cakes for everyone.
    Afterwards, we returned home, and the party continued…
    20070118-1618-03

  • Undermining Respect

    Ophelia, over at ButterfliesAndWheels, reflects on the language used by pressure groups opposed to stem cell research, and wonders whether they mean what they say. She has a point.

  • The Evil Within

    Theodore Dalrymple considers the question of whether evil is instrinsic in the human condition. And comes to the conclusion, which I share, that it is a component that cannot be easily dismissed.
     
    (hat tip to Normblog)

  • Virtually Unreal

    On the day when Niall Stanage weighs in with a rather silly piece on the danger of Second Life (clue: the backstory has nothing to do with Second Life whatsoever), Not Saussure points us towards the true surrealness of the phenomenon.
     
     

  • Pocket Money

    This is prompted by From the Heart of Europe.
     
    Count all the euro (and related) coins in your pocket – not by how much they are worth, but by which country they come from. (The full list of coins showing which ones come from which country can be found in many places, including http://www.euro.gov.uk/eurocoins.asp)
     
    Germany: 6
    Netherlands: 3
    France: 1
    Italy: 1
    Finland: 1
     
    Now, which country do you live in? Germany
     
    Obviously it helps to do this meme if you live in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Monaco, San Marino, the Vatican, Andorra, Montenegro or Kosovo, but people outside those enchanted places can play too.

  • Noaberschap

    One thing we’ve noticed since we moved to this part of The Netherlands last March is that the sense of community is still pretty strong around here. There is the local custom of Noaberschap (neighbourliness), where neighbours are expected to help each other out when necessary. We were touched when the young farmer across the field formally asked us if we would be Noaste Noabers (literally closest neighbours) to him and his girlfriend. This means that we are responsible for organising the rest of Herman and José’s neighbourhood in times of celebration or need (e.g. weddings or funerals). Hopefully, it’ll be the former, rather than the latter.
     
    We’ve just had the first celebration. Today was the day when Herman officially became the owner of the farm. So yesterday, the rest of the neighbourhood was at our house painting signs and making paper roses to decorate a pair of fir trees.
     
    20070114-1631-44 
     
    20070114-1658-48 
     
    Then today, while Herman was at the notary to sign the papers, we set everything in place to officially welcome Herman and José to the neighbourhood.
     
    20070115-1504-35 
     
    20070115-1513-23 
     
    20070115-1515-20 
     

  • The Sound of Silence

    I hope that this will be my last comment on last week’s gay rights versus religious rights debate in the UK, but I couldn’t help but raise my eyebrow in a very ironical fashion when I read the piece by Giles Fraser, the Vicar of Putney, in today’s Guardian, entitled Atheists: the bigots’ friends.
     
    While I grant him the point that many Christians are fully in support of gay rights, it does also seem that most of them have kept pretty quiet about it recently. And then again, there’s the rather telling point that of the 26 Bishops who sit in the House of Lords, only five of them were present in the debate last week, and of them, only one(!) voted against the motion to deny equal rights to gay people. So that leaves four of them who are quite happy to have discrimination continue, and potentially there are a further 21 of them who would agree with them.
     
    But then again, perhaps Giles Fraser doesn’t think that the Bishops are representative of the views of many Christians. If so, it’s a peculiar state of affairs indeed. 
     
    Update: Ophelia, over at ButterfliesAndWheels, has a little chat with Giles.

  • Parent Power

    I see that a parent in Seattle has been initially successful in his attempt to prevent local schools from showing the Al Gore film An Inconvenient Truth. He’s clearly in full possession of the facts and an intelligent rationalist:
    "Condoms don’t belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He’s not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven who also said that he believes the Earth is 14,000 years old. "The information that’s being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is. … The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn’t in the DVD."
    Wonderful. 
     
    Update: Apparently Frosty has been moved to give us a deeper peek into his rationale (and I use that word advisedly) behind his objections. Stop digging, Frosty…

  • Stereotypes Only

    A somewhat disturbing story in the Guardian today about the treatment meted out to Joanne Lees by the media. Her crime? She’s a woman in control of her emotions, instead of the tearful victim the tabloids want. There’s more than one Nicholas Hellen out there…

  • Matching Pairs

    I am like Diamond Geezer, I hate shopping for clothes. Fashion is probably the 13th worst idea in the history of the world.

  • Synthetic Controversy

    Not Saussure has an excellent entry discussing the recent Gay Rights vs Religious Rights issue that’s arisen in the UK over new laws to ban discrimination against gay people. His point is that some of the objections to the law seem fantastical in the extreme, usually a sure sign that a synthetic controversy is being whipped up. 
     
    I found it interesting that some of the objections that had been raised had already been dismissed in a previous debate in the House of Lords, and yet they are still circulating in the media (even popping up on the BBC TV News last night) as though they were valid. Obviously, you can’t keep a good meme down.
     
    In the event, the attempt to derail the bill was defeated in the Lords by a majority of three to one, so sanity has prevailed. It’s good to see that the UK has now reached a point (in banning discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, sex or sexual orientation) that the Netherlands reached in 1983. Better late than never, I suppose.

  • Dangerous Historian Apprehended

    The American Historical Association has been holding its annual conference in Atlanta. During the conference, Professor Felipe Fernandez-Armesto committed the heinous crime of jaywalking. For this, the former Oxford don was thrown to the ground, handcuffed and kept in a cell for eight hours while the authorities decided what to do about him. Watch the interview with this urbane man here, and marvel at the subtle policing that citizens and visitors to Atlanta can experience.

  • 12 Bad Ideas

    Fred Halliday posts his list of candidates for the world’s twelve worst ideas. He hits the target pretty well, I’d say.
     
    (hat tip to Ophelia, over at Butterflies and Wheels)

  • Guess Who?

    Chris Clarke, over at Creek Running North, sets a quiz. Go and see if you can guess who he is talking about. I confess I didn’t know the answer. Oh well, Chris has given me another recommendation to be added to the list of books that I still have to read.

  • The Secret Life of Brian

    I see that someone has added the Channel4 documentary about the circumstances around the making of The Life of Brian to YouTube. Perhaps it is in contravention of copyright, but this is an excellent documentary about the ongoing tussle between free speech and causing offence, and I for one, am glad to see it reaching a potentially wider audience.
     
    I am pleased to see that the documentary has extracts of a famous (at the time) discussion between John Cleese and Michael Palin (representing the forces of comedy) and the Bishop of Stockwood and Malcolm Muggeridge (representing the forces of Christians against blasphemy).
     
    Mervyn Stockwood represents the sort of secretive homosexual that I am grateful never to have been; that final comment in the interview about the Python team having received their thirty pieces of silver is truly beyond contempt. And I well recall the one occasion that I was in the physical presence of Mr. Muggeridge. It was when the Festival of Light (organised by the National Viewers and Listeners Association) was at its peak in the 1970s, and it had a public meeting in Bournemouth starring Mary Whitehouse and St. Mugg. I went along to hear what they had to say. What I heard disgusted me about the organisers and people such as Muggeridge involved in that eruption of hate speech. I felt physically sick at being in a large hall and listening to the baying of people led on by the platform speakers who had no compunction about uttering slander and lies. Even now, at a distance of thirty years, it disgusts me. And these were so-called Christians.  

  • Choosing the Moment

    I’m a believer in free speech and so forth, but sometimes I find myself having a sharp intake of breath. This morning, for example. I was reading yesterday’s Volkskrant (one of the Dutch broadsheet newspapers) over breakfast. I leafed through the magazine, and was suddenly confronted with a selection of images taken by a police forensics photographer during the course of his 30-year career.
     
    The images (both black and white and colour) showed a series of bodies at the scene of their deaths, either by crime or suicide. I found the images shocking and unbearable to look at. I suppose part of it was that I was unprepared to see them.
     
    The reason for the article is that there is an exhibition of the photographs opening in Amsterdam. And while I have no objection to the exhibition as such – after all, the images are of real events taken by a photographer in the course of his job – I do question the judgement of the editors in reproducing some of them in a colour supplement delivered to thousands of homes without warning. After that sudden intake of breath, I chose to skip the article and continue with breakfast, but the images that I saw remain. I can choose for myself whether to go to the exhibition, or buy the coffee-table book, just as you can choose whether you want to watch the video report (Bloedige tafelren op de foto) on the Volkskrant web site. I suppose what I am objecting to here is the removal, by the editors, of that ability to choose the moment, and the opportunity to prepare myself for the experience.