tcpip: (Default)
Diary of a B+ Grade Polymath ([personal profile] tcpip) wrote2005-10-24 01:27 pm

Sedition, We Are One Day, Intelligent Design, Truth, RuneQuest

The weekend started with a visit to the small demonstration for civil liberties. We live in dangerous times when people retreat into their private commercial lives over involvement in the public sphere. Chris Savage calls for sedition. I approve of his call for arms: "Because I do not want to see liberty nibbled at, I urge an association of Australian men and women to act mightily, with seditious intention, against the sovereign and against the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia." Who else is up for a bit of sedition?

Afterwards went to the We Are On Day annual meeting at the Melbourne Town Hall. Neither the array of speakers (from the Humanist Society, the Uniting Church, Christian Scientists, Bahai, Islamic Council, Kagyu E-Vam-Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh) or the compere (ABC's Encounter presenter Maraget Coffey) seriously addressed the serious problems in the divergent interests and beliefs, despite claims to similar core values.

Sunday I gave the extended service at the Melbourne Unitarian Church on intelligent design. Quite a good turnout and an interesting discussion by Dr. Bill Hall and Nigel Sinnot. Meanwhile, seventy thousand Australian scientists urge the government not to allow it into the classrooms. More on the presentation at my [livejournal.com profile] convert_me post.

Following the service was an animated philosophy group discussion on the nature of truth. I pulled an old rabbit out of my hat by using universal pragmatics to draw the sharp distinction between truth and sincerity (this is where people often get very, very confused). The debate really took an odd turn when matters of "contingent truthfulness" conflict with moral principles. In other words, the old discussion of the difference between moral principles and situational ethics has returned.

After all that, was the continuing adventures of the RuneQuest game run by Andrei. Magnificant stuff; we managed to find the Storm Khan leader of the White Bison clan (my clan!) and distract the army of Broos hunting for him, by tricking them and a century of Lunars into a conflict. The magnificant conclusion of the day saw the summoning of the Clan's Founder to dispatch the remaining chaos creatures and the subservient Lunars singing our praises. Waha help us if they ever discover it was due to our trickery that they fell into conflict with the Broo. It was high fantasy storytelling at its very best.

Re: The Plan

[identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_fustian/ 2005-10-30 09:15 pm (UTC)(link)
After carefully analysing the legislation, I believe (and I'm more than happy to be told I'm wrong about this; please do check my working) I have determined that the new laws will make it impossible for an individual unassociated with an "unlawful organisation" to be convicted of sedition, unless they call for the use of violence in some form.

That said, the new laws are very far from perfect. Not only do they create a ridiculous state where foreign citizens in foreign lands can be charged with sedition against Australia, they retain the disturbing indication to the Courts that they should doubt "good faith" in instances where Australians are advocating support for an enemy of an ally, regardless of whether such country is an enemy of Australia. (One can well imagine a situation where one would be restrained from opposing a US invasion of Venezuela, despite our government's decision not to become involved.)

The question is, should we devote our time and effort to opposing this particular law? My feeling is that we should back-burner this effort, at least until the Terrorlaws have been passed. (Let's face it: no effort we make now is likely to help prevent that happening.) We might like to visit the issue thereafter, depending on the final shape of the laws. (After all, who knows what trickery and double-bluff might emerge in the wake of all the COAG horsetrading?)