IT Work, Performances, Dr. Pell

[tcpip]

Made my pitch this week to the Victorian Boating Industry Association to redo their website using open source technologies (example) for a mere $5000. They decided to go with a more expensive proprietary solution, which was currently being used by two out the four decision makers. Damn. In other IT work related news have worked through some VB code to make Bendigo payroll and invoice payments automatic through an MS-Access interface. Started CCNA semester three; (re)learnt about VLSM (Variable Length Subnet Addressing). Borderlands' server died yesterday (after six months of me giving the CoM warnings). Fortunately I had another server on order (without the CoMs permission) and planning the build tomorrow. Perhaps now they will listen to me.

Last night travelled to Spotswood's old pumping station with caseopaya to see We Built This City, a multimedia documentary of the building industry and current IR legislation appropriately set underneath the site of a notorious building accident; the West Gate bridge. A combination of interviews, the Trades Hall choir, industrial sounds, some Aussie rock (with Mark Seymour!) film interviews, mini front-end loaders in synchronised movement (like Arab horses) and dancing cranes (I kid you not). Really was quite good fun.

The Catholic Archibishop of Sydney, Dr. George Pell, again proves he is a powerful moron. I have just written to The Age suggesting that the good Dr. check the Christian Bible and the history of the Roman Catholic Church for the advocacy and use of violence. He might find one or two ;-). lederhosen provides further insight to his mind.

GetUp have organised a new petition aimed at preventing the Government's plans to put children of asylum seekers back in detention. Once again youngsters US prove to be geographically illiterate. The World Conservation Union claims that the mass extinction rate is now includes hippos, polar bears and 1/3 of amphibians.

Comments

Islam

[(Anonymous)]

The church has largely apologised for its errors in the past, but in any case that is irrelevant here. Islam cannot be criticised? If Pell is disqualified from doing it, as you seem to believe, who isn't? We must just keep silent about it?

Re: Islam

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

In what way is it not irrelevant?

Pell is condemning the Qu'ran for allegedly being a book that advocates violence and Islam for being an intolerant religion.

If he is going to use the allegedly holy book and past actions are evidence one must ask why does not consider Islam to be capable of being as peaceful or as tolerant as the Christian faith, given their own history.

Re: Islam

[(Anonymous)]

"given their own history."

There you have it. Do you have any substantive objections to the painting of Islam as an intolerant faith at all? Changing the subject and talking about Christianity doesn't inspire confidence that you do.

Re: Islam

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Do you have any substantive objections to the painting of Islam as an intolerant faith at all?

Of course not. Intolerance and violence are to be condemned no matter who engages in it. I have argued with Muslims precisely on this point.

My criticism of Pell is because he is engaging in hypocrisy and bigotry. He is claiming that Christianity was capable of self-transformation, but Islam is not.

Re: Islam

[(Anonymous)]

Islam may be capable of transformation, but as Pell pointed out, if you read his reasons, which you have not argued against, you merely objected to his saying anything at all, it is much more difficult for Islam than it was for the churches.

I see no hypocricy in his attitude, he openly admits to past failings of the church. There is no bigotry, it is informed criticism.

Re: Islam

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

"Considered strictly on its own terms, Islam is not a tolerant religion and its capacity for far- reaching renovation is severely limited," he said.

What reasons? That's merely bigotted assertion.

Re: Islam

[http://users.livejournal.com/_fustian/]

Pell's critique is nothing but clichéd Clash of Civilisations-style casus belli. Presenting the Jews as murderous thugs bent on eternal vengeance by cherry-picking the Torah is rightly condemned as antisemitic. How is this better?

Re: Islam

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

It's just another version of antisemitism.

Besides, it is worth reading the passages of the Qu'ran in context - invariably it was when a nascent Islam was under attack from pagan Arabs.

Certainly the overwhelming majority of Muslim scholars believe in contextual reading.

Re: Islam

[(Anonymous)]

"It's just another version of antisemitism."

So Islam cannot be criticised.

"Besides, it is worth reading the passages of the Qu'ran in context - invariably it was when a nascent Islam was under attack from pagan Arabs."

Utter rubbish. Read this http://www.muslimhope.com/WhatIsJihad.htm. From that page:
.......119 other verses of Qur’an that suggest that Jihad is not merely limited to defensive war alone."

Mohammed himself fought mainly offensive wars, to conquer territory, enrich himself and his men, loot, subjugate, rape and gather more wives for himself and his men.

"Certainly the overwhelming majority of Muslim scholars believe in contextual reading."

Indeed they do. That is why almost all of them have interpreted "smite at their necks" to mean "cut off their heads", within the context you see, of war, war, war.

Re: Islam

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

So Islam cannot be criticised.

Please try not to be an idiot. Antisemitism is an prejudice; an a priori judgement prior to reviewing specific instances.

19 other verses of Qur’an that suggest that Jihad is not merely limited to defensive war alone."

Mohammed himself fought mainly offensive wars, to conquer territory, enrich himself and his men, loot, subjugate, rape and gather more wives for himself and his men.

You are wrong, again

As it should be. A jihad is a struggle and the greatest form of jihad is the struggle with oneself to account for conscience.

You simply don't even know what jihad actually means.

That is why almost all of them have interpreted "smite at their necks" to mean "cut off their heads", within the context you see, of war, war, war.

Ridiculous and childish assertion.

We're done I'd say. Further posts from you will be deleted and unread.