Posts by recordari
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ok, so let's have a black and white one. Yes, chequered even, y'know kinda a "we are all winners" flag. :)
Cool. It'll look great on this ;-)
What? Too much? Still, how could I resist?
And so it isn't a totally nugatory post;
I'd like to hear speeches made in the House, and see a vote on something written-down -- rather than having it decided (by Key's own telling) in "five minutes" at a Cabinet meeting.
What he said.
-
So long as we revisit the republicanism/constitution debate and a change to the flag just falls out of that.
Which is why my initial 'that's nice' response now seems way too simplistic. And perhaps why this is just another example of JK passing something under 'urgency'.
-
I like the idea of Treaty partner flags flying side by side on the national day, but if the the flag is going to be given de facto statutory meaning, I'd much rather see some kind of statutory process make it so.
Maybe we need a Carly Binding Referendum.
Sorry, wrong thread... Oh, actually it is this one. Hard to tell after a while. Good debate this. Almost makes me think we should revisit the whole flag issue, along with the republicanism debate, and the constitution, and yadda yadda yadda...
Have we got time?
-
It's not to say that Maori are happy about it, but I'll put my optimism that a National PM just agreed to fly the TR flag over Premier House over politicial dissent for now.
Maybe. Although I'm waiting for the 'LHaws effect.'
Personally I'd like to see a less divisive debate over the Symbolism of the flag itself, embodied in the notion of Tino Rangatiritanga, from an historical perspective, including the viewpoints of people like Sir Apirana Ngata. Ok so the flag is not historically significant, but the notion is. Without this historical context, IMhO, it is hard to respond 'rationally' to a gathering media storm.
So yeah, I'm one of those naive people whose initial reaction was 'hey cool, our two flags flying together. That's progress'.
But we'll have to wait and see.
-
Tino rangatiratanga?
Ahh. Caught by the taking too long to write my post again.
Edit.
\
Exit.Only love
Can make it rain
The way the beach is kissed by the sea
Only love
Can make it rain
Like the sweat of lovers
Laying in the fields.Love, Reign o'er me
Love, Reign o'er me, rain on meThe Who.
-
This article from a presentation by Paul Kurtz Is Secular Humanism a Religion? highlights some of the more salient points about the philosophy. Of course he shows it is not a religion, but some 'parents' in the US tried to get the text books of humanism banned from schools by having it declared as such.
At the end he talks of a need for a new Global Ethics based on the principles of Secular Humanism. I couldn't agree more. It will not be religion, god or any notional deity that leads us from this mess we're in. It will be the application of rational and scientific rigour, importantly, IMhO, free from the worst excesses of vested interest, that will lead us to the promised land.
Can I get a witness?
-
But it might be considered Old School :-)
Yes well, if we start down the road of semiotics, we'll be up pretentious creak without a moral compass before we know it.
Hmm. Slipping back into my somewhat futile attempts at comedic wit, after the earlier stuff, makes me feel a bit guilty. D'oh, there's that word guilt again.
I feel like I've been part of something. I'm not entirely sure what, but it was definitely something. And it was good. Thanks.
-
I hope it's not too pretentious, but in existentialism they sometimes define nothingness as the 'absence of expected presence'.
Sartre used the analogy of looking for... hang on, Google check ... Pierre in the cafe, but Pierre wasn't there. His previous presence was so reliable that it left a gaping hole.
In both stories above, where suffering and fear were so ever present, you would almost expect some evidence of a higher order, but it is these circumstances that seem to most highlight the absence, at least in my experience. Randomness is a good way of putting it.
I agree with Ben that for some it is a 'valid' community of support in times of struggle, but when it leads to religious fatalism (this is god's will), it is a challenge to 'breath through the nose'.
It took me a while to write this, so I'm editing after the fact.
Edmund, sorry for your loss, and I might have written a different story had I seen that first.
-
I was going to tell a story that also happened to me the other day about some christian doorknockers who caught me in a conciliatory mood. But that's an old story.
Someone earlier talked about the alternative approach to door-knockers, and I was going to tell the story of my Grandmother.
She would let them talk for a while, and if I can be so crass, say 'your god is good, and I'm gonna let you finish...' No better not go there. Suffice to say that whatever they gave out, they got back in spades.
Perhaps my response was a bit emotional, but since you spoke from the heart, felt you deserved the same in kind.
It seems this 'community' is more worthy of my trust than I might have hoped. Although I sense at times people come and go who don't respect others as much as they should.
-
Ben your post blows the rest of this stuff out of the water.
I'm fighting back tears in fact. Having been through the births of our three girls, and I am pleased/privileged to say without incident, it is these moments of total helplessness that define us, IMhO.
I feel completely humbled.
My name is Jackson by the way. Anonymity in this case seems wholly inappropriate.