Now, as you who know me well already know, I'm a Catholic. And those of you who know me better will also know that it's a personal thing, and I'm not really interested in participating in mass-scale conversion of people to the flock.
But today I'm going to take up the flag for my people, and also people of all religions.
A story in The Spencer Street Soviet (otherwise known as The Melbourne Red, or The Age) today, which it has picked up from it's sibling newspaper in Britain, The Guardian, informs one that double decker buses in London now carrying advertising for atheism. They read "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life". You can find the article here.
Now, while I agree with the sentiment of the latter part of the message, I'm not happy with the advertisement. In fact, I'm not happy with atheism in general. Recently, it's been charting an interesting course.
Due to people like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, atheism has received plenty of publicity. Both agree that religion is the basis of most of the world's problems, and because God plainly doesn't exist, this is a problem that can be easily solved by the eradication of religion.
I call this "fundamentalist atheism". Just as other fundamentalists in other religions want to eradicate all the other religions (and atheists for that matter), these people want only atheism to survive.
There is only one problem with my analogy - atheism isn't a religion. It's the absence of one.
When the Church of England publicises Christ or God, it is publicising something. Atheists are publicising the absence of something. It's like selling an empty coke bottle.
I know plenty of atheists. Hell (not a swear word when talking about atheists as they don't believe it exists), I'm even marrying one. But they don't promote atheism. In fact, they talk little about God of their own accord. They may talk about the evil in the world that organised religion is responsible for, and that is fair comment. But they're not actively recruiting people to be Godless.
Paul Keating is quoted as saying (and this is about the only time I'll quote PJK in an argument I'm making), "If God doesn't exist, why isn't everyone just chasing women and antiques?", these being the two most desirable things in his mind, apparently.
Organised religions, or "faith traditions" as some people call them (urghh), have been responsible for, how does one put it, some bad shit. But they're also responsible for some incredible goodness as well. Personally, I think that is how God works on Earth, through people doing good works and being charitable. Jesus didn't call on us to be good to the poor because he wanted to change the world order or bring about social equity: He called us to do good works because it brought us closer to God. But that is another story for another day and another audience.
A few weeks ago a story ran in the local papers that the Humanist Society was about to receive permission from the Department of Education to run a "religious" education course at state primary schools that advocated the absence of God.
Now, I'm a secularist, and I don't believe religious education should be taught at schools operated by the government. But they certainly shouldn't be permitting what amounts to a "non-religious" education course to be run at a state school. It should be up to parents to provide guidance with regards to religious beliefs and greater meaning. It should also be noted that relying on parents to do parenting isn't exactly the most successful strategy at the moment.
Simply put, I don't think atheism should be put on the same level as religious belief. Actually, I think on the census the box you tick should just be " No Religion". If you don't believe in a religion, then you have no religion. Atheism is not a religion. It's the promotion of nothing. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
3rd Test and 20/20 ODI squads
Some quick thoughts....
- Graeme Smith is one tough hombre, as Dennis Commetti would say. Great effort to go out and bat, and nearly save the match. Much deserved Man of the Series.
- Siddle and Johnson are keepers, but this attack (with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus) will look more like Australia's attack 1989-1991 than 1999-2001. Jury out on Bollinger, but plenty of time yet.
- My current fourteen man squad for South Africa tests - Ponting (c), Clarke (vc), Hughes, Katich, M Hussey, Symonds, McDonald, D Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, McGain. Bollinger, Hauritz & Krejza unlucky, but we need a wrist spinner for South Africa and England.
- Good move to rest Mitchell Johnson for a couple of weeks. Also good move to select Hauritz for 20/20 and one dayers, but can't see how he plays with that squad.
- Michael Clarke to open batting in first two one dayers, ahead of Brad Haddin or James Hopes.
- 20/20 matches to be split, Aussies to win one day series 3-2, mainly due to absence of Graeme Smith.
- Graeme Smith is one tough hombre, as Dennis Commetti would say. Great effort to go out and bat, and nearly save the match. Much deserved Man of the Series.
- Siddle and Johnson are keepers, but this attack (with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus) will look more like Australia's attack 1989-1991 than 1999-2001. Jury out on Bollinger, but plenty of time yet.
- My current fourteen man squad for South Africa tests - Ponting (c), Clarke (vc), Hughes, Katich, M Hussey, Symonds, McDonald, D Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, McGain. Bollinger, Hauritz & Krejza unlucky, but we need a wrist spinner for South Africa and England.
- Good move to rest Mitchell Johnson for a couple of weeks. Also good move to select Hauritz for 20/20 and one dayers, but can't see how he plays with that squad.
- Michael Clarke to open batting in first two one dayers, ahead of Brad Haddin or James Hopes.
- 20/20 matches to be split, Aussies to win one day series 3-2, mainly due to absence of Graeme Smith.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Silence is not golden
The end of 2008 couldn't come quickly enough for the Australian Cricket Team. From a familiar position on Day 2 of the WACA Test Match (and the MCG Test Match for that matter), the Aussies couldn't seal the deal, failing mostly with the ball, but also with the bat, particularly in the 2nd innings in Melbourne, where even Ricky Ponting's 99 was disappointing, given he got out to such an obvious set-up.
What was more disappointing about Ponting's dismissal, even more disappointing than how it happened, was his reaction. He wandered off the pitch a beaten man. It was the same reaction that came from a brave Brett Lee when he heard Billy Doctrove call no-ball after he bowled Neil McKenzie late on the fourth evening. They just seemed defeated.
Watching the DVD of the first 16-match winning streak enjoyed by the Australian Test Team from October 1999 until March 2001, I noticed Ponting's reaction when he was out for 197 in Perth versus Pakistan, playing a similar shot. He was ropable with himself, screaming "no" loudly as he walked angrily off the ground. That was the reaction of a man not defeated, and not satisfied. Ponting reaction was more like a surrender in Melbourne, despite the fact he had made 98 fewer runs. He had given it his best shot, and almost looked comfortable with the fact that it wasn't good enough.
Another astonishing thing I read during the Boxing Day Test Match was an article by Robert Craddock in the Hun. He reported than when Graeme Smith, the South African captain, walked off after batting in Perth, he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Very little chatter, and certainly no talk directed at unsettling the batsman.
It is not a long bow to draw to say that this all goes back to match in Sydney 12 months ago. That match caused a national outcry, but not at the man who had made a racial slur, or his team, but ours, for playing the game while taking no prisoners.
Andrew Symonds had nicked a ball to the keeper and not walked. What terrible form to rely on the umpire to do his job! Imagine an AFL footballer throwing a lunging foot at a ball, getting close, the ball bouncing through the goals, and then the footballer telling the umpire he didn't get a foot to it? No, one expects better behaviour from a cricketer, although there is more money involved and also the little question of national pride.
There was no great ourpouring of approval when Symonds got a howler of a decision in Adelaide and walked off the field without comment or visable dissent. Of course, everything that is wrong with Symonds' cricket career can also be traced back to the New Year's Test Match of 2008.
The massive media reaction last year has resulted in the Aussies having their verbal tail between their legs. I can't imagine a Steve Waugh team reacting the same way; he would have called a spade a spade, said something about being paid to win games of cricket, and carried on as if the fuss had never happened.
Since Michael Clarke bowled Australia to victory late on the Sunday afternoon, Australia has won only four test matches, all against the West Indies or New Zealand, and lost five, all against India or South Africa. Like it or not, the Aussies are at best third in the world at the moment.
Sure, there have been some personnel problems. We can't find a quality spinner. Fast bowlers keep getting hurt and changing, but during the first 16 game winning streak, Australia played McGrath, Fleming, Muller, Kasprowicz, Lee, Bichel & Gillespie. Two sides of quicks, with a 12th Man thrown in. During the 2nd 16 game winning streak, Australia played quicks McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Clark, Gillespie & Mitchell Johnson. You need a good squad of players.
Shane Warne said before the Sydney match that the Aussies bowlers need to recapture some aggression on the field. That could well start with the verbal aggression, although it is hard to see newbies Bollinger or Siddle, or the seemingly patholigically friendly (and incredibly lucky) Andrew McDonald doing that. Johnson has been growing into that role, and he looms as one of the three most vital members of that team, along with captain and vice-captain.
In the final analysis, the players are paid to play and win. When they won the Sydney match 12 months ago, it was almost like they had caused some sort of international incident. Firstly, it was that awful little Indian who caused the "incident". However, it was Australian heads that were being called for. If Ponting should be sacked, it should be for poor captaining, not waiting for the umpire's decision, pressing home every advantage he can, and verballing his opponents. The Australians need to forget about the events of Sydney 2008, and once again make a cricket field full of Australians an uncomfortable place to be.
What was more disappointing about Ponting's dismissal, even more disappointing than how it happened, was his reaction. He wandered off the pitch a beaten man. It was the same reaction that came from a brave Brett Lee when he heard Billy Doctrove call no-ball after he bowled Neil McKenzie late on the fourth evening. They just seemed defeated.
Watching the DVD of the first 16-match winning streak enjoyed by the Australian Test Team from October 1999 until March 2001, I noticed Ponting's reaction when he was out for 197 in Perth versus Pakistan, playing a similar shot. He was ropable with himself, screaming "no" loudly as he walked angrily off the ground. That was the reaction of a man not defeated, and not satisfied. Ponting reaction was more like a surrender in Melbourne, despite the fact he had made 98 fewer runs. He had given it his best shot, and almost looked comfortable with the fact that it wasn't good enough.
Another astonishing thing I read during the Boxing Day Test Match was an article by Robert Craddock in the Hun. He reported than when Graeme Smith, the South African captain, walked off after batting in Perth, he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Very little chatter, and certainly no talk directed at unsettling the batsman.
It is not a long bow to draw to say that this all goes back to match in Sydney 12 months ago. That match caused a national outcry, but not at the man who had made a racial slur, or his team, but ours, for playing the game while taking no prisoners.
Andrew Symonds had nicked a ball to the keeper and not walked. What terrible form to rely on the umpire to do his job! Imagine an AFL footballer throwing a lunging foot at a ball, getting close, the ball bouncing through the goals, and then the footballer telling the umpire he didn't get a foot to it? No, one expects better behaviour from a cricketer, although there is more money involved and also the little question of national pride.
There was no great ourpouring of approval when Symonds got a howler of a decision in Adelaide and walked off the field without comment or visable dissent. Of course, everything that is wrong with Symonds' cricket career can also be traced back to the New Year's Test Match of 2008.
The massive media reaction last year has resulted in the Aussies having their verbal tail between their legs. I can't imagine a Steve Waugh team reacting the same way; he would have called a spade a spade, said something about being paid to win games of cricket, and carried on as if the fuss had never happened.
Since Michael Clarke bowled Australia to victory late on the Sunday afternoon, Australia has won only four test matches, all against the West Indies or New Zealand, and lost five, all against India or South Africa. Like it or not, the Aussies are at best third in the world at the moment.
Sure, there have been some personnel problems. We can't find a quality spinner. Fast bowlers keep getting hurt and changing, but during the first 16 game winning streak, Australia played McGrath, Fleming, Muller, Kasprowicz, Lee, Bichel & Gillespie. Two sides of quicks, with a 12th Man thrown in. During the 2nd 16 game winning streak, Australia played quicks McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Clark, Gillespie & Mitchell Johnson. You need a good squad of players.
Shane Warne said before the Sydney match that the Aussies bowlers need to recapture some aggression on the field. That could well start with the verbal aggression, although it is hard to see newbies Bollinger or Siddle, or the seemingly patholigically friendly (and incredibly lucky) Andrew McDonald doing that. Johnson has been growing into that role, and he looms as one of the three most vital members of that team, along with captain and vice-captain.
In the final analysis, the players are paid to play and win. When they won the Sydney match 12 months ago, it was almost like they had caused some sort of international incident. Firstly, it was that awful little Indian who caused the "incident". However, it was Australian heads that were being called for. If Ponting should be sacked, it should be for poor captaining, not waiting for the umpire's decision, pressing home every advantage he can, and verballing his opponents. The Australians need to forget about the events of Sydney 2008, and once again make a cricket field full of Australians an uncomfortable place to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
