Comments about posts

Feel free to make comments about any posts. Please be informed that any offensive or derogatory comments will not be published.

The Slaughter

A cow is looked after by its master. The master's duty is to look after it.
Thus, a cow should obey it. This used to be the case.
Now, cows have rebelled against their masters;
Anyone who rebels against their master is one who do not care for others.

They seem friendly, but they are aggressive.
They seem smart, but they are foolish.
They seem innocent, but they are domineering.
They seem benevolent, but they are manipulative.

Above all, they are proud.

They complain when others don't understand them.
But they always get away with it when they mistreat others because
They can claim that they are victimised.
Their life is focused on accumulating
Wealth, power and pleasure.
To fatten themselves, ready for the slaughter

They do not know of the path they are leading.
They are not ready for slaughter and
Laugh when others talk about it.
Slaughter is facing them at any time.

A cow has come to the end of her life.
Pleading with her master to spare her life
She claims "I did not know".
"You did know," her master replies, "but you failed to prepare yourself".
For there is no excuse.

Two shots are fired.
Upon the first shot, she falls to the ground.
"She deserved it," the righteous say.

So the fattened cow was remembered as
The one who was not ready for slaughter

Pleasure and Power (2)

One thing that can be noticed is that boys tend to use love to get physical pleasure. Girls, on the other hand use physical pleasure to get love. It might seem like a fair deal, right? No. It is dangerous, but it is amazing how many people do not care.

When people engage in physical pleasure, there is a strong bond formed. People give their soul to the other person. So engaging in such activity is a promise. This is no clique, but a fact. Many people have become deluded into thinking that sex is casual. Really, there is no such thing as "casual sex".

Thus, sex can be used by people as a form of social control. When it is done outside a fully (yes, 100%) committed relationship, it will leave emotional pain on people. When people are enticed into engaging in such activity with another, people are being trapped into giving one's soul to another. Don't believe me? 

Ask yourself how many happy stable marriage are there between people who have engaged in premarital and extramarital sex. 

It is important that people are careful of those who act in a lewd manner or those who dress promiscuously.

You should not feel that you have to trust these people or be friendly with them. Because you don't. 

Pleasure and Power (1)

Our society is one where "anything goes". The sexual revolution during the 1960's meant that love was free and that everyone is entitled to love from others. It was generally believed, and still is believed, that sex means love. These are the two greatest lies of our society

Love is not free. Love is from the heart, not from the face or body. One cannot say that one loves another unless he or she cares for that person.

Sex is not love. It is an expression of love, but an expression itself is not love. Therefore, sex cannot be used to get "love". It won't.

Love does not focus on the way people look like, or their achieves. It cares for people and appreciates people for who they are from the bottom of the heart.

It is that simple.

You shall pay thy tax, says society

Australia has become increasingly secular, and is continuing to do so. The general society does not revere any particular religion. In fact, religion, particularly Christianity has no place in the public sphere. Interestingly enough, other religions which are generally regarded to be the same as Christianity in terms of its teachings and values are not criticised by the media.

Channel 9's Current Affair, presented a report which criticised Hillsong for being exempt from taxes and "investigated" its finances. According to the report, the government classifies religious groups as charities, and hence are exempt from taxes. The purpose of taxes are to fund government schemes and programs. It is at the discretion of the government to allocate its revenue to schemes and organisations.  Accordingly, it must tax those who it serves and depend on it.

As such non-government organisations such as charities, and churches are of a different status from taxpayers as entities. They are independent of the government, so the government should not interfere with their activities. Its revenue is not earned, it is donated by its members.

The criticism directed at churched for being exempt from tax shows that they are not regarded  as organisations that are different from secular organisations. Instead, their donations that help support its works must be used to fund the facilities of others who do not contribute to it, that is general society. The onus is on the church to explain why it should be exempt from paying taxes.

If it were a secular organisation, or a religious non-Christian organisation, it is questionable as to whether it would have received the same criticism. One does not need to be religious to ask this.

Insanity, Debauchery and Hypocrisy

Australians often think that their own culture is great one. Australians condemn violence against women (which has become a more important topic that violence against other groups), do not support war and respect others, and above all, treat everyone as equals. However, before we can analyse Australian cultural attitudes, we must ask who is considered 'Australian' and who is not in the people who live on this land of Australia?

Everyone must ask themselves, how do we treat people of other groups, before we can really call ourselves an egalitarian society.

I will explore the following in the next blog posts:

• Secularism and how Christian minorities are treated
• Sexual ethics
• Australian women
• Racism and sexism directed towards men and women of ethnic minorities
• Egalitarianism

Don't fall for her because She's Hot

A young woman wanted to show everyone how she "had it all". She achieved straight 7's academically, and could always be seen hanging about with the same group of girlfriends. All her friends had boyfriends, so wanted to have five. She was not kind to others, but she no problem getting five boyfriends because she was hot.

She used s*x to get all five. They all paid for "it". Her boyfriends were feared by everyone, especially the less mature boys, because they enjoyed watching them wince whenever they would be bullied by the alpha females. They were alpha males.

The young woman had been going out with her alpha males for a month, when one of them become physically involved with another girl. Angered, she vowed that she would not trust men ever again, because one of the five boyfriends left her for another.

The Women's Collective held a rally to sought to help women who had been facing relationship problems with men. She spoke at the rally:

"I want to help women who have been bullied by men. I know from the bottom of my heart how it feels, I have been through this myself. I want to empower women to feel good about themselves in relationships."

All the feminists cheered in approval.

Everyone else knew what had really been going on. She had seduced all five of her boyfriends who were going out with other girls. A right-thinking person would think that she had learnt her lesson, but she had not.

Lies is truth and truth is lies

If there is one oxymoron that should describe the state of affairs in the postmodern world, it is lies is truth and truth is lies. The idea (not fact) that there is no truth is contradicts itself. It purports itself as the ultimate truth. Many universities are promoting postmodernist beliefs, encouraging extrasensitivity in the words people use to describe people of certain groups such as man, woman, Asian, Western, Aboriginal or African - all terms that do not merely describe someone, but forms an "identity". An article in The Australian explains this well.

Since a person's identity is in what they identify themselves to be, then, out of respect, people who do not fall into a certain category must not use such "labels" because it does not describe them. To use such terms would equate to labelling. Labelling is wrong. Therefore, one should not use such terms.

However, in order to express the truth, words with real meanings must be used. Words exist to express what is the truth. Therefore, words that have meaning need to be used in communicating ideas. From the perspective of postmodernism, however, postmodernist words, not real words are used to express mere ideas and not the truth. However, words expressed always have a meaning.

Postmodernism may as well not use any words if it purports that the use of words are offensive. For this reason, it may as well be dead.

The Meaning of Love

Valentine's Day is one of the most important days of the year in the Western world. It is to remember St. Valentine, a priest who risked his life to marry couples in secret. Soldiers were forbidden from becoming married because Emperor Augustus believed it would make them weak. While there is nothing wrong with celebrating love, it is important to remember what is the true meaning of love and marriage.

The following is a social satire I have made up. I hope you enjoy it and feel free to share it!


A couple was planning what they were going to do on Valentine's Day.

"What to do you want to do on Valentine's Day, honey?" the man asked his girlfriend.

"To go shopping at IKEA!" she answered, her eyes all teary.

To his surprise, the man replied, "Shopping! Why would you want to go shopping on Valentine's Day? I thought we had done enough shopping!"

"Don't worry," his girlfriend said with a wile. "It will be the best day of your life. I promise. Just do what I say, okay?

"Alright." he replied. What else could he say?

Soon enough, it was Valentine's Day. The woman had been planning their wedding to be held at IKEA all along. The man was shocked, for he had not expected her to propose to him. So they got married at IKEA.

"I told you it would be the best day of your life," she said.

"Why didn't you tell me about this before Valentine's Day?" he asked her. "I would have brought you some chocolate and a cake."

Angered, she yelled "It doesn't matter whether we are married or not, you should buy me something anyway. How dare you say that!"

So she immediately called for a divorced and they were divorced immediately.

It was the world's shortest marriage. It lasted for only 2 hours.

It used to be...(5)

It used to be that people who served the community because they truly wanted to make a positive difference were revered. These people made sacrifices for serve the needy, the poor, the vulnerable and the oppressed.   Power, money, fame and career meant nothing to them. Desiring these things were regarded as desires that contradict the desire to serve others.

Now, people can serve others and their personal needs. It is now normal, and even, fashionable to claim that one wants to serve others through their career where they can also gain power, money or fame. Serving others can be done while serving power, money or fame. Former Attorney-General Nicola Roxon stated in her resignation speech that she encourages young people to consider public serve because one can fight for what one believes. This may be true, however, it does not show an attitude that seeks to serve others although to may outwardly claim to. Instead, it is out of pure selfishness - to fight for what one wants, not what is right.

What people want is not necessarily right. In fact, what people want is often self-centred and has no regard for what others need. The most popular phrase in Australian slang is "I can do what I want". Really, it is not about what one wants. This is evidence that the Australian society is individualistic, self-centred and arrogant. No wonder relationships break down, people fight and, above all, people get hurt. All sorts of people get hurt, not just the groups that are popularly considered to be vulnerable.

The media has contributed to such an individualistic, self-centred and arrogant culture. It portrays the idea that people can serve their own personal desires and the needs of others. It exults rich, powerful or famous people when they act generously because they are not expected to. Although this is realistically true, it reinforces the false idea that people can serve both personal desires and others at the same time.

Helping others now seems hypocritical thanks to the media and an individualistic culture. Helping others can only be truly regarded as serving others when it is done in love for others, not out of selfish ambition.

It used to be..(4)

It used to be that work was done to serve the family and community. The husband and wife would distribute out the work as to who would work at home and who would work in the community. Either way, work was done to serve others.

No longer has work become a service to the community. Work now needs to be a career, especially for women. There has been many expectations placed on women to have a career and family. Those who can have both are successful. Those who can't are unsuccessful. Work that is not capable of being a career, that is, work that is not intellectual, or involving leading others, is not valuable. Such work is regarded as non-work.

Interestingly enough, a career, as the term is understood in the postmodern world, does not have to be one that is lucrative. It can be one that has much power or fame. Many of the powerful politicians and public servants, such as commissioners, are really just after the fame and power, in the guise of wanting to help others. Many of the powerful women politicians use women's rights as a pretext for their want of fame and power. It is an easy pretext to use because half the population is female, such that they can get more votes, and that such an issue is regarded as a sensitive one.

People have become so focused on their careers at the expense of relationships. Parents have neglected the needs of their children by letting other people look after them. Young people are becoming increasingly arrogant about their prospects. Women have become extremely proud about their careers that they look down on stay-at-home mothers.

That work has become a status symbol means that helping others is choice that people make depending on what they can gain. Our humanity has gone. Welcome to the postmodern world where there are very few  who truly serve others through their work.

It used to be...(3)

It used to be that friendship was about respecting others. It was about helping each other through the hard times. Now, friendship is dependent on how the individual person views one's friends, rather than how the person is viewed by others. This is evidence of how we are becoming increasingly individualistic.

We treat our friends as people to be used. It is all about how many friends we have, not how many people who we are a friend of. The idea of friendship is to give each other personal pleasure and to gain personal desires. Friends are now, as understood in the postmodern sense as people to have fun with. One has to have more friends to have more fun, meaning more pleasure.

The activities that we enjoy with friends has become a status symbol. Gaining, not making "friends" is a point-scoring activity. People talk about who is their friend, not who are they friends with. Social life has become a norm to show-off one's popularity, instead of helping others with their needs. As a result, gaining friends has become a political tool for people to gain influence and control over others.

No longer do we feel satisfied about ourselves, but we are concerned with what others think about us. To feel more popular, we look at how many friends we have to feel assured about social status.

It used to be... (2)

It used to be that the education started at the home in the family. A family, now called the 'traditional family' consisted of a husband, wife and children. The parents would serve the family and community. The parents would teach their children values to guide and support their emotional, physical, social, mental and spiritual needs.

Now, parents fail to teach their children family and community values. Many parents of the Generation Y youth do not set examples for their children in many areas. Many parents do not have family values and do not have healthy relationships with others, especially people of the opposite sex. They had children out of wedlock, leaving the children brought up in a family that is unstable. Even if the parents do get married, the children are instilled with the idea that it is acceptable for parents to be unmarried, more importantly that it is right to engage in  sexual relationship outside of marriage.

This has produced a perverse, degenerate and morally decadent generation, a generation that has no respect for others, is selfish, and callous. People of Generation Y blame others for their own problems, except for when someone of their group (the classic example would be a young woman who is outraged about rape, but does not care if a man was harassed in a similar way).

It beggars the question as to how this generation can lead the future generations to come. How? It is a hard question given the lack of community and family values Generation Y has.

It used to be ... (1)

It used to be that a relationship was founded on love and respect. It involved friendship and honesty about the character of the other person. People used to be able to tell the other person how much their loved one would annoy them at times and how stupid they could be. Marriages were meant to last a lifetime. Marriage was generally accepted be a union between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. Marriage was about husband and wife cooperating with each other.

No longer are relationships founded on love and respect. Relationships now involve two people (whether of opposite sex or the same-sex) who use each other for their own personal gain whether it be pleasure, money or power. It is now not only acceptable, but normal for people to have multiple relationships at the time. We now call people in a relationship partners and even 'friends with (read: deadly) benefits'. It is now acceptable in the eyes of society for people to be sexually involved outside of marriage. Marriage has become a contract, not a relationship. The man and the woman no longer need to cooperate with each other. It has become acceptable for women to beat their husbands, while husbands are made to cower before their wives.

Yet, a majority even have the audacity to say that we are becoming more respectful towards others. This is a lie. We have become not only brutal, but callous. Double standards to relationships apply - this time to men. Women are able to get away with unfaithfulness by claiming it is the only way to be "liberated". Only men are lambasted and blamed for bad behaviour, not women. Men are blamed for bad relationships no matter what the situation. It is no wonder children are abandoned, married men become single fathers and the elderly men and women have become lonelier. Generation Y has become ever more decadent and degenerate.

Having it all: Welcome to the postmodern world

We live in an increasingly materialistic world. Our society is at the worst of most vices, if not all. No longer do we feel shocked when people are subject to abuse and violence. Nor do we care if people make money out of the suffering of others. No, we think it is normal because this is the true state of our world.

The idea of "having it all" is a materialistic one. It is the modern belief that a successful person is someone who has:

• love (whether married, de facto, heterosexual or homosexual);
• family;
• friends
• career; and 
• influence. 

Influence may be either money, fame or power. From the modernist perspective, a person who is successful at the career is one who has not only money, but fame and power as well. Love, family and friends are also status symbols.  Only a person with a stable family and good friends are worthy of being loved. People with no family and friends are dismissed as unlovable and lacking of social relationships.

I will be exploring each of these five areas in the next posts.

Equality: What it really means (2)

Equality, as it is understood in the postmodern world means no differences in the role played in the community or family. However, difference in roles does not mean inequality of social status. It follows from the postmodern understanding of equality that only where there are no difference in roles that people are of equal status, and that no one is a subordinate. No longer does equality mean having an equal chance or access. Equality is the inherent dignity of each human being to be treated the same as others. It is not a mere social construct, but what is means to be treated as a human. Equal opportunities does not mean that social differences between people must be eliminated. A society can be a diverse one, in which different people play different roles to build the community.

Equality: What it really means (1)

Equality is term with strong emotional connotations. We like to fight for equality (more often than not for ourselves, while ignoring the injustices others face), we like to fight for our rights. Only those whose position are regarded as worthy enough to be equal become the subject of such civil rights or political movements. If only some are worthy to be treated as equals, who should they be treated as equals and, more importantly why only some people, not all people? That some are worthy enough to be treated as equals is an oxymoron. Equality is about treating every person with the same dignity and that people are treated based on their behaviour. It is not a matter of having the same roles in the community or family. It is a matter is being treated the same as others on the basis of behaviour, not personal characteristics.

That 'all [people] are equal, but some are more equal that others' accurately describes the true state of affairs, especially of that in the postmodern world. The rights of the poor, the unemployed and the persecuted are often neglected. It has never been, not is it popular to fight for the rights of the poor and the persecuted. How often have you heard of the term "pauper's rights", compared to "women's rights" and "children's rights"? Such terms are coined for political purposes, to gives the movement political ground.

The Hidden Face of Political Progressivism

Political progressivism loves to express it hate for conservative politics and criticises it for not doing enough to help marginalised, oppressed groups. While some groups have been historically oppressed, some of these historically oppressed groups still claim that they are oppressed. It is important to remember that humans generally prefer to fight for their rights rather than help others. Humans like to receive help from others, rather than help others. As such, these "oppressed" groups use their historical position of oppression to claim that they are still being "oppressed". They attempt to twist history and make others deluded about their current plight to gain sympathy. They blame others when they are not able to achieve or gain what they want, and claim that others in dominant groups are evil.

The only thing more evil than oppressing others, is to lie that one is being oppressed to gain what one wants.

Fairness is Not Justice

Fairness and justice are often confused in the postmodern world. The terms 'fairness' and 'justice' are used interchangeably because they are thought to mean the same thing. Fairness means to treat people the same way in a particular set of circumstances. Justice, however, requires that fairness be offered the right way and that the right thing should be done in  a particular set of circumstances. In other words, fairness is relative, while justice is absolute. This is what many people don't realise. People often take fairness for granted in Australia because everyone is said to be given a "fair go". However, while fairness is one thing, justice is another.

For example, it is fair that two people who steal money from a house share out the money equally. However, such an act is not a just act because it is a wrong act that should not have been done in the first place. This example illustrates that fairness is dependent on the set of circumstances that it is applied to. Justice does not. Since fairness is relative, it would follow that all people may be equal, but some are more equal than others because some deserve to be treated more fairly. Justice, however, commands (not demands) that all people are treated equally regardless of their circumstances.

'Only cultured, upper-middle class western women exist', says the Media

The media is obsessed with missing upper-middle class western women. Whenever there is extensive media coverage about a person who goes missing, such that protests are sparked, politicians find themselves having to answer questions, and there is hate sites about a victimiser, that person is almost always an upper-middle class western woman. Anyone else who goes missing is sure to not receive anywhere as much attention, unless the family works hard to campaign for safety such as the Morcombe family. The campaign it led was certainly not an aggressive one, like the one led by feminists after Jill Meagher was murdered. This has been dubbed the "Missing White Woman Syndrome".

I myself am not sure why this is the case. However, I can speculate that it is because upper-middle class western women are probably more valued than anyone else simply because majority of society believes that they contribute, and are sensible, smart and intelligent. In the eyes of the media, everyone else is probably not as sensible, smart or intelligent and hence, it is partially their fault or their family's fault, or friends' fault when they go missing. It may also be because majority of journalists are upper-middle class western women and so most of them feel more strongly about their own, compared to when a person of another group is missing. This ilk of biased feminist journalists more likely than not want to get their own voice heard while ignoring that of others. They should be ashamed of themselves.