A Bit of a Rort

The philosopher Richard Rorty died last week at the age of 75. His life was one of major impact and influence, his place in history is assured. Rorty questioned the very nature of identity, of truth and of knowledge, attempting to kill any basis for certainty. In short, he is held to have destroyed the notion of an objective reality and in so doing removed the basis for any sound intellectual thought.

Following in the wake of Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche as part of the post-modern movement, Rorty solidified the idea that we cannot know anything with certainty. Therefore, there is no purpose in searching for truth, since knowledge and identity are simply social constructions. If accepted the implications of Rorty's proposition are both profound and terrifying as he removed the grounds for truth.

Rorty also famously claimed that a person lost in a forest has no identity, as a person's identity can only exist in community. When people are isolated they lose themselves. Yet, the irony is that as community is emphasised, togetherness can be lost. As we lose our idea of self, we lose our concept of common humanity, of that which unites us, and instead we are segregated into our own little community. Consequently, our ability to have meaningful engagement with those from other communities is lost and group differences—rather than what we share in common as people—become what defines us.

Rorty left us a lonely world. The impact of his thinking can be seen in universities where debate rages over the status of ethnic science and maths, where cultural relativism is endorsed and universal knowledge denied. As academics struggle to find their feet again they flounder. Rorty's life shows that good intentions can destroy and that one man's ideas can have a tremendous impact over the course of his lifetime.

Copied from today's email "Real Issues" sent out weekly from http://www.maxim.org.nz

And I'll Wear My Morning Pants

When my kids played up at school I'd threaten to go to their classroom and sit there all day long in my green stretch morning pants. They were the especially ugly but very comfy, tight-fitting, stretch honeycomb- patterned pants that I mosttimes threw on in the mornings, especially in winter. I'd watch their faces when I would say it and could well imagine the picture in their minds of me sitting there in their classrooms with their mates sniggering at their mum wearing the grotesque pants...well it was too much for them to imagine and I never got any more complaints from their teachers for a couple more months.
I was reminded of this recently when a friend passed away.
She was a wonderful lady with a beautiful heart. She just shone. She had a terrible life though, yet you wouldn't know it. When I met her mum I realised she was all that was wonderful about her mother. She told me once about having to drive her kids to school in the freezing cold of a winters morning. She had on her dressing gown and shoes and let off the kids at the gate. On her return trip home the car, always running on the $10 tank of gas, ran out of petrol on the busy bridge near her home. Typically of my friend, she just did what she had to do and got out and waved down some help from a passing motorist. I can just see her in my mind..smiling her most gorgeous smile, head and shoulders back and looking all the while the lady in her old worn dressing gown. God keep Eire close to You.

Everywhere a Nanny

Don't Let Super Nanny Usurp your Family

I have watched the 'nanny' programmes and wonder how many people choose to remain childless because of them. I have said it before and I'll say it again, parenting is for the fittest and the toughest and only God sees what you do in those unseen acts of love and discipline for your children. You will not go unrewarded.

From the Daily Mail...

Daily Mail UK 22nd May 2007
Child-rearing experts such as Supernanny and Gina Ford are damaging family life by undermining parents' authority in the home, it has been claimed. There was growing confusion among parents over how to bring up children because of the parenting advice 'industry', a leading sociologist warned. He said relying on techniques from the so-called experts could be destroying parents' confidence in their own child-rearing abilities, weakening their control over their offspring. Professor Frank Furedi also warned that the spread of the nanny state was adding to bewilderment among parents.

Professor Furedi, a sociologist at Kent University, was among academics to challenge increasing interference in family life at a twoday conference at the university. He claimed figures including TV Supernanny Jo Frost, whose discipline techniques include the 'naughty step', portrayed mothers and fathers as incompetent. He said: "They basically assume the high ground - 'I am the supernanny, unlike you, the incompetent, bumbling idiot'." But he warned that the wealth of advice available, from Miss Frost and others including the no-nonsense author Gina Ford, risked demoralising parents.

Professor Furedi, author of Paranoid Parenting and the Culture of Fear, went on to accuse Labour of politicising parenting!!!

Read more at.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456765&in_page_id=1770

Remote Control of The Family

How to control adults by means of 'children's rights'.

By Lynette Burrows
 
 

This article is published by The Human Life Foundation, Inc. New York, in the HUMAN LIFE REVIEW, Vol. XXV, No. 2, Spring 1999, pages 65 - 73. The article is reproduced here with the kind consent of the author.
Lynette Burrows is a well-known English educator and journalist. Her latest book, The Fight for the Family, was published in 1998, revised and reprinted in March 1999 by the Family Education Trust, Family Publications, Oxford, England.
 

 
When you think about it, the fashionable crusade of 'children's rights' is bound to be anti-family. It is a movement which declares itself to be more interested in the welfare of children than are ordinary parents. It seeks rights and laws for children that neither they, nor their parents, want. It promises to give children legal sanctions against their parents and, in so doing, pits the interests of children against their parents. The inescapable implication is that children are not in safe hands with their own parents and that a whole movement has had to be called into being in order to protect them. It is an innocent-sounding piece of subliminal, anti-family propaganda, advertising the fact that parents are, at best, inadequate and, at worst, hostile to the needs of their children.
Analysing the 'loaded' message of the title 'children's rights' one can see it attempts to pack the punch of an appeal to both parental feeling and the nobility of action implied by the word 'rights'. It is utterly bogus! A 'right is classically defined as 'the freedom to act without interference, according to one's conscience.' It means nothing unless the individual has the capacity to act upon their 'right' and children, by nature of their immaturity and inexperience, do not have that capacity. So they have people who act for them, in the form of the people who created them and who love them more than anyone else. Those people, the adult parents, have a freedom to act according to their conscience, and within the law, with their children and it is that freedom that the children's rights activists seek to remove.
One can clearly map their intentions by what they have achieved so far and what they are signalling they want to do in the future. I don't know anything about the American scene but, in Great Britain, and several European countries, among their achievements has been securing the right of the state to allow under-age children to be given contraceptives and abortions without their parents' knowledge or consent. This remarkable right was not achieved via parliament, which still upholds an 'age of consent' at sixteen years. Still less was it achieved by pressure from either parents or children. It was as achieved by the active collaboration of the industry that sells contraceptives, the people who are employed in promoting their use, and the 'children's rights' lobby who claimed that, since children had now decided to be sexually active - there was nothing parents could do about it.
The right for children to 'divorce' unsatisfactory parents has also been secured for them by children's rights lawyers; working on the usual pay-rates but with the bill settled by the taxpayer. So far parents have not been given the right to divorce unsatisfactory children - but that is consistent with the philosophy of children's rights. It is parents who are failing in their duty to give children the freedom they need. Children, the client group, are not to be criticised or restricted in any way.
Children have also been given the right to take themselves out of the care of their parents and put themselves instead, into the misnamed 'care' of the local authority. Just what this can mean was illustrated by a mother, Mrs Iverson, whose14 year old daughter went to live with a 33 year old drug-dealer from Jamaica. She appealed to the local authority to get her daughter back and they responded by getting a social worker to take the child to a contraceptive clinic. The anguished mother could do nothing whilst her daughter was first introduced to a life of prostitution and then, a month later, murdered. No-one in authority was criticised or prosecuted for their lack of action since they, and the police, were prevented from denying the child her 'right' to free association, by the Children Act, 1989.
Thus, one can see by their aims and achievements, that the right to behave badly is second only to the right to premature sexual activity, according to the children's rights agenda. Furtherance of this aim was massively enhanced by the successful campaign of one of the earliest children's rights groups to get corporal punishment, of even the mildest kind, outlawed in schools. An unwary parliament passed this law by one vote, against a background of generally unproblematic discipline in schools. Certainly primary schools were little havens of tranquillity and learning for children in even the roughest areas. All this has gone now; together with thousands of good teachers who have fled a profession where harassment of them is the norm rather than the exception in many areas.
Children have, in other words, been given an amazing collection of liberties to behave badly, with absolutely no enforceable obligations to behave themselves or even to observe the law. On the other hand, their misdeeds are providing masses of highly paid work for the now enormous lobby of professionals who are parasitic on the new options available to children and the problems they bring. Any attempt to improve the behaviour of young people, is bound to run into opposition from these professionals since they are defending a financial interest that is dependent upon more of the same.
 
Another peculiarity of the rights, sought by activists for children, is how extremely limited and arbitrary they are. If these really were rights that any child could legitimately be supposed to need or to want, they would surely start with the right of a child to be born and not to be killed before birth. But all children's rights activists support abortion in principle and in practice as if, in any circumstances, it could be considered in the unborn child's best interest.
 
Then again, any child should surely have a right to enjoy a relationship with both their mother and their father; rather than being created by artificial insemination for the benefit of a lesbian couple. In all the arguments about this still highly contentious practice, and its rather more relevant, related topic, the ability of homosexuals to foster and adopt children, the children's rights people have been 'out to lunch'.
Another major area where a serious question of children's rights are involved, is surely the right of children not to be bullied at school. Parents protest about it all the time, but little has been done to address their concerns because parents do not belong to well-funded organisations with direct access to the media. 70% of parents were found last year to want corporal punishment restored in school; and so too did 68% of schoolchildren.
The reason for this is, no doubt, because many children are in fact receiving punishment that is decidedly 'corporal' in school - but from bullying thugs rather than from lawful authority. The rights activists don't address this subject because they are so busy monitoring schools for signs of homophobia, sexism or racism that they seem to have overlooked the much larger number of children who are simply terrified of the big boys.
Other areas deserving attention from those who could support parents in wanting the best for their children, would be having a flexible school leaving age and having the right to do work outside of school hours. Even more important, amongst the list of glaring omissions in the children's rights agenda, is the care and protection of children who have been taken into council care.
The Social Services Inspectorate presented a report last year that pointed out just how badly children 'in care' are doing. Despite there being only 0.5% of children in local authority care, 22% of young men in prison and 39% of prisoners under 21 have been in care. One third of people sleeping rough in London have been in care and one quarter of children in care aged 14 or over, don't go to school regularly. For some reason, referred to in the report but not explained, many of those who abscond from children's homes, somehow disappear from local authority records thereafter.
When this report came out, there was much public discussion about this parlous state of affairs and many people commented on the lack of independent monitoring to safeguard vulnerable children. None that I saw, even thought to question the complete lack of involvement or interest in this scandal by the many, high-profile, publicly funded, children's rights organisations. There are many areas of pressing need in relation to disadvantaged children, where parents with the best will in the world, simply have no power to get things done. Well-funded organisations with premises, facilities, telephones, full time staff and, above all, access to the media, could do so much of real value if they wanted to; but our current crop do not. So, one has to ask, what do they really want?
The answer to this must be that it is something ideological as well as something financial. The financial objective is fairly straight-foreward. It has provided a good many jobs and the children's rights activists have certainly found themselves a career. My book, The Fight for the Family, (a second edition of which came out in March) started life as a commissioned chapter in a book about social affairs. I was given a researcher (American) and told to find out about the principle children's rights groups; who formed them, who supported them and who paid for them.
Once we began, we found a scene so entirely different from what we had expected, that we became seriously interested and what had started out as a fairly hum-drum piece of research turned into a fascinating lesson in the modus operandi of pressure groups. It also ballooned into a small book.
For a start we discovered that all the principle groups concerned with this characteristically liberal/left version of children's rights, groups were founded or co-founded by one man, and his domestic 'partner', mostly as limited companies. Their friends and colleagues over the years were spread amongst child care charities and government committees and one, or both, turned up on the boards of all eight of the principal organisations promoting their version of 'children's rights'. Their ideological orientation explained why the narrow agenda they pursued in every case was so similar. It also explained why the basic assumption was always that children needed to be 'liberated' from their parents care and control. Not having chosen to get married themselves, despite having children, it is fair to say that they have some rooted objection to marriage as an institution or, at least, believe that it is not important.
These groups have played an important part in promoting all the rights referred to above relating to premature sexual activity and behaving badly. One of the organisations was exclusively devoted to securing the abolition of corporal punishment in schools and, that having been achieved, its funds were transferred to another organisation, End Physical Punishment of Children, (EPOCH) which is the principle driving force behind attempts to get parental smacking of children criminalised.
The part of my book which really enraged rights activists, however, was not the discussion of their ideological bent, which they did not seem to dispute. It was the fact that attention was drawn to the similarity of their aims to those of the paedophile organisations of the 1970's, which were prosecuted and suppressed in 1980.
As a matter of fact, the similarities are striking and, whilst I was not claiming that children's rights activists were all paedophiles, it is nevertheless evident that their campaigns have been useful to those who want greater sexual access to children. 'Unwitting' was the word I used to describe the direct help given to paedophiles by the de facto abolition of the age of consent for girls in the matter of providing them with contraceptives at school. Now it is proposed to apply the same age of consent law to boys for homosexual activity, we will no doubt see its de facto abolition too.
However, it was after the book was sold out that the response to the publishers began to make another aspect of 'children's rights' clear. It was always obvious that the welfare of children was very low on most of the activists' agenda. Otherwise they would have been doing honest research to discover whether the freedoms advocated by them for children, were actually beneficial. They would also have been much more interested in whether breaking up families was the best response to anything but clear law-breaking on the part of parents, not to mention whether local authority care was better for children than a normal, even strict, home.
Now, like a voice from beyond the grave, we suddenly heard that Sweden had, at long last, developed a protest movement against the things that were being done to them in the name of children's rights. I don't know if it is the same in America, but here and in Europe, Sweden has always been held up as a paragon of 'progressive' innovation. It is referred to in reverential tones by liberals everywhere and children's rights activists place particular emphasis on the beneficial effects of their 1979 law which forbade parents to smack their children. According to their literature, no parents have ever been imprisoned or otherwise penalised for having laid a hand on their children and there is no cause for concern anywhere.
Well, it isn't true! An organisation of academics, lawyers, doctors and other professionals have formed 'The Nordic Committee for Human Rights', which is principally concerned with human rights abuses in Sweden, the most powerful and influential of the Nordic nations. They have a website (NKMR.org) where you can read all about it in English. They point out several crucial, historical factors. Notably that the Nazi's copied a good deal of their social policy from the Swedes; particularly that part of it which saw children as belonging to 'the parental state' rather than to its parents. The family too was viewed with dislike since it encouraged thoughts and actions that were not prescribed by the state.
Unmarried mothers had their babies automatically taken away from them and an organisation called 'Save the Children' was begun during the 1930's in Sweden, which was, contrary to expectation, profoundly anti-family. What children had to be 'saved' from, were the imperfections of their natural parents and the oppressive and un-enlightened atmosphere of a normal family. That has a familiar ring to it, doesn't it?
They were also very enamoured of eugenics and the idea of a perfect racial type. Unbeknown to the rest of the world, the Swedish government pursued a policy of forced sterilisation of children it thought came from poor stock, until 1976. What a surprise for liberals everywhere when the fact came out, only last year, that more than 60,000 children had, in that way, been cleansed of their ability to procreate .
Few people had any idea that the Swedish government had the power to maintain such secrecy when it also had a relatively free press. One can hazard a guess that the truth only emerged finally because a couple of sad individuals, who had been deprived of their birthright by being sterilised when they were children in care, sued the government for compensation for what was done for them. Victims have now been promised the princely sum of £7,000 apiece.
The Nordic Committee, under its energetic and fearless chairman Ruby Harrold-Claesson, has at last broken open many of the other half-truths that the Swedish authorities are still putting about. She is a lawyer - incidentally, the only black one in Sweden - and has dredged up a lot of the figures relating to the seizure of children by the authorities. These are difficult to obtain because they are not recorded in the normal, criminal courts. Hence the ability of the children's rights people to claim that there have been no prosecutions under the 1979 law. Children are taken away under the auspices of an administrative court which, in the public interest, of course, keeps the figures safely out of reach of most people.
To give you an idea of the scale of the tyranny over the family, it is necessary to describe the context. Sweden has a population of eight million; it is also extremely homogenous as to race and no people in Europe are more clearly identifiable by their appearance alone. It has virtually no poverty, wall to wall welfare and no large cities. The capital city has a population of less than two million and the second city has one hundred and fifty thousand people. There should be, in fact, very few cases where children need to be taken from their parents. Yet, in 1981 the authorities seized 22,000 children; which represents a rate of seizure 86 times greater than that of West Germany. An equivalent figure for America would be, by that reckoning, more than 687 thousand - in one year!
No doubt the authorities had such a field day because of the number of children who had been smacked by their parents before the 1979 Act came in. The figure fell somewhat after that but, in 1995, it was 14,700 children removed from their homes. That is a rate 57 times that of Germany and, in American terms, would be nearly 500 thousand children. A mind-boggling number for the rest of the world to contemplate and a clear explanation why so few people in Sweden either get married or have children.
Yet why is this so little known? From time to time there is brief publicity of the abuses of Sweden, before liberals return to their uncritical admiration of it. Unfortunately for the oppressed everywhere, the liberal/left always treasures its heroes - even when they are murderous tyrants - so it will take some time, and a lot of repetition, for the truth to rise to the surface.
Another stalwart of the Nordic Committee, Siv Westerberg, has taken eight cases to the Court of Human rights at Strasborg, and has won seven times. The Readers Digest featured one of her cases in 1993. It involved three children who were abducted by the authorities whilst they were at school. They were sent to separate families 600 miles away and it took the parents 5 months even to find out where they were. No specific reason was ever given for why they had been taken; just that it was in their 'best interest'. It took seven years before the parents were able to get their case to the European Court, which found in their favour. The parents were awarded £33,000 compensation and the Swedish authorities were told to return the children to their parents. The eldest, who was then 17, was allowed home but the other two were not. This is the system that we are being asked to admire and follow!
By a striking coincidence, on the very day the organisation that published my book held a conference to discuss its findings, the BBC asked to do an interview with me about the smacking debate. Since I was tied up with the conference, they decided to interview me in a side room during the lunch break and, accordingly sent an interviewer and crew. I took the opportunity to introduce them to Ruby Harrold-Claesson, who was one of the principle speakers at the conference and she gave them a brief run-down of what she was saying about Sweden.
The team looked uncomfortable and, when I suggested that they include an interview with her to beef-up the debate, they said they already had been to Sweden and would be including an account of things there, as part of the programme.
When we watched the programme a few days later, sure enough, there they were in Sweden interviewing a handful of schoolchildren who confirmed that their parents were not allowed to smack them. They then asked a senior official about whether many children had been taken from their families as a result of the anti-smacking law. Laughing uproariously, she waved her hand around her, 'Can you see many children being taken?' she said. And that was supposed to be a sufficient answer.
After this, the missing brick fell into place! The question was always, why are the children's rights people so concerned to make the parental right to smack their children illegal? Most of their organisations have been more or less devoted to the subject despite the fact that 90% of good and caring parents say that it is necessary at times. Now the answer is clear.
It is a device which places most parents in the power of social workers. They are, by training and tradition, marxist, feminist, and anti-religious. They don't much care for the family and lend their weight on every possible occasion to arguments and devices that show it in a bad light. In this country, they are still opposed to the inclusion, in official statistics, of figures which show the precise nature of the relationship of abusers to the children they abuse. At present, they are simply called 'fathers', even though they are seldom genetic fathers and, even more seldom, genetic fathers actually married to the mother of their children. The traditional family is still the safest place for any child to be - but you would not know it from official literature on the subject.
Thus, anybody who wanted to further a marxist, feminist agenda, could not do better than to have most families in thrall to social workers. The right to browbeat parents because they smack their children when they think it necessary, as the Bible tells them they must, would be all an officious bureaucracy needed to infantalise the majority of adults. It is not about the elevation of children's rights at all. It is about the crushing of adult ones.
It is a particularly crafty bandwagon to set on the road because it has drawn support from so many unpleasant but powerful allies. Contraceptive-selling commerce has welcomed and supported them; paedophiles love them; and as for those government employees engaged in the job of directing, but not curbing, the rising tide of young people in trouble - they simply could not do without them.
Baby-snatching, as it has always been called, is almost bound to be due for a make-over in the years to come. There has been in increase in infertility amongst the young that would be considered alarming if we were not still so fixated with the idea of over-population; plus the fact that the 'wrong' sort of people are still having babies, particularly out of wedlock. This rise must be due, at least in part, to the powerful steroids being given to young girls to ensure their continuance as sexually active people. Also because of the extraordinary increase in the sexually transmitted diseases which cause barrenness in women and sterility in men.
Evils have a habit of happening one upon the other and it is an ironic observation made by the Nordic Committee for Human rights, that one of the reasons it is so easy to find foster-carers for the thousands of 'snatched' children in Sweden, is a political one. Successive social policy makers have scorned the role of wife and mother for many years. A woman loses all child benefits if she refuses to place her children in a crèche and she would feel very vulnerable to having them taken away too. Unless of course she had a very well-paid job to do there - looking after other people's stolen children.
It is incongruous, isn't it? To build your home on the ruins of someone else's. No wonder Scandinavian dramatists at the turn of the century were always so gloomy; they must have sensed what was coming.

The Fight For The Family:
http://www.nkmr.org/book_tips_the_fight_for_the_family.htm

Lest We Forget

Men and women have fought and continue to fight for freedom and truth, the freedom and truth that comes from knowing Jesus Christ. I copied the following from an email received in 2005, I want to keep it here as a reminder to us that some things are worth fighting for...

"What is Truth?" the famed Roman procurator cynically asked rhetorically. Few of us have the will to raise the question ourselves. And yet a moment's consideration quickly reveals that truth is our most precious treasure to be coveted. Truth is the key to success, fulfillment, victory, or achieving any worthwhile goal. The pursuit of truth is our greatest challenge in every one of our endeavors.

This "fabulous century" has ushered in astonishing changes in the realms of technology and yet, strangely, it has also probed new depths of darkness with devastating wars and monstrous new weapons, yielding the bloodiest, most revolutionary, most unpredictable century of any in history. Perhaps most fearsome of all, it has also ushered in a wholesale abandonment of truth. In any cultural war, truth is the first casualty.

Early in this century, many "intellectuals" in our society became enamored with the doctrines of Freudianism, the materialism of Feurbach, the nihilism of Nietzsche, the dialectic of Hegel, the communism of Marx, along with Behaviorism, Socialism, Existentialism ("do your own thing"), Rationalism, Fabianism, and Humanism. David Breese's book, Seven Men Who Rule the World From the Grave, highlights the impacts of Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, George Wellhausen, Sigmund Freud, John Maynard Keynes, Soren Kierkegaard and, of course, John Dewey. Through the teachings of John Dewey's humanism, his atheism, amorality, evolution, and one-world socialism permeated our educational system and excluded from our textbooks the moral and Biblical teachings which had been the bedrock of our American culture.

A spiritually apathetic society hardly murmured when on June 25, 1962, citing no precedents, a "liberal" Supreme Court abolished prayer from the public schools (Engle vs. Vitale). One year later, on June 17, 1963, the Supreme Court abolished Bible reading from the schools (Abington vs. Schempp). This week marks the anniversary of those landmark decisions.

The Bible repeatedly portrays a rise in lies and deceit to be a characteristic of the last days (Daniel 8:25). The final world leader will exploit signs and lying wonders (2 Thessalonians 2:9). He will be anticipated by doctrines of demons (1 Timothy 4:1). After all, who is the god of this world? Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4; 1 John 4:4). What is his primary weapon? Deceit (John 8:44; Revelation 12:9).

The high principles that made America great have been lost. There no longer appears to be any connection between character and destiny. People claim that "morals have changed." God makes morals and He didn't change His mind. God hates wickedness.

The manifest contradictions of our present predicament result from so few persons today taking the time to evaluate the issues, agree with the true, and resist the false. Most are borne along by streams of influence managed by others inimical to their interests. Most of the assumptions that govern our society, our nation, and our families demand re-examination. The shock is that they all are false; most from deliberate deceit.

Yet, determining the nature of reality in our world is the cornerstone of our living. A man puts into practice tomorrow what he believes today. To believe in the wrong model of history or the wrong purpose of living can lead to grievous errors, great tragedies, and devastating consequences. The correct-true-view of man, God, and history is the key to sanity, survival, and fulfillment for each of us.

Where do you find truth? If we search diligently we will eventually discover that the "truth" of the world consists of convictions of convenience and political correctness in its many forms. Pandered to us by those who would manipulate us to their own agenda, it proves fragile and crumbles when relied upon; hardly the stuff to build our lives upon.

One definition of truth is when the Word and Deed become one. The ultimate truth is the fulfillment of God's promises in His Messiah. God's Word had committed Him to provide what we need in His Son. Jesus was the fulfillment of that commitment.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." - John 14:6

The Lord Is Not Slack In Warming The Globe

He doesn't want anyone going to Hell, He wants everyone in the world to repent of their sins, acknowledge them!
Jesus Christ overcame death and Hell to give us a wonderful hope-filled NEW LIFE (Rom 6:4). He will be coming for the Believer's next time and in His Word The Bible you can read in 2 Peter 3,..."BUT THE DAY OF THE LORD WILL COME AS A THIEF IN THE NIGHT; IN THE WHICH THE HEAVENS SHALL PASS AWAY WITH A GREAT NOISE, AND THE ELEMENTS SHALL MELT WITH FERVENT HEAT, THE EARTH ALSO AND THE WORKS THAT ARE THEREIN SHALL BE BURNED UP... nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness...WOW, bring_ it_ on_Jesus, we have surely seen enough unrighteousness in New Zealand to know that, whatever You havn't built will surely come to nought and be torn down, exposed. 'To EVERY thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven...'(From the book of Ecclesiastes chapter 3, in The Holy Bible)
Have a wonderful Easter weekend everyone and may you find true love in Jesus Christ who is alive for you.

Please Read This! -From the Family First Office today

7 More Good Reasons Why We Oppose Bradford’s Anti-Smacking Bill -

From the group that's "whipping up hysteria" according to Sue Bradford - because we're presenting the Facts!!

1. No decent research shows smack by a loving parent breeds violence
Otago University study 2006 – children who were smacked in a reasonable way had similar or slightly better outcomes in terms of aggression, substance abuse, adult convictions and school achievement than those who were not smacked at all.
Fergusson and Lynskey (Christchurch School of Medicine) – found no difference between no smacking and moderate physical punishment “ It is misleading to imply that occasional or mild physical punishment has long term adverse consequences”


2. UNICEF reports prove there is no link between smacking and child abuse
2003 UNICEF report on maltreatment deaths.
Of the five countries with the lowest child abuse death rates in the UNICEF report, four allow smacking !
Austria banned smacking in 1989 – is the 5th highest for child abuse death rates

2007 Report released last week : “the likelihood of a child being injured or killed is associated with poverty, single-parenthood, low maternal education, low maternal age at birth, poor housing, weak family ties, and parental drug or alcohol abuse.”
The safest country for children is Netherlands – hasn’t banned smacking . Of the 10 top countries, 6 haven’t banned smacking.


The 2006 CYF report “Children at Increased Risk of Death from Maltreatment and Strategies for Prevention”
identified the factors which signaled greater risk for children including poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence and family breakdown. Statistics also showed that children living in households with an adult unrelated to them were almost 50 times as likely to die of an inflicted injury as those living with two biological parents!


Example: Just one of the real causes - Substance Abuse
UNICEF report 2003 - Child welfare professionals – 80% said “substance abuse causes or contributes to at least half of all cases of child maltreatment”
85% of States in US report substance abuse and poverty leading problems in families reported for abuse
Substance abuse triples risk for child maltreatment

3. Sweden experience is a warning to us
Child abuse increased 489% in 13 years following ban - Assaults by kids against kids increased 672%
2000 Swedish Govt report – “we see no tendency to a decrease in bullying at school or in leisure time during the last 20 years”
Sweden’s Foster Care rate is double NZ’s – twice as many kids being removed from their families
European Crime and Safety Safety – UN, Euro Commission – published this month - Sweden has one of the worst assault and sexual violence rates in EU

Lies.....
Around one child a month dies at the hands of a parent or caregiver in New Zealand.  In Sweden, the average annual deaths attributable to child abuse for the past 30 years or so has been less than one every four years. - Document circulated on behalf of Barnadoes, Plunket, Save the Children, Children’s Commissioner and EPOCH last year
“The rate of child homicide & in Sweden is something like one every 4 years” - Sue Bradford on TVNZ’s Close Up 19 July 2006
•  “Dr Kiro says people need to realise since Sweden banned physical punishment in 1976, only four children died in the following 20 years”
Children’s Commissioner speaks out against culture of violence – Press Release - Dr Cindy Kiro - 03/11/2004

The Truth
Morgan Johansson, Swedish public health minister, said (2006)
"Every year, eight to ten, sometimes as many as twelve children die in Sweden due to violence. This has been true for several years,"

4. Polls
Averaged out, polls show that 80% of us want to keep the status quo. Politicians need to listen to the people.

5. Police won’t prosecute
Domestic Violence Policy currently being enforced by Police strongly encourages arrest at the time and denies Police Diversion except where authorised by the District Commander. Diversions are rarely given for domestic violence matters. The Police Association admitted today (21 Feb) that they will have to investigate any complaint.

As noted by Cabinet, anyone may bring a prosecution for breach of criminal law e.g. lobby group could bring private prosecution against smack or removal to ‘time out’ – not determined by Police

6. Are the Greens serious about stopping child abuse?
2003: P (Methamphetamine) reclassified as a Class A drug – only the Greens opposed
2006: Opposed an increase to the Drinking Age
2005: Intentional Possession of Child Pornography (the worst of child abuse) –Only the Greens opposed the maximum penalty being 5 years – wanted it lower at 2 years
2007: Want to decriminalise Marijuana
SOFT ON THE REAL CAUSES OF CHILD ABUSE YET THEY WANT TO CRIMINALISE PARENTS WHO GIVE THEIR KIDS A SMACK

7. Smacking isn’t violence – it’s correction
Children are already protected from violence and assault through the Crimes Act
Smacking is in harmony with nature – pain teaches e.g a child teases a dog, they get a dog bite – a child touches the hot element, they get burnt – they take their hands off the handles of the bike – they crash!
Does this teach a child to be a violent person? NO!
A Reasonable smack from loving parent is great teaching tool

http://www.familyfirst.org.nz

Law Versus Grace

The problem with lawmaker's giving grace to prisoners convicted of crimes of murder, is that God looks upon the heart of a man but man can only look on the outside of him/her. So when the lawmaker's allow leniency to murderer's they will almost always get it horribly wrong. Such is the case with a man, a convicted murderer, allowed to walk free on parole and murder another innocent person, in Wellington yesterday.
So, this will continue to happen when successive so called 'secular' parliaments, continue to enact law that reflects God's grace. Only God can truly exercise that right.

The Boy Child Not To Be Ignored

Jesus came to earth with the keys to life and death, will you choose life?
From the book of Isaiah, chapter 55, there's these words: Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the Lord thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.
Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call ye upon Him while He is near.

Have a joyful Christmas everyone, the most precious gift of all is free, and it is, Hope in the Lord, Amen?

More Confusion in these Last Days...

A Bloggin Minute
Wednesday » November 29 » 2006

Losing the right to a mommy and daddy

Barbara Kay
National Post

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

"Ibelieve children have the right to a mother and a father, and preferably their biological parents." These words -- I agree with them, and so do the UN Conventions of the Child -- were once the equivalent of saying you believed in peace on Earth and goodwill toward men.

But in postmodern societies obsessed with gender equity, as ours has been for the past quarter-century, "mother and father" and "biological parents" have become politically incorrect locutions when joined to "children's rights." Just ask the author of my opening statement, the McGill University bioethicist Margaret Somerville, whose honorary doctorate at Ryerson College last June was jeopardized on its account.

"Words matter," says Elizabeth Marquardt in an interview. Marquardt, the author of Between Two Worlds: The Inner Lives of Children of Divorce, is a Chicago-based affiliate scholar at the Institute for American Values, and director of the Center for Marriage and Families. She is the keynote speaker in Ottawa tomorrow at the Institute of Marriage and Family's first annual family policy conference, a one-day session addressing a 50-strong complement of MPs, senior staff, NGO representatives and other decision-makers around social policy and family issues. Her topic: "The Revolution in Parenthood -- The Emerging Global Clash between Adult Rights and Children's Needs."

By "words matter," Marquardt is referring to Canada's gay marriage law, Bill C-38, which includes a provision to erase the term "natural parent" and replace it across the board with "legal parent" in federal law. At one stroke, she says, the locus of power in identifying a child's parents precipitously shifted to the state, from the civil society that preceded it.

In her report, released Monday across North America and Europe, Marquardt details the ripple effect from emerging reproductive technologies and gender-neutral redefinitions of parenthood. Her research revolved around the question of "Who is parenthood for -- adults or children?" She cites troubling global evidence that adults' rights are privileged over children's. Among many diverse examples: In New Zealand and Australia, influential law commissions propose that children conceived through sperm or egg donation have three legal parents; in Quebec the female partner of a biological mother in a same-sex union is noted as the "father" on the birth certificate; judges in several states in the U.S. have seized on the notion of "psychological" parenthood to award legal parent status to adults (invariably women) not related to the child by blood, adoption or marriage.

When the cultural zeitgeist dictates that children's interests can be fully served in any caring environment, who are the winners and who the losers in the switch from natural to legal parenthood? The winners are homosexual couples, single women seeking social approval for mate-free motherhood, as well as ideologues promoting state control of social norms and the de facto feminization of society. The losers are children -- especially at-risk boys, whose social failures are disproportionately linked to fatherlessness -- and fathers, who through law and cultural attitudes are relegated to virtual dhimmi status in a female-controlled social order.

Marquardt conducted extensive interviews with adult children conceived through sperm donation by strangers, a first in this field of research. Many reveal the negative effects of fatherhood's marginalized role: Some subjects call themselves "lopsided" or "half-adopted" or, in cases of lesbian unions, "queer spawn." One used the term "kinship slaves." Joanna Rose, an Australian interviewee, asks why everyone "flips out" when the wrong baby is taken home from hospital, but assumes donor-conceived children are fine: "I believe that the pain of infertility should not be appeased at the expense of the next generation."

This report -- whose findings range far beyond the parameters of a single column -- is, with a promised second look at gay marriage legislation in prospect, a timely springboard to public discussion and debate. Marquardt concludes, "When society changes marriage, it changes parenthood.... The legalization of same-sex marriage, while sometimes seen as a small change affecting just a few people, raises the startling prospect of fundamentally breaking the legal institution of marriage from any ties to biological parenthood."

Words do indeed matter. Ponder the implications of these: Honour thy Progenitor A and thy Progenitor B (and, where applicable, Progenitor C). Brave new world -- or a postmodern version of child sacrifice on the altar of neo-pagan deities Feminism and Gender Equity?

bkay@videotron.ca

© National Post 2006






Copyright © 2006 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.

When Government Cared

My generation had it pretty good, we were brought up with some safeguards ready in place for our wellbeing. It sure wasn't perfect but looking back it was good.
I'm remembering the days when: it was illegal to make booze such as whiskey, gin, vodka etc.; when it was illegal to gamble beyond the odd housie game or horse racing, controlled by Government; when prostitution was illegal and our women, men and children were valued beyond being meat markets and playthings for every degenerate around; when pornography was not allowed to be imported, made or televised because we were considered valuable in someones eyes; when songs had the "F" word in it, they were banned from the airwaves; when practicing homosexuality was illegal; when shooting-up on drugs was considered so dangerous, syringes were kept under lock and key; when sexually transmitted diseases were just that, diseases and they were considered punishment for the sin of having multiple sex partners; murders were few and far between and they were always front page news in the newspapers; children didn't do murder; when elderly men and women were respected and you helped them, you gave up your seat on a bus for them and you sure didn't beat an eighty year old woman or rape her; we needed every baby New Zealander so much that we didn't murder them in the womb, abortion was illegal; we couldn't buy alcohol nor step foot ON a licenced establishment until you were 21. Oh yes, we were valued back then by the lawmakers. So now, just short of anarchy what will become of our next generation?

No Longer your own Carstle

There's more Wearing Down to be done in this part of te globe.. now the Vehicular Police will have the Smoke Detect Cameras on the roadsides of New Zealand and look out if you are caught smoking cigarettes in your very own CARstle! Personally I wouldn't choose to take a ride in any car that reeks of tobacco or any other smoke but, if my car were to break down in the middle of a night and I was offered a lift with someone hooked on tobacco, hey, I'd take the ride alrightty! People who smoke ciggies are generally good ordinary salt-of-the-earth types who, generally love others and generally care about others too, except they cannot see the harm their smoke does to their lungs or anothers'...but.. they'd more than likely give you the shirt off their back, but probably not their last cigarette though :) So, why pick on the remnant of smokers who are already either rebelling hard-out and paying exorbitant prices for their cough or, are struggling to quit altogether?

Eternally Webbed

I heard a man on TV recently, I hear many just like him..he was telling viewers that whatever one puts up onto the WorldWideWeb stays there and will be/can be used against them in the coming years.
So, shaking in my slippers tonight (NOT!) I am again putting something up onto the eternal web!
And it is this! I smacked my son today, he called me a bitch and I will smack my son EVERY time he calls me a bitch and nobody will tell me I cannot smack my child! Not a lesbian, not a homosexual, not a woman whom God has closed the womb of, not a male politician, (they might soon be a minority...) NO ONE, now take notice, this will be on my record for eternity and some of you know me right? Those who have used their deduction powers, lol. So, make my day and arrest me in the days to come.
I heard someone else today in the news media, he is a representative of a Father's group and he is most concerned with the agenda of homosexual/lesbian and liberal groups who have taken it upon themselves to usurp our authority over OUR OWN CHILDREN! How the hell did this happen? Well it is because there are some New Zealand men who are more concerned with rugby and grog than they are with caring and loving their wives and children, and some havn't even honoured their wives yet and married them the way only a man and a woman can be married! It's about time we got our families back together and into the God-intended purpose for living this life.

Worrying Gene

A Bloggin MinuteThey (scientist's) say they have identified a gene in Maori (and some other ethnic groups) that can make them more violent and aggressive and more likely to become addicted to harmful substances. They have dubbed it the "Warrior Gene".
God calls this worrying gene SIN and the only remedy for it is for the sinner to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour over their whole life.
He was sacrificed on the Cross for not only Maori sinners but all peoples of the world, because everyone has the propensity to murder, maim, tell lies be addicted to gambling or drugs... Everyone can have their known or as yet, uncovered sins forgiven and their slate wiped clean.

Check out http://www.harvest.org

Too Precious To Delete

I found a bird sheltering from the driving wind and rain under a sun-lounge chair that should have been put away at least one month before. But if it had there would have been no shelter and I wouldn't have been able to capture in a photo and in my mind, that little bird huddled there waiting for the storm to subside and it could get back to pecking the worms out of the lawn for it's breakfast. It is just as well I have the gorgeous image etched in my mind because in the photograph the birdy is barely visible. My sonshines reckon I should delete it off my camera but for now it remains, a reminder that some things are too precious to delete.

Without Hope and Killing nga Tamariki

A Bloggin MinuteTwin babies have been killed by their whanau or caregivers and it's sad to think that maybe they could have been spared if the ones entrusted with their care had 'found God' through a church that organised the 'ENOUGH IS ENOUGH' protests. I say "could have found God" because the media and various Members of Parliament came out and callously slandered the Christ- loving church (Destiny church) for having the 'audacity' to speak out about the moral degeneration of our small country.
It will be God who will bring an end to the bashings and killings, not an act of Parliament nor more money thrown at Social Service agencies already struggling with the burden of a society gone wrong. The Destiny church (NZ) has a proven track record of bringing the hope of Christ to the lost and the outcast and should be honoured, and those who would dare to call what is 'good' evil, have their agendas exposed in the very media that supports them.

"What Can We Do For The Kahuis" this from this weeks Real Issues email from www.maxim.org.nz
The nation has been transfixed this week by the tragic deaths of Chris and Cru Kahui. They join a long list of children killed in this country, many by their own families. We are stunned by such evil, and we rush to find someone to blame: the family, the Plunket nurse, the social worker, the hospital, the fragmented state of government services. This family has fallen off the top of every cliff there is, and we want to know who was in charge of the fencing.

But as the politicians promise a cross-party working group and CYFS review their procedures, it is easy to lose track of a few things. The most important is that Chris and Cru were killed by a person, not a race, not a context, nor a system. There are many beneficiaries, many poor, many unemployed, many alcoholics and many people from dysfunctional families of all races, who do not and will not kill their children. It is the perpetrator of this crime who is truly responsible.

No law can force people to be good, but the government can weaken or strengthen those things which restrain, encourage and warn. It can set a context in which it is easy or hard to be good, in which it is easy or hard to abuse. Research has shown us many of the factors which set the context of abuse: family breakdown, the loss of biological connection, poverty, unemployment, teen pregnancy, educational failure, substance abuse and ill-health, to name a few. The government can examine what it is doing in those areas to strengthen families, remove rigid laws and promote good ones.

An individual's decision to obey the law is shaped by the family, community and culture to which they belong. The bonds of affection, shame and conscience which are forged by that culture restrain most of us. They snapped this time, for this family. When we ask who is responsible, and what we can do, it is helpful to remember that the government can only do so much to shape the environment in which a person lives. Bonds of affection and strength of character are built by neighbours and friends, by churches and sports clubs and schools, by families and community initiatives. If we want to make them stronger, perhaps we should begin there.

Confusion Era...

A Bloggin Minute
A new teaching manual available for use in some Australian schools has courted controversy, by advising teachers to scrap the words "mother" and "father", in favour of "carer" or "parent" when talking about families. The manual also advises the use of gender neutral toys, and books and activities which promote alternative family forms.

The manual, titled Learn to Include: Learning about diverse families in a primary school setting, is aimed at classes from Kindergarten to Year Three, and is funded by the crime prevention division of the New South Wales Attorney General's Department, in an attempt to increase children's sensitivity to a "diversity" of family forms.

The elimination of universally accepted concepts like "mother" and "father" in favour of the neutral "parent" or "carer" removes the essential element of relational connection which comes from being part of an intergenerational family, belonging to a mum and a dad. This approach ends up dismantling the normative framework in which children see family life.

In the first few years of school, children are formulating ideas about themselves, the world, and their place in it. Seeing oneself in relation to a mother and a father is a part of this. All children have a mother and a father, and the majority are still raised by their mum and dad. Attempting to hide this fact does a disservice to all children, regardless of their personal family background. In search of a spurious and artificial 'equality', the realities of life and the natural framework through which to view it can both be obscured.


....And just when you thought you'd heard it all, there's more...

Following the government's law change mandating the compulsory microchipping of dogs, from Lassie the farm dog to Fifi the poodle, other animals are on the agenda, as the government continues to implement its Wildlife Registration Strategy.

According to latest reports, cats will be microchipped by 2008, followed by rabbits, canaries, goldfish and 'other dangerous predators' by 2012.

"We are very concerned at the wanton and unregulated carnage going on in the environment, and we are determined to do something about it", said Ministry of Wildlife Affairs spokeswoman Bledin Hart.

"We will follow the same approach as dog microchipping" said the power-suited Ms. Hart brightly to Our Reporter, as she sat in her Wellington office,

"There is a very simple chain of logic here. The microchip will be designed to be read at a range of 2 inches. This means that, after the cat kills the baby kakapo, and if there's a DOC ranger around, and if the cat hasn't run away, and if we can catch it, then, well, provided we've got a machine, of course, then, we'll be able to see who the cat belongs to, and send the owner a very strongly worded letter indeed. A jolly good telling off, you might say." She laughs merrily, and pauses. "Unless the owner has been rather naughty, of course, and hasn't paid his registration fee".

Confederated Cat Owners spokesman A. Farmer, speaking at the Show in Gore, called the proposal "ridiculous", as "half of cat owners do not register their cats already. A $110 dollar fee is going to mean fewer registrations, all for a useless microchip that will not save one kakapo".

This does not phase Ms. Hart. "It's about interspecies partnership" she says, with an embracing gesture. "I'm sure it's going to be best for all the members of our ecological family in the long run".


These items were received in the latest "REAL ISSUES" email received from MAXIM INSTITUTE NEW ZEALAND.
If you'd like to receive them weekly sign up here: http://www.maxim.org.nz
 

A Website Teens (& mums and dads) Can Trust

Here is a website you can fully trust for teens to sort out some everyday problems. Different from the sex education taught in NZ schools, these people can be trusted to deliver messages that will serve to save you from heaps of sorrow and there is definitely NO HIDDEN AGENDA, in other words, they won't teach you that homosexuality is normal for instance.
Go to: http://www.attitude.org.nz

The Missing Ingredient IS Love

A Bloggin MinuteThursday, June 1, 2006

Where Is the Love in Sex Education?
Writers Opinion
By Dr. Ted Baehr, Publisher of MOVIEGUIDE®

HOLLYWOOD, CA (ANS) -- Every year, I have the opportunity to speak in different countries on how to make media-wise families. This year was Ukraine, which I visited a few weeks ago as part of the International Congress of the Family.

The problems in Ukraine are immense. Ukraine has the highest HIV/AIDS rate in Europe, a large white slavery prostitution trade, high alcoholism, and low wages. Its beautiful women are renowned around the world, but mainly as sex slaves and mail-order-brides in other countries.

In the midst of the conference on family issues, some of the government officials were proud that they had introduced American initiated sex education.

MOVIEGUIDE® has carried many articles exposing the fallacy of sex education. As Dr. Judith Reisman and other scientists have shown, sex education not only shows young people how to do it but also gets them excited about doing it. Thus, MOVIEGUIDE® supports abstinence, which has been proven to work, if taught properly.

But, it occurred to me, hearing about the abuses in the porn industry and the orphanages in Ukraine, that what we should propose is Love Education, which we all need. Love Education helps children learn that real satisfaction comes not from lust, which is self-centered, avaricious and often thoughtless, but from Love, which cares for the other person, supports the other person, builds memories that last, and gives long-lasting joy.

Where do we find Love Education? In the flesh, we find it in Jesus Christ, and, for more detailed information, we have the New Testament, which is the Word of God.

At its Ukraine conference, the International Congress of the Family discussed everything from sexually transmitted diseases to family planning, to the dignity of life, to the basics of sustaining a good marriage, to the importance of Christian faith.

One of their biggest concerns, however, was the influence of the western media. I was able to address those concerns and teach them the first steps toward media wisdom. Many people asked for permission to translate my MEDIA-WISE FAMILY book and its into Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Polish, etc.

In the battle for the culture, we often focus on the conflict between the various secular worldviews such as materialism and socialism. In its visit to Ukraine, however, the Congress showed that the most important worldview in winning the culture wars and redeeming the values of the media is the Christian faith and its foundation on strong biblical principles. This faith and these principles can teach everyone how to live a better life, not only in Ukraine but throughout the whole world.

What a difference it would make if sex education courses were replaced by Christian Love Education courses! And, what a difference it would make if the mass media promoted Christian Love Education rather than lustful sex education!

Divorce rates would go down, AIDS rates would go down, and abandoned children would find loving homes. Best of all, the joy of giving would melt the Scrooge-like hearts of the opulent societies of the West, including the lust-minded executives in the mass media of entertainment.

Of course, with God, all things are possible.

(c) baehr, 2006
NOTE from Dr. Ted Baehr: For more information from a Christian perspective, order the latest MOVIEGUIDE® magazine by calling 1-800-899-6684(MOVI) or visit our website at www.movieguide.org. MOVIEGUIDE® is dedicated to redeeming the values of Hollywood by informing parents about today's movies and entertainment and by showing media executives and artists that family-friendly and even Christian-friendly movies do best at the box office year in and year out. MOVIEGUIDE® now offers an online subscription to its magazine version, at www.movieguide.org. The magazine, which comes out 25 times a year, contains many informative articles and reviews that help parents train their children to be media-wise consumers. MOVIEGUIDE® also regularly broadcasts several international TV and radio programs hosted by Dr. Baehr. Also, if you want to train your family to be media-wise, call 1-800-89 9-6684 in North America to order the book, video or audio version of THE MEDIA-WISE! FAMILY, Dr. Ted Baehr's latest book. © baehr, 2001

Just a Tussey Mussey

A Bloggin Minute It is Mother's Day today and it used to be called Mothering Sunday, when the children were sent home from church with something special they'd made for their mums. It reminds me of my favourite bunch of flowers, the 'Tussey Mussey.' Preferably made up of 'found' flowers from the garden or roadside, the smaller the better, each flower is added to the bunch until a rounded bunch of perfumed colour is formed and tied at the stems with ribbons. Each one is as unique as the maker and giver of the exquisite Tussey Mussey. I hope I am presented with one :)

A Pub Was Never This Good

(I so wanted to go to this crusade!)

Thursday, May 4, 2006

They all came for God: New Zealanders come in droves to Harvest '06 with Greg Laurie

By Michael Ireland
Chief Correspondent, ASSIST News Service

CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND (ANS) -- More than 21,000 New Zealanders filled the Westpac Center Arena in Christchurch, April 28-30 to hear evangelist Greg Laurie. The event was New Zealand's first full-scale evangelistic event, making it one of the largest evangelistic outreaches in the country's history.

Over three nights, some 21,000 adults, teens, and children gathered at the arena to listen to popular music from Christian recording artists Audio Adrenaline, Steven Curtis Chapman, and The Katinas before settling in to listen intently to the message of God's forgiveness and love presented each evening by Southern California pastor and evangelist Greg Laurie.

Speaking conversationally on topics like, "Jesus and the Skeptic," "Everyday Jesus," and "Immortality," Laurie addressed spiritual issues head-on, explaining the need for a Savior and the ultimate price Jesus paid for humanity.

As Laurie described the forgiveness that is available and free to anyone who asks, over the course of the weekend more than 2,000 people made their way to the floor of the Westpac Centre to commit their lives to Christ.

The Press newspaper in Christchurch reported that Laurie gave a "straight-from-the-shoulder message which held the audience spellbound for 40 minutes."

The paper reported: "Some came for the music, some came to hear Greg Laurie, but they all came for God. Thousands of people last night packed the Westpac Centre for the first night of Harvest '06."

Harvest ’06 chairman Pastor Murray Robertson said: "Christchurch has not been visited by this caliber of preaching since Billy Graham was here in 1959. Greg Laurie connected with us as a common man, which is what the Kiwis so appreciate about him." Pastor Robertson himself came to faith in Christ at Mr. Graham's crusade in Christchurch.

Some 120 local churches worked together for two years to bring Harvest '06 with Greg Laurie to the area, and they left no stone unturned to spread word of the event throughout the South Island. Despite a population of nearly 350,000, for weeks Christchurch appeared to be blanketed in Harvest '06 bumper stickers, billboards, and bus ads, and the question everyone seemed to be asking was, "Who is Greg Laurie?"

That question came in handy during the weekend as 50 teens from Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California, called the SWAT Team (Students with a Testimony) joined with local churches to provide answers about Harvest '06.

The students, who each paid their own way to New Zealand, talked with youth at coffee shops and local hangouts, inviting them to attend the event and sharing their own powerful stories of God’s transformation in their lives. During the weekend, the SWAT Team led 150 people -- primarily youth -- to faith in Christ.

Local media also jumped on the bandwagon as curiosity about the Harvest '06 event grew. In addition to coverage from The Press, hosts from a popular rock station interviewed Greg Laurie about the event, and nationally recognized radio talk show host Simon Barnett served as the emcee for the Sunday evening program.

"The Harvest Team and Greg Laurie have elevated the awareness in our city that we need the gospel of Jesus Christ. They have come as servants and have demonstrated that there is hope for our city. We've never seen anything like this," said David MacGregor, senior pastor, Vineyard Fellowship in Christchurch.

While the first night of Harvest '06 nearly filled the Westpac Center, the Saturday night Amplify youth program was overflowing, with some 8,000 in attendance before the doors were closed, leaving outside hundreds who did not arrive in time to stake out a seat.

The latest and loudest music from alternative band Audio Adrenaline, Grammy Award-winning musician Steven Curtis Chapman, and local band Satellite was a definite draw, but it was the message from Laurie that appeared to really capture the attention of the youth in attendance.

"The youth of Christchurch have shown a great hunger to hear the word of God," said John Collins, executive director of Harvest Ministries. Indeed, by the end of the evening, 863 youth came forward to declare a decision to follow Christ -- more than 10 percent of the crowd.

At the conclusion of the three-day Harvest '06 event, Collins added, "Every pastor I've spoken to locally believes Christchurch has been profoundly impacted by this weekend's events. The sense among Christians here is that God has begun a work that will continue on long after this weekend. It is our hope and prayer that many of the young people who were introduced to Jesus Christ these last three days will grow up to impact their generation for Christ."

Harvest Crusades, known for presenting traditional Christian beliefs in a culturally relevant way that appeals to all ages, employing of-the-moment methods like Internet technology and popular Christian music, has drawn more than 3.3 million people to stadiums and arenas in the U.S., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand since 1990. Each Harvest event features a message from Greg Laurie, founder of the Harvest events and pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, Calif., one of the 15 largest churches in the U.S.

Archived web casts of Harvest '06 in Christchurch, New Zealand are available for viewing at www.harvest.org

 Harvest with Greg Laurie will hold two additional crusade events in 2006, including its 17th annual Southern California Harvest in Anaheim, Aug. 11 – 13, and a first-time visit to San Jose, California, Oct. 13 – 15.

MEDIA NOTE: For more information about the 2006 Harvest with Greg Laurie events, contact Laura Swickard McGowan at (847) 328-8009 or cellular (847) 347-5206. E-mail: laura@lauramcgowan.com; website: www.lauramcgowan.com

"Radar" O'Reilly

Tuesday, May 2, 2006

Fighting for family, life after M*A*S*H

By Scott Harrup, an associate editor of Today’s Pentecostal Evangel
Special to ASSIST News Service

SPRINGFIELD, MO (ANS) -- Gary Burghoff almost never gives interviews anymore. The actor, best known for his role as Cpl. “Radar” O’Reilly in both the movie and television series M*A*S*H, is 62 and long retired to private life.

But in a February interview with Canadian radio talk show host Drew Marshall on Oakville, Ontario’s JOY 1250, Burghoff speaks candidly about a decision he made not long after he left M*A*S*H.

“Family, to me, became the most important thing,” he says of his rationale for exiting the show that defined his career. “I was not available as a father because of my work. That doesn’t stop when the work stops. Whenever you go out as a family, you’re always torn from family to deal with public recognition.”

Burghoff turned down other offers that followed. Unfortunately, leaving M*A*S*H couldn’t save his marriage. In the late 1970s, Burghoff moved back to Connecticut, his boyhood home, and began life as a single parent of his 4-year-old daughter.

While dealing with the divorce, Burghoff lost his father. It was a dark time, but it forced him to ask some critical questions.

“My father had said when I was in New York early on struggling as an actor that if you don’t know the Bible you don’t have a foundation,” Burghoff says. “I had told him from an agnostic point of view that the Bible was a very good book, but it wasn’t the only book. But after M*A*S*H I realized he might have something. I had given my life over to the world instead of to God.”

For the next two years, Burghoff pursued an intense study of the Scriptures. It was life-changing.

“When you become that empty vessel that is ready to be filled,” he says, “the veil is lifted. You suddenly understand those words. That’s what happened. The Bible before was always an enigma to me. But now I could understand it. The Lord says, ‘Ask and you shall receive.’ And I was asking.”

Burghoff’s second marriage blessed him with two sons, but his growing faith created a distance between him and his wife.

“I’d married a wonderful woman,” he says, “but she was not walking the same Christian walk, so there was a great communication gap in the marriage.”

When they separated and she moved to California with their sons, Burghoff again put family before his own dreams. Although he had planned to return to his New England roots, he was determined to be a father to his sons.

“My choice was a very easy one,” he says. “I’m going to be a father to my kids first. Because that, like my walk with the Lord, is who I am. I’m a daddy.”

Burghoff moved across the country and lived down the street from his estranged wife for 12 years so they could raise their kids together.

“Fathers who don’t do that are sacrificing something wonderful,” he says. “A divorce is between two people, never between a parent and children. I know the Lord hates divorce, but He hates abandonment, I think, a lot more.”

Today, Burghoff enjoys traveling and promoting wildlife-related causes. His wildlife paintings reach a growing and appreciative audience. But spiritually, he keeps two points in focus -- Christian fellowship and the Word.

“Without the Word,” he says, “I’m rootless, I have no foundation. Whenever things seem bleak, I go back to that source. If art is a personal reflection of the beauty you see in life, I want to go to the source, so I go to wildlife. I do the same thing with spiritual beauty.”
Scott Harrup is an associate editor of Today’s Pentecostal Evangel, the weekly magazine of the Assemblies of God. Drew Marshall is a nationally recognized Christian broadcaster in Canada. Visit his Web site at www.drewmarshall.ca.

This is Anzac Day

This is the day Australian's and New Zealander's remember our brave soldiers who fought in wars together. There are many sad and terrible memories but also times of remembrance of friendships forged that bind us together even though there is today rivalry in the sporting arena. We are bound together and remember the heroes who have now gone and the heroes of today who continue to put their lives on the line for our freedom. I salute them and thank them for sacrificing their lives for us. From God's book the Bible His words ring true today as they did 2,000 years ago when He sacrificed His life to give us eternal life. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
We will not forget.

When All Your Chocolate Goog-Googs Have Gone

aint you glad you've still got Jesus AND Radio Rhema or LifeFM, or some other Christian Radio to listen to 'til your Saviour comes for you? I was looking up @ the clouds and saying to my littlest sonshine Today, 'I'm ready for when Jesus comes and I know I will yell and scream and excitedly say, 'come on, here He is, let's go!!' He just said, 'yes mum and this Lego machine I have built will be used for His army."

So You Gained The Whole World

but you have now lost your soul. Was it worth it to be liberal? so 'new age'? so humanist? To do things that were morally wrong because you had the power to do so, you were allowed to, and maybe you needed to put more money in your bank..to cloth yourself..to put food in your tummy/fridge? or buy more drugs or alcohol? You are worth so much to Jesus Christ who gave His all for your life! Don't ruin your own life or those of others, you are so precious in His sight. If you want to learn more please check out this site: http://www.examineyourself.com

Media Stooping To Sewer Level

A Bloggin Minute
C4 and TV 3, aka Canwest, are in cahoots in screening a TV programme that portrays a 'statue of the virgin Mary' menstruating. Who are the crooked, perverted, boofheads behind this type of television? To what level below the surface of common decency would they grovel to, to make my kids even remotely interested enough to watch their TV stations?
I support 100% the Catholic church in calling for a boycott of C4, and TV3 and anything that those stations advertise, if they go ahead and screen this muck and any other muck they screen now and in the future. Where are the howls of protests from the Ministry of Womens Affairs about the 'Bloody Mary' programme?The women's groups and all those staunch feminist's out there? Just a strange silence, when it suits them, of course...

Deceiving and Being Deceived

We have now in New Zealand a Doctor, a GP, Neil Benson who wants to open a brothel..link here--->http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10366570
In the medical profession too there is this blindness to the evil pervasive in our land. And deception too, Mr Benson likens brothel -keeping to owning and selling alcohol in a pub!
Now teachers in our kindergartens are to be trained in self-defence by the Ministry of Education, this when the government is about to consider new laws to prevent parents smacking their children. Link here--->http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10366679
Instead of government timewasting on anti-smacking law/ birdflus and other sky pies, why don't they ban explicit sex and violence screened on our free-to-air television programmes, and also movies/dvd's/ videos and games coming into our country? And cease government-financed abortions/ killing babies in the womb, the unseen minorities, the victims of the "Just Me" diversity and a most horrible violation against humanity.
In the USA, TV programmes like 'Sex In The City' are only available on pay-to-view channels so why is this rubbish able to beamed into our living room where my kids could easily access it? The government law-makers, the media, brothel-keepers and dodgy doctors, et al, need to be warned about tempting people to sin.

Armed Soldiers To Guard New Zealand Wombs?

The Green Party of New Zealand and a chorus of other environmentalists, noticably of late, the homosexual Labour Party Department of Conservation Member of Parliament, Chris Carter, are calling for the Government to send the New Zealand navy to the Southern Ocean and to exert pressure on the Japanese to put a halt to their whaling expedition.
When thousands of baby New Zealander's are slaughtered by abortion procedures annually in this country you'd think the activist's against whaling would get their priorities right in where their 'protection hearts' ought to be active.
So, can we expect the Armed Forces to be sent to surround the Abortion Clinics and hospitals to protect innocent babies from slaughter, or better still, the Government to stop illegal abortion-on-demand?
If our country is to have any credibility in the world, it must be seen to be doing it's utmost to protect all New Zealand people first, even our as yet, unborn.

Jesus Christ IS God's Gift For Us

How do we get our heads around a free gift, something like when a stranger stands on a street corner and hands you a $100 bill? You did nothing to earn it but you take it probably willingly, but most likely you'd be thinking maybe it's a fake or, someone will soon come out from behind a tree and say, "Smile, you're on Candid Camera"...
Well the fact that Jesus Christ died on a cross to take the full brunt of all of our sins is hard to comprehend, after all why would anyone do that for us? Well, no ordinary bloke would, however, Jesus IS God and He has His own way of doing things, totally different to the way we do things and I'm rapt about that because I can put my faith in Him who knows everything and who truly does have the Whole World In His Hands. The peace and the joy truly knowing that, is just one of the freedom gifts that comes with the Christian tag attached to me.
Christmas Day rolls around every year and it is a wonderful occasion for other's to hear about Jesus and His birth and short life on earth. However, what the world needs to know more about is that He is still here, as the Holy Spirit, living in the believer's who are spreading the Good News about the Saviour of The World.
HAVE A JOYOUS CHRISTMAS EVERYONE AND MAY YOU TOO COME TO KNOW THE ONE I KNOW

The 3- Inch Bird

Young son recounted the doings of the family cat found to be stashing two of it's birds inside the house this morning...son finds the '3-inch bird' first with hundreds of feathers scattered everywhere and he is wondering if the birds have the bird flu. When I ask, why? he says because he is feeling itchy all over...and cos the birds are kinda, coughing. When gingerly, I ask, why are they coughing, he says they're like, chirping err, err real loud and that the 15-cm bird's head was in the cat's mouth but then it slipped out and then out of the cat's paws and went straight out the doors...I'm left thinking bird flu would be a better option for some birdies.

A Millstone Round The Neck

The Lord Jesus Christ says if someone causes His people to sin they might as well commit suicide, choose to have a millstone placed round their neck and be cast into the deepest sea.
Another prostitute has been brutally murdered in New Zealand and it is obvious that a life isn't worth much to many people, the murder stats are certainly reflecting that.
It is just as well Jesus Christ came to earth to be our Saviour, we only have to accept Him in Faith, if we do we are assured of eternal life, if we choose not to then we continue on to eternal death and destruction, the millstone round our neck and cast in to hell. The ultimate sin, the sin of unbelief.

A Bloggin Minute:The Children are Eating Dog Faeces, arn't they?

A Bloggin MinuteWell yes, one did, forced to, over a seven-week period by his mother and two of her friends.http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3490069a12855,00.html
This type of horrendous crime against children is becoming all too frequent in our small country with a population of only 4Million. It never used to be like this. Things have progressively declined morally since homosexuality was legalised in this country in 1984 and our liberal abortion laws enable thousands of baby New Zealander's to be murdered each year. Recently, the liberal Labour Government has also allowed Civil Unions, the closest they could get, at the moment, to homosexual and lesbian marriage, and they have legalised prostitution and pimping openly on our streets and brothel operating and keeping, in our neighbourhoods. We have drug runners using our soft-touch country now as a major trafficking route, yes it's open slather in what 'was' affectionately known as, Godzone!
I heard a talk-back radio host say,".. but we have the lowest unemployment in the world and the immigrant's coming here are saying this country is so great". Well, they would say that wouldn't they when the countries they are leaving are currently worse than our own, but will they be worse much longer? Or, will our country be worn-down completely? and then where will we go, to India perhaps? South Africa, Zimbabwe, China, how's about Thailand...

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing Down

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing Down(New Zealand) Parliament loses opportunity to protect marriage

Yesterday, Parliament voted 73-47 to defeat the Marriage (Gender Clarification) Bill that would have defined in legislation that marriage is between one man and one woman. This Bill would have sent a clear message that the traditional definition of marriage is valued and protected in this country.

Parties treated the vote as a conscience issue, although there were some clear voting patterns. All Labour MPs, except one voted against the Bill; National MPs were split 36 in favour of the Bill and 12 opposed; New Zealand First were split, five in favour and two opposed; Jim Anderton, the Green and Maori MPs opposed the Bill; and all United Future MPs and both Act MPs voted in support of the legislation.

Many MPs were convinced by the argument that this legislation is unnecessary because marriage is already defined in our courts as a union between one man and one woman. Whilst technically true, this argument missed the real need for and importance of this Bill.

When similar legislation was passed in Australia last August, the Attorney General, Mr. Peter Ruddock stated it this way: "The bill is necessary because there is significant community concern about the possible erosion of the institution of marriage...The government has consistently reiterated the fundamental importance of the place of marriage in our society. It is a central and fundamental institution. It is vital to the stability of our society and provides the best environment for the raising of children."

This was an opportunity for our Parliament to show it's support for the place of marriage in New Zealand - an opportunity sadly lost.

(The above post was taken from an email from Maxim Institute, (http://www.maxim.org.nz) dated 8 December 2005. Real Issues #186. Sign up for them on the site.)

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing Down

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing DownSupreme Court to Consider Parents Rights
from the November 29, 2005 eNews issue. www.khouse.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Supreme Court will hear a major case on the abortion issue this Wednesday. In 2003, Planned Parenthood took New Hampshire's new parental notification law to court, where it was overturned. The nation's highest court will now hear arguments to determine whether parents' rights over the medical care of their children has more importance than the rights of minor girls to get secret abortions.
New Hampshire's law is simple. It requires at least one parent to be notified, either in person or by certified mail, 48 hours before a minor daughter can legally obtain an abortion. It includes an exception to save the minor's life, as well as a judicial bypass if the girl can convince a judge that she is mature enough to make the decision on her own. A lower court struck down the law days before it was to take effect because it failed to include an exception for the "health" of the girl, and because the exception to save her life was deemed too narrow.
While health exceptions sound like good things, in reality they simply gut laws like this one. "Health" exceptions and "life" exceptions are completely different. If a girl is going to die because the growing embryo has remained inside her Fallopian tube, then an emergency procedure may be necessary before a parent can be notified. However, a child's "health" might include anything. According to the Supreme Court's definition in Doe v. Bolton (1973), "health" can include physical, psychological, emotional, familial, educational or financial "health". A health exception makes laws like these veritably useless.
The Supreme Court's decision in this case, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, will be extremely significant, and will have an effect on other laws that restrict abortions. Right now, thirty-four states have laws that require a parent to either be notified or to give their consent before their minor daughter goes through an abortion. Another nine states have passed similar laws, but have had them struck down by local courts.
This case will also cause the Supreme Court to revisit other abortion-related cases, including Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), in which the Supreme Court struck down Nebraska's partial birth abortion ban (5-4) because the law was vaguely worded and did not include a health exception. The case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), another parental/spousal notification case, will also be reconsidered.
Laws that require teenagers to notify their parents or guardians before getting abortions are just good policy. Nobody would argue that minor girls should be allowed to get their tonsils removed without parental consent. Parents have the primary responsibility over the health and welfare of their children. They will be the ones dealing with any harmful physical and emotional effects an abortion might have on their scared, young daughters. They have a right to know their daughter is planning to have an abortion and to have time to discuss with her other options she might not have considered.
"Laws like this are extremely important for protecting vulnerable children against coercion, deception, and the damaging emotional and physical consequences of abortion," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center of Law and Justice. "It makes no sense to permit children to undergo a medical procedure like abortion without their parents being notified. To permit children to get abortions without parental notification is not only legally flawed, but bad public policy. This is an important opportunity for the high court to step in and protect the health and well being of our children."

Related Links:
  •   Supreme Court Should Uphold Parental Notification Law for Children Seeking Abortions - ACLJ Press Release
  •   Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England - Duke Law
  •   Abortion Case Offers U.S. Chief Justice Chance to Reshape - Bloomberg

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing Down

A Bloggin Minute: Wearing DownA Judicial Assault on Parenthood
Michael Medved

In an appalling travesty of justice, the Washington State Supreme Court has ordered a husband and wife to share custody of their ten-year-old daughter with a third parent: a lesbian lover the mother rejected four years ago!

The two women lived together when the baby was born, but the mother left homosexuality to marry the biological father of the girl. The court, however, anointed the one-time lesbian lover as a "de facto parent" with the same rights as the mother--despite the fact that she never adopted the girl legally when they lived together.

This decision not only trashes the rights of biological parents, but also slights the significance of legal adoption. It grants special status to a homosexual relationship--even when discarded--while clearly ignoring the best interests of a child.

How would a ten year old benefit from a court-created third parent to whom she bears no biological or adoptive relationship?



Michael Medved is the host of The Michael Medved Show.

Michael Medved is the author of Right Turns: Unconventional Lessons from a Controversial Life.

Crave Te Kaikoura

A Bloggin MinuteThe blessings of having fisherman friends is especial when they bring you fish fresh from the ocean and last night we were given some cooked crayfish. I was hogging into one to break my fast this morning and in walks sonshine and tells me that what I am eating is s--t, I said no, it is just the gravy and he said it is s--t and I am beginning to lose my appetite, tis just as well the tail is long gone into my tummy so I place what is left of my koura's hardbelly into a plastic bag and tightly do it up and into the bin it went, I hope the weather isn't too hot between now and next rubbish day...back inside son is tucking in to the last x3 crays and discarding the bodies. They're back in the fridge where they'll be eaten, in private, later.

Wearing Down

I have noticed with the recent trend among the mostly liberal members of parliament here in New Zealand, a 'wearing down' of what we have considered good and upright people serving in important places in our social services departments. I include here our police force and anything else where Joe or Josephine Public has to go for help, for guidance, for an anchor, someone to look up to when you havn't got anyone to trust. Now, I have not always been a follower of Jesus Christ and so I have not always had Him as my built-in anchor, but I know that when the crap hits the fan we need the right people to look to, good solid upright citizens. Well, I mean no offence to anyone but the police have a current member who is upfront in a terrible heavy metal band that exudes violence from every pore and speaker, is this comfort for the needy?...and then there is Georgina, formerly George? Beyer, who the Labour Party lauds as the worlds first- transgendered -Member of Parliament, and now is the Chairperson of the Government's Social Services Committee. I don't doubt for a moment that she/ he is capable of doing that job as chair, however, as an anchor for so many of our people who are hitting the gutters big time, absolutely not. We need very straight people right now in every helping agency, kids can see right through the wishy-washy hairy-fairyness of these liberal's who delight in wearing down our right to righteous government.

An Aging Potato Masher

I've been around long enough to see many sizes and varieties of spud/potato/murphy, whatever you want to call em, and I've found them all different upon cooking/tasting. Some are tasteless, some have eyes that wern't there when first placed in the pot and some, well some just deserve a darn good mashing! So over the years I have variously mashed with a stainless steel masher, some with holes in em and some had aWlook to them but now I use a plastic one and it's a wee beaut, well so I thought. But after all these years of presuming I had acquired a nack with the spudata's mashings my son tells me his friend's mum makes the most delicious mashed potatoes and she uses lots of butter, milk and finishes her mashing with a good fork whip-around! I was hurt, I was, I just said, quietly to sonshine, Well, I have mashed many a spud in my days and I used to use the fork, the dollops of butter and much cream as well as milk in them but, now I am an aging potato masher, doing the mashings well past my prime and so, if you want that type of mash then do it yourself....oh no mum, said he, they're still edible and that's good enough for me.

..Oh And That's Lady Cadaver Over There..

On display in New York are some real bodies in various stages of decompose and I wonder, who would give permission to have people ogling them in that state? Would you? It is bad enough seeing mumified men, women and children in museums, hardly the final and private resting place an Egyptian had in mind surely...oh well if it will help people give up smoking when they see the totally yuck cancer-ridden cadaver in the exhibition then it will have served it's purpose.
I did look @ the picture of one exhibit in sporting pose and thought, well that will never be me cos I don't do sport.

Get Back Onto That Treadmill!

My worst fears came upon me @ the gym yesterday...a lady climbed aboard the treadmill beside me and proceeded to press those buttons and I saw out the corner of my eye that she was walkin mighty fast and then I realised she was trying to alter the speed, she was going 7.7 k's by this time and still walking-as-fast-as-her-legs-could-walk-her... next minute her arms were flailling all over the place and before I could turn my machine off to help her she had hit the tread and was plonked onto the carpet with her hands out-stretched onto the mill...I stopped her machine and asked her if she was okay and she replied, 'yes, I'm fine" and promptly got on again, just as as one is told to do when their horse has bucked them off, and away she went as if nothing had happened. I was more perplexed and have decided I will attend the gym @ 6:00am in future when older ladies are still tucked up in bed in their nighties :)

hangon a bloggin minute mate ;)

Welcome to blogger-inn, take a seat, close your eyes and prepare for heaven. Some minute or another you will hear some soothing stuff, soothing to your (hopefully not itching) ears....