tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5426187053282004467.post1553539369758944112..comments2023-08-23T00:11:34.071+10:00Comments on The Australian Heroin Diaries: Questioning Christian Behaviour at Beyond 2008Terry Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12331435244789111209noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5426187053282004467.post-52104929638658544272009-10-20T15:01:02.751+11:002009-10-20T15:01:02.751+11:00Shit .. i just want my prescription heroin so i ca...Shit .. i just want my prescription heroin so i can go to work and look respectable enough in the house of Jesus PTY LTD ha... you lot can prey/pray in the gutter all you like:)<br />Damn i missed Norm Stampers visit, why is it ya only find out about these things after the fact.. we need a central "events calendar" so people know where to congregate/share ideas...<br />Also i checked the newspapers in March RE UN summit for drugs/policy<br />..never found one mention of it<br />probably swept under the carpet along with the other hereticsUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14291599226292766910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5426187053282004467.post-3854358671843981982009-06-19T22:12:04.759+10:002009-06-19T22:12:04.759+10:00If you have any regard for objectivity you will of...If you have any regard for objectivity you will of course post my Vienna speech so that readers can decide for themselves.<br /><br />STATEMENT OF CONCERN<br /><br />Members of the International Taskforce on Strategic Drug Policy attending the Beyond 2008 NGO Forum applaud the efforts and enterprise of the organisers of this event. <br /><br />However, if we as a forum of NGOs purport to speak for the world’s NGOs, we must have necessarily, from the beginning, used a different process of representation to this forum than the process that has been used.<br /><br />The stated starting assumption of this forum was that it represent a ‘balance’ of NGO ideological outlook and engagement. This is very different to a democratic model in which the weight of representation in this room regarding drug policy would closely equate to the surveyed weight of NGO opinion on various issues back home.<br /> <br />Such an alternate democratic model of representation would require that:<br /><br />• Every relevant NGO, not just a selection of NGOs, be invited to provide input through a transparent survey process. In Australia just 142 of more than 300 NGOs were invited to do the original survey <br /><br />• This survey would extensively survey the weight of the varying drug policy opinions between NGOs and quantify responses. There was no quantification of response in our Australian consultation process <br /><br />• Once responses to the survey were quantified, representation to this forum would then be chosen to reflect the outcomes. Our Australian representation was chosen on the basis of who could afford to attend (evidence attached) and not in parity to any quantification of varying views<br /><br />Without the very necessary quantification of views, there is a less than transparent process for choosing representatives. A thoroughly democratic process would have yielded a representation where all contentious issues could have been quickly solved by a vote, and a majority voice recorded. This is not to deny that our processes here have not been without value.<br /><br />Alternately, this forum’s assumption of a balanced ideological representation allows certain perspectives to punch above their weight in the achievement of consensus if, for instance, the real NGO community back home votes 70/30 on that issue. Our concern is that representation according to an artificial imposition of balance, rather than democratic representation, would likely have yielded different recorded outcomes on some of the more contentious issues before this forum.<br /><br />Gary Christian<br />SECRETARY<br />Drug Free AustraliaDFASecretaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03723302312402270250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5426187053282004467.post-946155703455437882008-07-21T09:27:00.000+10:002008-07-21T09:27:00.000+10:00Best post I've read in a long time. An officia...Best post I've read in a long time. An official reply to Mr. Christians 'Jihad on HM' from the Beyond Forum couldn't do better. <BR/><BR/>We have our own "Christian warrior" moralists convinced [to quote DFA phrase writer, Bill Muehlenberg] "Moral civil war is waging in Australia over... sex, porn, euthanasia, homosexuality, etc...". Add NSPs, MMT, MSIC, drug education. We tolerate this intellectual cousin of barbarity due to political correctness.<BR/><BR/>We need to respect, that people who believe the world is 6,000 years old, God literally made man from clay, fighting climate change is blasphemy and JC is coming to take them home are speaking in Australian parliaments, US Congress, some are running the White House and now, for us, the UN review process of drug policy success & related harms.<BR/><BR/>The psychology we're missing is these groups fear both decline of society if we do not reverse many democratic freedoms, <B>and</B> associate secular values with immorality and disregard for life. It's not a minority or eccentric view: Howard ruled us with excess moralism because, yes he's a dick, but secondly he was afforded the power of the Christian right. <BR/><BR/>The reason we fail when we trust others, is because we don't understand the power of ideology. Sometimes, those of us who understand democracy, minority rights and the value of education and law reform, are blinded by our own awareness. Ignorance falls in the face of education. Belief has no reason, nor evidence. Only bias and error of assumption. As Mr. Christian notes himself, drug users deserve no human rights ["drug user rights = the right to harm as many as they please"] - which themselves are "a metaphysical illusion".<BR/><BR/>Christian had no intent ever of forsaking his role in this moral war. His semantics over democracy [which IMHO, suggest he doesn't understand it] don't so much show poor understanding, as an egocentric view. <I>Society must act, to restrict the rights of users to achieve the aims of morality, behaviour, appearance, etc, by forcing use to stop. This then achieves the "best" for society, not individuals whose rights are illusory, because society must be in total morally pure.</I> The logic of "compassionate" jail sentences - as it is on the DFA website - is the same as lighting the heretics pyre: to "save them". <BR/><BR/>His 'speech' serves to support ongoing rejection of HM, as he can now claim he has cogently argued why the process was flawed. Of course it's flawed, if he <I><B>believes</B></I> outcomes are inherently wrong. Which, he sincerely does, being convinced modernity and free choice equate to a clash of morality.<BR/><BR/>If Mr. Christian can name me one compassionate deed done in the name of his superstitions that cannot be done by a "non-believer", or a life-long drug user just for the sake of doing so, I'll happily join him. I'm sure you'll find none.<BR/><BR/>Flipping the coin, by the time you finish reading this sentence, you've already thought of an inhumane deed done in the name of religio-superstition.<BR/><BR/>I guess that's a longish way of saying, I'm not surprised and our greatest problem is being politically correct, ignorant, trusting and continue to associate institutions of superstition with socially cohesive outcomes.<BR/><BR/>Paul Gallagher:<BR/>DFA WatchFiresnakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05460932868431102039noreply@blogger.com