Silent Night

Oh dear:

The survey of 1,000 school children aged between five and seven years old reveals that 36 per cent don’t know whose birthday we celebrate on December 25 - with over one in five believing the festivities are in aid of Simon Cowell's birthday.

Read the piece. It gets worse:

In addition, the research by online retailer Woolworths.co.uk found 24 per cent of children believe that Brentwood in Essex, home to TOWIE stars favourite nightclub the Sugar Hut, was the location of Jesus' birth.

Another quarter think Jesus was born at 10 Downing Street or Buckingham Palace, with only 28 per cent of those polled able to name Bethlehem as the correct birth place...

...The confusion over festive traditions are not just confined to the nativity story with over a quarter of those polled thinking Lapland was the name of a London nightclub and 35 per cent could not even name Rudolph as one of Santa’s reindeer, despite his famous red nose.

Instead the average British child thinks the reindeer are named after celebrities, including Tulisa Contostavlos, David Beckham and Pippa Middleton...

'We’re not saying that celebrity culture has ruined the traditions of Christmas but from these results it certainly seems to have had an effect on how children think about the big day!'

They may not want to say it by I will.

Celebrity culture has ruined the traditions of Christmas and many other aspects of society.

-- Nora

Race To The Bottom

Columnist Andrew Bolt, a critic of the Stolen Generation meme has often asked people to name 10 Aborigines who have been stolen from their families for racist reasons.

Well the Full Court of Australia has come close to providing the first truly documented case:

THE Family Court has declared a "notably fair" man to be a "proud Aborigine" despite both his parents saying they are white.

The court was asked to consider the matter after the man, who was raised white but began identifying as an Aborigine in 1999, got an Irish backpacker pregnant.

She wanted to go home to Ireland with their baby daughter, but the Family Court is required by law to give special consideration to Aboriginal children, and their need to retain links to their culture and heritage.

This would normally mean that an Aboriginal child could not be taken out of Australia to be raised by a non-Aboriginal parent.

After a decision and an appeal, the child was allowed to leave with her mother to Ireland.

-- Nora

Repent At Leisure

Whingers who complain that social conservatives want to 'take us back to the 1950s' might want to take a look at this piece from the Daily Mail.

Problem families are each costing the taxpayer an astonishing £75,000 every year, new figures reveal today.

Ministers have been horrified by research showing that on average £9billion is spent each year on 120,000 families blighted by jobless parents and truanting children.

More than two-thirds of this is devoted to protecting children – via social care and child support – and tackling the crime and anti-social behaviour such families often generate.

Oh my.

What to do?

Well why not go back to the 1950s? The majority of children born to parents who are married, the majority of households with the breadwinner in work, less crime.

To be sure the genie is out of the bottle but any modern government that fails to endorse and strengthen marriages and whole families (mum, dad and the kids) and work to create an improved economy and the employment it brings, becomes directly culpable for the disintegration of prosperity and social order.

-- Nora

UPDATE:
Desperately sad. Completely avoidable.

And by the time Kelsey was 17 she was dead – strangled by Willcocks in an alcohol-fuelled row over claims of sleeping around.

In the words of his barrister, ‘they were much too young, both of them’. Stuart Driver QC added: ‘It was a disastrous cocktail, because they had powerful adult feelings but the immaturity of children.’

Yesterday at Chester Crown Court, Willcocks was jailed for a minimum of 16 years after being convicted of murder.

It's All About Context

The Facebook page of the T-Base store at Sunshine Plaza, Maroochydore, features a photo of a boy wearing a "Boobies make me smile" T-shirt, and the store stocks tees with nipple-exposed shots of Kate Moss.

Adidas Global said there was no move to withdraw the T-shirt but they told The Sunday Mail they apologised to consumers affronted by the design.

Owner of the T-Base store claimed the store made the T-shirt specifically for the boy at his mother's request.

"We don't do sleazy," she said. "That was just for a laugh ... I don't sell the porn-style shirts - only artistic ones like the Kate Moss item."

People who know Nicky and I well would be the last to call us prudes. We have a playful attitude to nudity and sex as some of our classic pinup entries on Nifty Knick Knacks demonstrates.

So our endorsement of the Australian Christian Lobby's objection to the sale of what the Sunday Mail describes as 'sleazy T-shirts' is not hypocritical but logical.

Our society quite correctly regulates the age of consent for sex on the basis that one should enter a sexual relationship with a degree of maturity and that children are too physically and mentally vulnerable and immature to develop a healthy sexuality.

We quite rightly deplore paedophiles but how much do we unwittingly groom our children through the exposure to highly sexualised images in the public space and then get all surprised when teenage girls are sexting - thus turning themselves into child pornography producers?

In this case, if the owner of the T-Base store is correct and the mother of the child (he looks about 10 years old to me) had the T-shirt made for him, then I would be questioning the woman's fitness as a mother. Is there a bit of an Oedipal thing happening? What message is she giving her son with respect seeing girls and women as mere body parts? How will this impact on his ability to develop healthy relationships as he gets older?

The owner of the store is being disingenuous is suggesting that she 'doesn't do porn' and that the nude images on the T-shirts are 'art'. Indeed they may very well be art, but context is the thing.

On a gallery wall where adults can make the determination for themselves whether their children are mature enough to appreciate the work is context is one thing, having the images thrust in front of them is quite another.

Also, a further difference - are these people wearing T-shirts of nudes because they're art lovers but because they like the shock value or the mobile titillation of wearing a bit of tit and arse?

In the privacy of one's own home one can wear (or not wear) anything one chooses but in a public space we all have the responsibility to be mindful of others and to be as 'inoffensive' as possible to maintain civility in our society.

-- Nora

Fall For Anything

Quick! Bring out the smelling salts!

A Hervey Bay mother swoons when she discovers that her Year 8 daughter has brought home... a 32 year old boyfriend?... Drugs?... A busload of OWS protestors?... Syphillis?

Quelle horreur, what could possibly cause her to go on a "crusade" right up to Education Queensland's head office?

Birgette Linding said she was mortified when her daughter came home earlier this year and recounted how Gideons Bibles had been handed out to students at the end of a Year 8 assembly at Urangan State High School.

How shocking.

And how quickly the anti-religious haters come out in comments, but also adhering to the law of unintended consequences John of Townsville's comment is a revelation: "Good, religion and the bible have no place in Queensland schools." So it would seem.

"Religion (by which they mean Christianity) is unscientific," they cry - ignoring the fact that modern science owes a significant debt to Christianity which provided most of the founding principles of science with the acknowledgement that a rational God created the world rationally and that those rational principles could be observed, repeated and understood.

These anti-Christian bigots are equally as sanctimonious as the religiousfolk they decry, smug as they are in their rigid belief system that all life evolved from nothing and that the reason we're here is because 'gravity did it'.

"We're far to logical, smart, clever, rational to believe in a sky fairy," they argue.

And yet, unmoored by the Christian belief system to use as a framework for rationality or as a foundation for ethics, these same people become easy prey for other gods - particularly Gaia The Earth Fairy who got a shout out this week at the United Nations Climate Change conference in Durbin, South Africa at which our own Climate Change Minister Greg Combet attended (carbon-neutrally, of course).

From the conference manifesto:

Rights of mother earth
74. Ensure respect for the intrinsic laws of nature.
75. The recognition and defence of the rights of Mother Earth to ensure harmony
between humanity and nature, and that their will be no commodification of the functions of nature, therefore no carbon market will be developed with that purpose.

Compare this to the instruction given to man in Genesis to have dominion over the earth.

That not is to say that we trash the planet, anymore than a logical, rational human being would trash their own house. But what it does mean, as generations of people before us knew, we are to use the resources it contains to improve our lives and the lives of those around us.

This Gaia-mad, quasi-scientific, pseudo-religion demands the opposite. And if you're poor, and life is a today-to-today struggle keeping body and soul together, you're less likely to consider helping others or have the resources to do so even if you were inclined.

And any propensity to charity (particularly one which cannot be reciprocated) makes no sense within a Darwinian framework in which survival of the fittest is the only law.

So what purpose does it serve to condemn humanity to a hell it can avoid? There's a question for another day.

Such a world governed as the Gaian adherents would have it would not be a nice place to live - but get used to it folks, without the Christian world view and the compassion and grace it teaches, your world is about to get even uglier.

Oh, and a final comment to Our Lady of the Perpetually Offended, Birgette Linding - you are under no obligation to read the Bible yourself, neither is your daughter. If you don't like it, don't look.

And a few questions: Why are you so afraid of the Bible? Are you afraid that if your daughter reads it that she will find something wonderful and life changing? Are you usually so narrow minded?

-- Nora

Family Lies

Oh no.... we're not trying to redefine marriage and family...

‘By painting the traditional family as a tiny minority this report is giving a false picture of life in Britain. It makes one wonder what their agenda is.

-- Nora

Wolf?

The media is filled with implicit praise today as yet another school child proudly reports escaping the clutches of yet another slavering predator.

I'm sorry to be the one to ask the question - did this event actually occur?

This is the latest in a long line of child abduction alerts on the Gold Coast over the past few months, not uncoincidentally occurring in the aftermath of the discovery of the remains of Daniel Morcombe and the subsequent arrest of a suspect in his abduction and killing.

There is no doubt that the Daniel Morcombe case is true and tragic and his parents' attempts to bring something positive from the event through a child safety foundation in their son's name is very commendable indeed.

However I believe there is a link in the recent rise in reporting incidents and the statewide school tour by the Morcombes.

Children, as we know, are susceptible to suggestion. They are also keen to impress their peers and their adults and will either embellish stories or make them up from whole cloth which is why it is important to deal with lying at a very young age.

Could it be that the reports of attempted abductions could very well be a form of mass hysteria unwittingly encouraged by parents and the media?

I don't believe these children are lying for any malicious reason, I believe that at heart they want to demonstrate to their teachers and parents that they understand the 'stranger danger' message and what better way to do that than by giving the adults from whom they want approval, a real life scenario that demonstrates the their ability to look after themselves?

This is why educators who encounter claims of sexual abuse are counselled by psychologists to be very careful in evaluating those claims and give clues to look out for.

Also of concern is that an innocent enquiry by an adult to a child for directions, for example, can result in a witch hunt that ruins the lives and reputations of innocent people as in this example:

One incident in Livonia involved a tow-truck driver who assaulted a man he had seen asking two boys on the street for directions. He turned out to be a tire salesman on a business trip from Akron, Ohio, who had gotten lost with no knowledge of the slayings.

The fact of the matter is, children are more likely to be abused by people they know - whether they be someone online who has cultivated a relationship with your child, a teacher, sports coach or a family friend.

Child welfare is a serious issue and adults have a responsibility to address with issue soberly and seriously, making sure that we allow children to not only be safe, but to feel safe.

Children rely on the adults in their lives to keep their world safe which in turn gives them confidence to grow, learn and explore. If adults and the media are hysterical, fear-filled reactionaries, then what hope do our children have?

-- Nora

UPDATE: Girl's abduction report 'invented'. Told you so.

Why Indeed?

"I don't know why but we're seeing a lot of teenage girls exposing themselves on web cameras...

Why? Here's Exhibit A:



UPDATE: It's interesting that a rethink of pop culture mores occurs when one becomes a parent.

This from renowned British actor Sir David Jason:

‘Take the adverts – I was watching SpongeBob, a favourite cartoon of ours, but suddenly a scent advert came on with this girl stripping off as she walks towards the camera. It’s done for mums but they forget a lot of girls are watching these powerful images.’

Marriage - Not a Gay Ole Time

This weekend the ALP national conference discusses, amongst other things, whether to adopt gay marriage as part of its platform, hot on the heels of Queensland's Labor Government introducing civil partnerships for homosexuals.

We're told that it's about 'equality' and 'tolerance' and 'respect' and 'rights' and that to disagree with gay marriage makes one immoral.

Funny isn't it, how ideas can be twisted so that which was once immoral is now moral and many of those who are against same sex marriage (SSM), swamped by the speed that this fundamental societal shift has occurred, struggle to articulate their reasons against it.

Let's demolish some of the arguments for same sex marriage:

The state has no right to discriminate in recognising adult relationships
The principle argument for SSM is that the state has no right to prohibit any adult to enter into a relationship with any other adult.

Well the state already discriminates with respect to relationships between adults. A brother and sister cannot marry; a father and adult daughter cannot marry; a man cannot have multiple wives; a woman cannot have multiple husbands.

The reason for this is plain (watch this space, I believe in the next 5-10 years polygamists and adult incest supporters will agitate for equal 'rights' to marry).

From the state's perspective children who are born to incestuous couples are likely to have medical conditions which the state will have to provide for. Children of polygamous families are often not supported by their father, thus proving a greater welfare drain.

The state also recognises that children raised by their biological mother and father in a committed life-long relationship have better social, educational and financial outcomes than children raised in other circumstances.

Yes, children are raised by solo parents and go on to do okay, (Nicky and I are two examples) but it is nonetheless the truth that children raised by their parents have social and financial advantages that others do not.

The state regulates marriage for public health and welfare.

Marriage is about recognising the right to love who we want and not about raising children or if it is, childless heterosexual couples don't have a right to marriage either
This is a specious argument if there ever was one. And one which (deliberately?) misunderstands the contractual nature of marriage covenant.

Let's take a look at those traditional wedding vows that form the cornerstone of what most people understand as marriage:

my pledge to stay by your side ...
in sickness and in health,
in joy and in sorrow, as well as
through the good times and the bad.
I promise to love you without reservation, forsaking all others,
comfort you in times of distress,
encourage you to achieve all of you goals,
laugh with you and cry with you,
grow with you in mind and spirit,
always be open and honest with you,
and cherish you for as long as we both shall live.

The undiscussed nature of homosexual (both gay and lesbian) relationships is twofold:

• They're short lived. Homsexual relationships are less likely to last 'until death do us part'. In fact a they're unlikely to last to their 7th anniversary with the majority of relationship in gay men lasting about six months (Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Says," Washington Blade (February 27, 04): 12.); according to a 1988 survey, lesbians fare even worse with the average relationship petering out in less than 5 years; In Australia the average length of a marriage is 32 years. There is no evidence that granting state sanctioned marriage will improve the longevity of these homosexual relationships. Very, very few will last 'til death caused by advanced old age


• They're rarely monogamous. Now there's the real elephant in the room. Monogamy is a real struggle for gay men and a high number of lesbianstoo. By contrast a survey published in the Journal of Sex Research found that 77 percent of married men and 88 percent of married women had remained faithful to their marriage vows. (Michael W. Wiederman, "Extramarital Sex: Prevalence and Correlates in a National Survey," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 170.)

I'm now going to introduce the Kardashian Law. It similar to Godwin's Law in which 'as an online argument grows longer and more heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will bring up Adolf Hitler or the Nazis. When such an event occurs, the person guilty of invoking Godwin's Law has effectively forfeited the argument.'

The Kardashian's Law works on a similar principle in which 'as an online argument on gay marriage grows longer and more heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will bring up the failed relationship of a celebrity as an example of normal heterosexual relationship or marriage. When such an event occurs, the person guilty of invoking Kardashian's Law has effectively forfeited the argument.'

An example of this pops up on Facebook every so often:

"Let me get this straight...Charlie Sheen can make a "porn family", Kelsey Grammer can end a 15 year marriage over the phone, Larry King can be on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55 hour marriage, Kim Kardashian can get a divorce after 72 days of marriage, Jesse James and Tiger Woods, while married, were having sex with EVERYONE. Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institution of marriage? Really? Re-post if you are proud to support equal rights."

The examples quoted here say more about the narcissistic and toxic culture of the entertainment and celebrity industry than it does about real marriage.

Very quickly addressing the issue of childless married couples (Nicky and I are a case in point, we're childless by choice) - the answer is simple: having children is not obligatory. But let me tell you, if homosexuals do receive legal sanction to marry then expect an explosion of court cases demanding the 'right' to children.

It's a civil rights issue
This argument is a big one in the US where homosexual advocates have tried to align themselves with black civil rights causes from the 1960s.

Homosexuals are allowed to vote, can sit anywhere in the bus they like, can make legal arrangements for inheritance and sick bed visitations. There is no real discrimination as was experienced by African Americans during that time.

Unlike laws in some states of the US that prohibited a black man marrying a white woman and vice versa - a gay man is free to marry any woman, a lesbian can marry any man.

The fact that gay men and lesbians are same sex attracted is their issue. Not the State's.

Two gays getting married doesn't affect your/my marriage
If homosexual relationships are less likely to be long-lived and less likely to be monogamous, it does by definition changes the expectations of marriage in a wider context - especially when those advocates invoke Kardashian's Law and use the facile, inept and insincere coupling of celebrities as their examples.

Not only have we seen the concept of marriage being an exclusive union of a man and a woman for life eroded through the introduction of quicky, no-fault divorces, but we are also seeing a push to redefine even the meaning of monogamy.

This link on Psychology Today is very instructive:

I've wanted to write an article on this topic ever since I began working with a gay male couple who told me that they were monogamous. After several months, however, they informed me they had had a three-way. When I asked if they had changed from monogamy, they said, "No."

I was confused. Maybe I hadn't gotten the correct information in our initial consultation? I told them, "I thought you told me you were monogamous," and they said, "We are." Now I was REALLY confused! So I said, "But you just told me you were monogamous."

Their reply was, "We are monogamous. We only have three-ways together, and are never sexual with others apart from each other."

If that's not a redefinition of monogamous (from the Latin for One + Marriage - a form of marriage in which an individual has only one spouse/sexual partner at any one time.), then nothing is.

Hollywood mainstream also plays its part in trying to stretch the accepted boundaries of monogamy in marriage - take this year's comedy flick Hall Pass (defined by the trailer as 'a week off marriage with no consequences) in which two married men are let off their vows by their wives and allowed to do whatever they want up to an including having sex with other women.

Also, take the TV series Big Love that sympathetically portrays a polygamous relationship.

Again the universal principle of 'Garbage In/Garbage Out' applies here. If this is the type of pop culture you and your children are consuming, then it is going to affect how they view relationships and thus the concept of marriage is redefined outside of a true fusion of the lives of one man and one woman becoming (in the Biblical parlance) 'one flesh', one entity for mutual love and support for life.

Those who argue that what others do does not impact on them misses mark on the importance of marriage has on the greater welfare of our society.

Why am I against same sex marriage? For three fundamental reasons:

1. Same-sex marriage is bad for children
2. Same-sex marriage is bad for civil society
3. Same-sex marriage is bad for public health

Same-sex marriage is bad for children

It’s clear that children benefit from having both a male and female parent. Recent medical research confirms genetically determined differences between men and women and those fundamental differences help explain why mothers and fathers bring unique characteristics to parenting that can’t be replicated by the other sex. Mothers and fathers simply aren’t interchangeable. Two women can both be good mothers, but neither can be a good father. One-sex parenting, whether by a single parent or a homosexual couple, deprives children of the full range of parenting offered by dual-sex couples.

Only mother-father families afford children the opportunity to develop relationships with a parent of the same, as well as the opposite sex. Relationships with both sexes early in life make it easier and more comfortable for a child to relate to both sexes later in life. Overall, having a relationship with both a male and female parent increases the likelihood that a child will have successful social and romantic relationships during his or her life.(5)

Same-sex marriage is bad for civil society

Not only does SSM amplify issues around the raising and socialising of children, overseas experience has shown that a government that mandates the acceptance and recognition of SSM are more likely to act punitively against people who do not support it.

Here are other examples, all annotated.

Even those who are not religious and so may support SSM should react in horror to the concept of the state criminalising thoughts and beliefs.

Same-sex marriage is bad for public health
Here's the second elephant in the room - one which homosexual advocates and their supporters don't like to talk about:

Homosexuals have shorter lifespans, indulge in more risk taking behaviour including drug use, are subject to more interpersonal violence (IE suffer more domestic violence) and suffer greater mental illnesses such as depression and suicidal tendencies than those who are heterosexual.

Let's add in one more point. Homosexuals and bisexuals are a tiny minority - why are we pandering to them on this issue? According to September figures from the UK, only 1.5% of the population are gay or bisexual - especially when it can be argued that there are a good number of homosexuals who do not support legalised marriage at all.

So if 1.5% of the population is homosexual and, let's say for argument's sake that one third of that 1.5% are not interested in 'marriage' at all, then why are our political leaders devoting so much time considering such a far reaching (and negative) shift to our society's structure that is demanded by 1% of the population?

-- Nora

UPDATE: The ALP national conference has just officially changed its policy to endorse same-sex marriage. It's just a vote in parliament away folks. I wonder what the old time Catholic Labor Union supporters think of their party now>

UPDATE 2: A couple of typos corrected and a slight rewriting on the paragraph on length of relationships for clarity and to include some additional information.

UPDATE 3: The law of unintended consequences reasserts itself. From the Daily Mail:

People who have had two sexual partners in a year may be 'too promiscuous' to donate organs under new health guidelines

That of course would include the 'monogamous' homosexual men referred to in the Psychology Today article earlier in this post. This is why redefinition of words and the societal understanding that goes with them is so dangerous. Potentially deadly.

UPDATE 4: I've been keeping an eye on this story for a few weeks now. Since we're talking about the influence Hollywood has in shaping our thinking and our expectations of societal norms, I thought it was worth linking to:

Does Hollywood Face a Child-Molestation Crisis in Casting?

And not just in casting. And not just in Hollywood.

Preach It Brother Bill

In the light of these statistics:

A CHILD crime wave is sweeping Victoria with almost 10,000 children aged 14 and under dealt with by police in the past year.

Exposure to sex, violence and alcohol, broken families, and boredom in sprawling housing estates have been linked to a surge in kids accused of robbery, assault, rape and other offences...

...A startling 9860 children aged 10 to 14 were accused of committing crimes last financial year. It was 1532 more than the year before, and almost a third of all alleged juvenile offenders.

Most were accused of shoplifting (2119), damaging property (1642), burglary (1355), assault (1029) and stealing cars or their contents (1022).

Dozens were also quizzed over robbery, arson and sex offences - including 24 alleged rapists."

Where is our Bill Cosby?

Comedian Bill Cosby has warned black Americans to "stop looking for somebody to blame" and to confront the ills facing their communities...

...Cosby, who starred for many years in his own series, The Bill Cosby Show, and who has a doctorate in education, told several hundred people at a conference of community associations that some of his critics within the African-American community were "intellectual panhandlers" who enabled destructive behaviour by staying silent or blaming racism...

...He said adults were equally complicit if they failed to speak up.

"I haven't seen the demonstrations saying, 'I'm not allowing my children to listen to this'," he said. "It's killing us. We're not talking about it, and we're not beating it down."

-- Nora

The Sins Of The Father

SITE OWNER'S NOTE: This post was originally conceived as a peg to hang images of the 1970s comic book edition of Cross And The Switchblade and scans of pulp fiction covers for Nifty Knick Knacks. However the events of this week turned what was supposed to be a light piece into this piece on youth behaviour and crime.

News of teenage violence today is as shocking as it is common.

There is almost daily news of young gangs holding entire neighbourhoods to ransom, violently drunk party-goers bashing someone whose equally drunken remark offended them, psychopathicly murderous females or simply opportunistic criminal activity.

At the same time, the media shakes itself out of its summer silly season news torpor to create a celebrity out of a smart-arsed teenager whose drunken, orgiastic riot masquerading as a party.

As many commentators begin to question 'what the hell has gone wrong with our teenagers?', Nick and Nora invite you to step into their way-back machine to give you a little insight into what's wrong with today's youth.

We'll rapidly rewind the 'Trust No 1' of the 1990s, the post apocalyptic 1980s, the seriously bummed out 1970s, the anarchic 1960s to take a pause in the 1950s.

Not the nostalgic-soaked Happy Days but an era when the headlines screamed 'Seven Teen Agers Murder Polio Victim'.

The crime was a brutal one, members of a gang called the Egyptian Kings, having lost a pay-per-player stick ball game with rival gang Jesters, decided to compound their welshing with vengeance.

One night they lay in wait for their foes to appear, two teenage boys wandered through the park.

They were beaten and stabbed. One of the boys, a 15 year old who suffered a limp as a result of polio was killed.

So sensational did that crime and associated trial become, it finally awakened people to the reality of street violence. It also happened 50 years ago.

The crime and trial did two things. It resonated with Broadway audiences:

ACTION
Dear kindly Sergeant Krupke,
You gotta understand,
It's just our bringin' up-ke
That gets us out of hand.
Our mothers all are junkies,
Our fathers all are drunks.
Golly Moses, natcherly we're punks!

ACTION AND JETS
Gee, Officer Krupke, we're very upset;
We never had the love that ev'ry child oughta get.
We ain't no delinquents,
We're misunderstood.
Deep down inside us there is good!

A powerful radio show about the Michael Farmer murder 50 years on is here. One of the commentators in the radio program is Nicky Cruz.

His story of transformation from criminal gang member to gospel preacher is told in part in The Cross And The Switchblade which became a best-selling book, a not-so-good movie and serialised here in comic book form.

The Cross And The Switchblade tells the story of a small town pastor, so shocked by the violence went to New York to share the gospel.

Admittedly naive, David Wilkinson's honest interest in the physical and spiritual welfare of gang members over five years of welfare and ministry won many of them over.

So was there anything particular about the 1950s that would cause a generation to run amok?

With the benefit of hindsight we can see some similarities - lack of spiritual direction, parents who are themselves dysfunctional to the point where the only familial connection their kids experience is in gangs.

But not all children involved in criminal activity or who find themselves victims of crime and violence are poor or ill-educated, indeed the Corey Worthingtons or the Matthew Stanleys of the world come from decidedly middle-class, relatively well off families.

So what went wrong?

For further insight, step back into the way-back machine for a trip past the 1940s when war ruled the world, the 1930s when the effects of the Great Depression bit hard to the Roaring 1920s, home to flappers, gangsters, wild parties and hedonistic wealth.

There is a scene the 1936 film My Man Godfrey in which the title character has it out with the brattish twentysomething daughter of his employer:

Cornelia Bullock: You can't go on like this forever. You really like me and you're afraid to admit it, aren't you?
Godfrey: You want me to tell you what I REALLY think of you?
Cornelia Bullock: Please do.
Godfrey: As Smith or as a butler?
Cornelia Bullock: Choose your own weapon.
Godfrey: You won't hold it against me?
Cornelia Bullock: It's your day off.
Godfrey: Very well. You belong to that unfortunate category that I would call the "Park Avenue brat". A spoiled child who's grown up in ease and luxury... who's always had her own way... and who's misdirected energies are so childish that they hardly deserve the comment, even of a butler on his off Thursday.
Cornelia Bullock: [hurt and angry] Thank you for a very lovely portrait.

Today there are a great deal of 'Park Avenue brats' who have grown up indulged with distractions and material possessions, wanting for nothing but consistent, effective discipline, the setting of boundaries and a realisation that the world doesn't revolve around them.

Gold Coast Bulletin columnist Robyn Wuth is on the right path when she wrote this week:

There you are, Australia. That's the youth of today -- aren't you proud?

Take a good look at the iGeneration and bear this frightening thought in mind -- this idiot and his stupid mates could be running the country in the next generation.

God help us all.

This is what the world is churning out these days and we have no one but ourselves to blame, us and the education system for turning out these ignorant little twits who are yet to have a thought, for teaching them more about their legal rights as horrid little brats instead of the three Rs.

Us, and the Government, and the legal system for making it harder and harder to discipline our children.

Us, and computer games, iPods and the internet for helping to turn out a generation of selfish little show-offs, publicity whores who want their 15 minutes of fame and then some.

Also, blame the parents of the 500 other kids who turned up and went wild. Where the hell were you? Did any one of them know where their kids were and what they were up to? I doubt it.

We can all feast on a sizeable portion of finger-pointing pie...

Long story, short: what's wrong with the kids of today? It's not just their parents, but also their grandparents, great grandparents and great, great grandparents.

The solution doesn't begin with government programs, police intervention or social workers. It begins with us.

What example do we set in our own behaviour and the standards we want to see in ourselves and others?

-- Nora

International Sign Of Distress

Google runs a doodle competition for school kids to mark Australia Day 2008. Some junior PC victims include an Aboriginal flag in their design.

But there's a problem.

-- Nick and Nora

Maccas Made Me Do It

Australian National University population health researcher Richard Eckersley warns 'health problems of the current generation of adolescents, particularly mental illness, were likely to cause even more pressure on health care once they grow up' and, as reported by News.com.au, blames 'increased stress, more time spent in front of the computer or television and changes in diet'.

No mention of adolescents' increasing use of illegal drugs that is frying their brains.

-- Nick

Bring Back The Wagging Finger!

Western Australia State School Teachers Union vice-president Anne Gisborne notes:

... violence among young girls had been rising for five years and unruly students were getting younger... She said families' resistance to deal with out-of-control children meant behavioural problems went untreated and got worse when students left school.

Perhaps the behavioural problems start with overindulgent, paranoid parents depriving their infants (and themselves) of sleep:

The survey found that babies in the 1960s and '70s woke only twice in the night and took just 20 minutes to settle, whereas today's babies wake up at least three times a night and take 33 minutes to settle. Even getting them to sleep in the evening has become harder. It now takes 56 minutes compared to 28. This was attributed to methods used. In the old days, babies were put in their cots and left to drift off. These days parents cuddle their babies until they fall asleep.

Back in school, 'peak parent group' the WA Council of State School Organisations called for:

... more teacher powers to tackle violence.

and President Rob Fry said:

"We have to bring back some strong rules."

Huzzah!

But wait:

"I'm not advocating bringing back the cane. But the department needs to somehow put in more support behind teachers so they know that they are protected when taking appropriate action."

Yes, they do, somehow, don't they?

-- Nick

When Children Become Mere Fashion Accessories

The woman said she enjoyed some aspects of the pregnancy, such as decorating the girls' nursery, but other parts were distressing, including purchasing a pram.

Finish your breakfast as the rest of the story may disgust you.

-- Nora

UPDATE: The story becomes more ridiculous.

The woman, who yesterday described her experience thus:

"It was like the last frontier of acceptance to spend hundreds of dollars on a pram," she said.

And who requested a general anaesthetic for the implantation procedure is, in today's article, described by her partner:

"My observation is that (the twins' birth mother) was one of the most confident and centred people that I have met," she said.

Really? Her testimony yesterday belies that.

And now the coup de grace:

"I find (now) that she doesn't have the same ability to love that she used to and the same capacity to, I guess, embrace differences and issues as a couple or as a team.''

She said the pair lost their lives functioning as a couple, becoming mired in everyday tasks associated with raising two children.

Diddums. You want normal - you've got it.

-- Nora

Putting Away Childish Things

Powerful parenting advice from author Tony Woodlief in the Wall Street Journal:

While some mothers and fathers stubbornly cling to the utopian beliefs of their childless years, the vision of humans as inherently sinful and selfish resonates with many of us who are parents. Nobody who's stood between a toddler and the last cookie should still harbor a belief in the inherent virtue of mankind. An afternoon at the playground is apt to make one toss out the idealist Rousseau ("man is a compassionate and sensible being") in favor of the more realistic Hobbes ("all mankind [is in] a perpetual and restless desire for power").

Go. Read the whole thing.

If you're a parent you'll find it liberating. If you're contemplating parenthood you'll see a road map.

Hat tip: Hot Air

-- Nora

The Dead Zone

Jesse James was 'a softly spoken 15-year-old who regularly helped his local pastor' and had the misfortune to live in Moss Side, a notorious inner-city suburb of Manchester, England, that is known as the British Bronx.

When the youngster was gunned down last year, it was suggested he might have been a member of a gang but police thought it mistaken identity and his mother vehemently insisted her “precious baby boy” was no gang member.

With the murder still unsolved, an inquest into Jesse's death has opened at which it is now suggested the youngster was accused of being a member of one gang in front of members of a rival group, sufficient enough in Moss Side to get you killed.

There's something else sufficient round there to get you killed:

Witness D, Jessie, and another teenage boy had been standing outside the West Indian Sports and Social Club in Moss Side. Witness D had wanted to “check out” a nearby party and set off on his bike. But as he did so, the other teenage boy had told Jessie that it might not be a good thing to follow his friends into the park on his bicycle... Earlier another witness, identified only as Witness A, also described the moment around 1am when Jessie was ambushed in the park.

One AM.

There's something seriously wrong when children shoot each other.

It starts when one in the morning is considered playtime.

-- Nick

Picture Post

This couple



is unsuitable to adopt children.

So is this couple:



It is not in the child's best interests.

This couple



is suitable.

So is this couple:



Not that there's anything wrong with that.

-- Nick

Mother Load

The lives of four children have been effectively ruined by selfish homosexual interests:

A SPERM donor who helped a lesbian couple conceive two children is liable for child support under a state appellate court ruling that a legal expert believes might be the first in the US...

It gets worse.

...Jodilynn Jacob, 33, and Jennifer Lee Shultz-Jacob, 48, moved in together as a couple in 1996 and were granted a civil-union licence in Vermont in 2002.

As well as conceiving the two children with the help of Mr Frampton - a longtime friend of Ms Shultz-Jacob's - Ms Jacob also adopted her brother's two older children, now 12 and 13.

But the women's relationship fell apart and Ms Jacob and the children moved out of their Dillsburg, Pennsylvania, home in February 2006.

Oh and that's not the end of it.

A Superior Court panel last week ordered a Dauphin County judge to establish how much Carl Frampton Jr would have to pay to the birth mother of the eight-year-old boy and seven-year-old girl...

...Mr Frampton, 60, of Indiana, Pennsylvania, died suddenly of a stroke in March, leaving lawyers with different theories about how his death might affect the precedent-setting case.

-- Nora

Natural Born Killers

If killing animals for meat is 'murder', what sentence should the vegan parents receive having deliberately starved their child to death?

Jade Sanders and Lamont Thomas fed the boy, named Crown Shakur, a diet largely consisting of soy milk and apple juice, the Atlanta court heard.

The child was born in the couple's home and never taken to see a doctor.

He was dead when they took him to a hospital across the street from their flat on April 25, 2004.

He was so emaciated that doctors could count his bones through his skin.

Answer: Life.

We can only hope that it is without possibility of parole so they can't kill any more children.

-- Nora

UPDATE: Speaking of wicked child abuse:

A QUEENSLAND man responsible for the worst case of incest in South Australian legal history has begged a judge to show him mercy.

The 64-year-old, of Gympie, has admitted not only sexually assaulting his three daughters for 20 years but also providing them to his friend and cousin for sex.

The South Australian District Court has heard he started abusing his daughters in 1967, when one of the girls was six.

After decades of acts including bestiality, he moved to Queensland and started a new family.

Mercy? The man deserves the same mercy he showed his victims. None.

-- Nora