|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Dear Jim Wallace...
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
In case you didn't, or if anyone else is interested, here is the lateline report.
Hooray. Rational people with facts. Or in some cases, acknowledged lack of them.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
One issue with the ACL and Jim Wallace is the single-issue focus. They do media monitoring that results in a daily digest of news articles on a range of matters of interest, including homelessness, sexualisation of children/society and more. But the vast majority of their output on specific issues is on one specific issue, suggesting to the population is general that homosexuality, particularly gay marriage, is the primary concern of Christians in political discourse.
When they do speak on other matters, such as their media release last month on asylum seeker policy, they maintain a sustained attack on the Green Party. A key part of the ACL's public argument is to depict the Green Party (which holds influence through balance-of-power in various parliamentary houses) as immoral/amoral secularists with an agenda to destroy the fabric of life as we know it.
In fat, that contribution on the asylum seeker debate irked me more than the ACL's ongoing input to the marriage equality debate. I dispute that the majority of Christians agree with the ACL on the matter of marriage equality; I think in the linked media release above the ACL would have been even more out of line with Christian thinking. Qualification: my opinion and I have no statistics to back it up.
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Bloody hell. And why, pray tell, do they not condemn the Coalition for being similarly stubborn about not implementing those recommendations they don't like? ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
One of the things which needs to be observed and stated is that Peter Jensen and Jim Wallace are both superb communicators. Possibly better than their public opponents so far. I think their opposition probably need far better and more experienced public performers. This is a very divisive issue in this country and the opposition really need to put forward their best case via the best presenters.
It is also possible that Jensen and Wallace have the sophistic skills to avoid any real debate as seemed to happen on last Monday's "Four Corners".
Despite the press beat up I don't think a real public debate has started. As so often here the issues are fudged and the important ones sidelined.
I agree re Jensen. He is a gifted communicator who often ends up appearing sympathetic, until you remember he is talking bollocks. I don't think even Wallace's closest friends and admirers could call him a solid communicator, so I don't know what you're seeing there. He looks dumb, sounds dumb and is dumb.
As the Lateline story linked shows, I don't think a 'debate' can start. Most agree on the facts - on average gay life expectancy is shorter than straight. The arguments based on these facts differ, and probably always will. What are we supposed to debate?
And I think you may be referring to Q&A, not 4 Corners. The latter did a very troubling piece on youth suicide in Australia. I couldn't watch either of them for long. I turned off Q&A after one of the arseclowns from the audience asked a racist question about asylum seekers, cloaking it in the usual nonsense about caring about human life.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
MSHB
Shipmate
# 9228
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Which is about as helpful as my optometrist telling me that because severe short-sightedness carries a higher risk of glaucoma, I shouldn't be severely short-sighted.
Clearly we need to organise against the forces that are promoting a severely short-sighted lifestyle and undermining the sanctity of our 20-20 vision.
--------------------
MSHB: Member of the Shire Hobbit Brigade
Posts: 1522 | From: Dharawal Country | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
In my case it's Winnie the Pooh's fault.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Most Australians would probably neither understand nor empathise with "Private Eye" style treatment of Messrs Jensen and Wallace, sebby. I suspect, in this milieu, it would be counterproductive.
Any opposition mounted to them publicly faces a daunting task. They have an incredibly powerful and organised support base in the Anglican Archdiocese of Sydney and the Australian Christian Lobby. This is, away from certain inner city areas, essentially a conservative country. The issues which motivate their opposition don't resonate in suburbia and are seen as pet hobby horses of the inner city left.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
The issues which motivate their opposition don't resonate in suburbia and are seen as pet hobby horses of the inner city left.
Unsubstantiated bullshit.
63% of respondents to a recent parliamentary survey support marriage equality.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
I think the issues are far deeper and wider than marriage equality, Dark Night. That is the current flashpoint.
Did you read the article "Truth a Victim in Unholy Row" subtitled "The ill effects of discrimination appear to be the main homosexual health issues" by Adam Cresswell in today's Australian?
It would appear that Wallace and Jensen have succeeded wonderfully with sidetracking the debate.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
Now I'm confused. What point are you actually trying to make?
You claim that the issues which Wallace et al's opponents are supporting are hobby horses of the inner city left - which you did not substantiate. Then, I point out that you did not substantiate this, and point to an example of one of those issues - same sex marriage - which was supported by the majority of respondents to a survey (a survey which had a healthy response rate).
Now you are saying that the issue is deeper and wider than same sex marriage. Well ... der!
Of course it is likely that one of the major reasons for short life expectancy among gays is discrimination. That is what I have been saying. What in buggeration are you saying?
And it's Dark 'Knight'. I await your suitably apologetic gesture.
[ 13. September 2012, 10:04: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MSHB:
Clearly we need to organise against the forces that are promoting a severely short-sighted lifestyle and undermining the sanctity of our 20-20 vision.
Kinsey would have of it that few of us really have 20/20 vision.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Great Gumby
Ship's Brain Surgeon
# 10989
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by MSHB:
Clearly we need to organise against the forces that are promoting a severely short-sighted lifestyle and undermining the sanctity of our 20-20 vision.
Kinsey would have of it that few of us really have 20/20 vision.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
But Kinsey was criticised for sampling bias, wasn't he? The sort of people who are interested in participating in a study about their eyesight are likely to be the sort of people who talk about it a lot - old ladies, speccy geeks and Donald Pleasence. It's likely that a truly representative sample would have included many more people with 20/20 vision and produced less sensational results.
--------------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. - Richard Feynman
A letter to my son about death
Posts: 5382 | From: Home for shot clergy spouses | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
The sort of people who are interested in participating in a study about their eyesight are likely to be the sort of people who talk about it a lot - old ladies, speccy geeks and Donald Pleasence.
( ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) )
Notice that they kill the blind guy at the end of the movie. Vito Russell had so much to say about that in his seminal work, The Celluloid Tapping-Cane
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
You are there and understand the cuture and mileau best.
But to add from far away, to get strong perfomrers to engage in debate might be to make Jensen and Wallace into serious characters and not the absurdities they must appear given a moment's thought. I would suggest humour and satire - the Private Eye effect as the best method of undermining their postion.
A comedian (or at least I'm told she's a comedian) tried that on Monday night against Peter Jensen on The ABC's Q&A programme and most people I talk to (pro and anti) and most of the on-line commentary suggests it went down like a lead balloon. Peter is a gracious individual who delights in mocking himself and an experienced debater of people who hate him and he knows a thing or two about the media. He wasn't the one looking like a baffoon on Monday night and he got exactly what he wanted. Whether you agree with him or despise him Peter Jensen IS a serious character.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
A comedian (or at least I'm told she's a comedian) tried that on Monday night against Peter Jensen on The ABC's Q&A programme and most people I talk to (pro and anti) and most of the on-line commentary suggests it went down like a lead balloon. Peter is a gracious individual who delights in mocking himself and an experienced debater of people who hate him and he knows a thing or two about the media. He wasn't the one looking like a baffoon on Monday night and he got exactly what he wanted. Whether you agree with him or despise him Peter Jensen IS a serious character.
Yes, that seems to be the consensus of many viewers, particularly the conservative ones.
The facts, however, do not bear this interpretation.
Jensen certainly seems to have some kind of gift. He spouts utter shit, yet somehow manages to smell like roses.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
The comedian, who actually made some very good points, like Dark Night in some of his posts here, possibly suffered from overkill. Consequently Peter Jensen appeared to show grace under fire.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
The reaction to Deveny has been interesting. I watched Q and A for the first time partly because it had been tipped as a Deveny-Jensen duel; in fact it was the first time I'd encountered either of them in non-written form, I think. And whatever the facts of the analysis in the blog post to which DK linked, I share some of the perceptions; Jensen was calm, though sneaky and underhand IMHO, and Deveny was...disrespectful, perhaps, or abrupt. Certainly not a conflation of all the descriptions that have been applied to her, but something off putting to supporters and opponents alike. One of the comments on the blog post summed it up for me when it said that she used polemic instead of debate. She came out with a couple of "Comment, comment, comment. That's the way I see it." statements rather then engaging in discussion.
Jensen was able to leave people with the suggestion that there is an open debate on gay lifespans that the gays/left are trying to shut down and censor because no-one said, "You're being disingenuous. You know the research that Wallace was relying on and you know it's been discredited."
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
The comedian, who actually made some very good points, like Dark Night in some of his posts here, possibly suffered from overkill. Consequently Peter Jensen appeared to show grace under fire.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
And it's Dark 'Knight'. I await your suitably apologetic gesture.
Read much?
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cryptic
Shipmate
# 16917
|
Posted
I'm coming into this discussion late as I have only just seen the Q&A repeat last on Saturday night.
Jensen was polite and gracious. He also seemed to me to be ill-at-ease, and I see this as him using the current kerfuffle as a way of raising his media profile. You might think this an odd comment, but Jensen, although well known to churchgoers I think has a pretty ordinary media profile outside of the official mouthpiece of Anglican Media. I think a lot of this was due to hammering that he took in his early days as archbishop in the mainstream media, some of this was his own doing, and a lot of it was the reflected glory of his idiot brother (who appears to have been gagged in the press since then).
Tony Jones gave Jensen plenty of air time at the expense of the other panelists, but after he stated his case, he quickly reverted to his patronising circular waffle.
Although Deveny made some valid points (and they were just that, points, not debate) her boorishness outweighed anything she said.
The ABC probably cheekily put Deveny up against Jensen for the "TV factor", but it was cheap stunt. A liberal theologian would have been a much better opponent and might have created some true debate.
--------------------
Illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 225 | From: Sydney | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
I'm not sure Deveny was boorish as a little bit over-the-top. Probably the way she does her stage act. It backfired.
It is interesting that, in selecting the panel, a liberal theologian, or someone like Justice Michael Kirby, a theologically astute Anglican layman, who could have very effectively opposed Jensen, was not chosen.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
A comedian (or at least I'm told she's a comedian) tried that on Monday night against Peter Jensen on The ABC's Q&A programme and most people I talk to (pro and anti) and most of the on-line commentary suggests it went down like a lead balloon. Peter is a gracious individual who delights in mocking himself and an experienced debater of people who hate him and he knows a thing or two about the media. He wasn't the one looking like a baffoon on Monday night and he got exactly what he wanted. Whether you agree with him or despise him Peter Jensen IS a serious character.
Yes, that seems to be the consensus of many viewers, particularly the conservative ones.
The facts, however, do not bear this interpretation.
Like it or not, in these contexts the perception is the fact.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cryptic:
...He also seemed to me to be ill-at-ease, and I see this as him using the current kerfuffle as a way of raising his media profile. You might think this an odd comment, but Jensen, although well known to churchgoers I think has a pretty ordinary media profile outside of the official mouthpiece of Anglican Media...
I guess it is only a minor point, but Peter Jensen will be retiring in less that 12 months, and I think it unlikely that he has any interest in raising his media profile. He saw an opportunity that would let him talk about Jesus, live on national television and he took it.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
A comedian (or at least I'm told she's a comedian) tried that on Monday night against Peter Jensen on The ABC's Q&A programme and most people I talk to (pro and anti) and most of the on-line commentary suggests it went down like a lead balloon. Peter is a gracious individual who delights in mocking himself and an experienced debater of people who hate him and he knows a thing or two about the media. He wasn't the one looking like a baffoon on Monday night and he got exactly what he wanted. Whether you agree with him or despise him Peter Jensen IS a serious character.
Yes, that seems to be the consensus of many viewers, particularly the conservative ones.
The facts, however, do not bear this interpretation.
Like it or not, in these contexts the perception is the fact.
Aha. That clears it up. Your perception is the fact. If only you could bring it to bear on everything, and sort out all of our problems for us.
Your last post is risible. First of all, Jensen was not just 'talking about Jesus,' and I think you know that. He was talking about homosexuality, a topic Jesus never actually addressed in any of the sayings we have attributed to him.
Secondly, if you really think anyone here believes that Sydney's political agenda is limited to Jensen's tenure, you are sadly fucking mistaken. It was there before him, and it will probably be motoring along after him.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
Is there any chance Jensen's detested brother will be annointed in succession? ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
Wouldn't it be great if they appointed our own Arebella Purity Winterbourne as the next AB of Sydney? She would be just what the place needs!
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cryptic
Shipmate
# 16917
|
Posted
Good point CJS, I wasn' t so much thinking about his profile personally, but getting his agenda back into the mainstream media. The marriage vow thing and agreeing with the dipstick Wallace were media gifts that he knew would put him back into the spotlight. See my earlier comments about his early days in office, after some cracking media gaffes, mainly from the other Jensen, the Sydney diocese often appeared reluctant engage with the media at all. Peter Jensen has a reputation as a media-savvy communicator, but I think that this reputation is not entirely deserved, he has built up much of his media persona through his acolytes at Anglican Media.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Secondly, if you really think anyone here believes that Sydney's political agenda is limited to Jensen's tenure, you are sadly fucking mistaken. It was there before him, and it will probably be motoring along after him. [/QB]
Agree. I'm sure that the goons and number crunchers of the Anglican Church League have a successor ready to go. It wouldn't surprise me if was somebody more hardline than Jensen.
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
Is there any chance Jensen's detested brother will be annointed in succession?
I doubt that even Sydney Diocese would be that stupid. The detested brother's role has been to minister to a particularly looney section of the cult, and of course to make sure that any of those old fashioned reactionaries were driven from the cathedral.
--------------------
Illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 225 | From: Sydney | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
Is there any chance Jensen's detested brother will be annointed in succession?
God forbid, Pete. Hopefully the Sydney Anglican Archdiocese would not be that stupid.
There are many in the archdiocese, both clerical and lay, who, whilst being very much in the traditional Conservative Evangelical tradition of the place, have misgivings about the Jensens' time in their current roles.
Clergy from Sydney have gone to other dioceses in that time as bishops. Gippsland and Canberra Goulburn spring readily to mind. Neither incumbent has attempted to overturn the more pluralistic practices of those dioceses.
The previous incumbent as Archbishop of Sydney, Harry Goodhew, was, albeit a Conservative Evangelical, much more popular with those in Sydney who did not follow the Moore College line. I hope we see a return to someone like that.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
Clergy from Sydney have gone to other dioceses in that time as bishops. Gippsland and Canberra Goulburn spring readily to mind. Neither incumbent has attempted to overturn the more pluralistic practices of those Dioceses.
if they want one of them back, I wouldn't complain. Not a fan.
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
Clergy from Sydney have gone to other dioceses in that time as bishops. Gippsland and Canberra Goulburn spring readily to mind. Neither incumbent has attempted to overturn the more pluralistic practices of those Dioceses.
if they want one of them back, I wouldn't complain. Not a fan.
What would be your reasons for dissatisfaction? Has he attempted to change the general ethos of the diocese?
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
quote:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
If they want one of them back, I wouldn't complain. Not a fan.
What would be your reasons for dissatisfaction? Has he attempted to change the general ethos of the diocese?
There does seem to be a drift to more (Moore?) evangelical clergy appointments. We have new bishops, so now a total of five, all broadly evangelical (the first female bishop in NSW was Moore College trained), plus the Director of St Mark's.
The bishop also gave inappropriate direction during our interregnum (in the parish I've now left) in relation to SRE, supporting the witch who'd been teaching for years over the parish leadership. She ended up having to withdraw from teaching SRE before the school could invoke the Inclosed Lands Act to bar her from the premises. I wouldn't say that his intervention enboldened her but... well, yes I would.
The language of Diocesan publications is subtly changing. Teenagers are going on missions overseas to cast out demons. I remember the bishop making multiple references to 'persecuted Christians' at home and abroad. While the language of persecution is sometimes appropriate, I find that in the western world it is typically code for Christians no longer receiving special privileges rather than any actual persecution.
Oh, and if a member of the clergy with no diocesan role has actively (though unsuccesfully) agitated for gay people to be removed from ministry roles in the parish in which he resides, do you think it's appropriate to appoint that same member of clergy as an assistant priest in that same parish? I don't, but clearly our bishop thinks it's fine.
[ 19. September 2012, 05:40: Message edited by: Vulpior ]
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I found the episode of Q&A disturbing mainly because of the way in which the programme was conducted. I'm not a fan of Jensen, but I felt annoyed at the way he was treated by the moderator,Tony Jones,who was pushing his own opinions and bias. The moderator gave time and encouragement to those who wanted to attack Jensen, but gave him little chance to respond.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Thanks for your information, Vulpior.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
bib's post is nonsense, and a great example of people seeing what they want to see. As I posted earlier, Jensen spoke more than anyone else on the show, and more than Jones himself. It may as well have been a pulpit for him.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
From a heathen who really doesn't care what Jensen thinks and who had never seen him speak before, I thought that (a) he was treated no differently than any other panelist who goes on Q&A (b) he came across as very well mannered and measured and erudite - he knows how to address an audience, (c) Catherine Deveny was no match for him, because she is a vulgar, self-important skank and (d) what he said was bollocks.
[ 20. September 2012, 11:16: Message edited by: Left at the Altar ]
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
As happy as I would be to have Phillip Jensen as archbishop, he will also be retiring within the next 18 months or so.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
Dark Knight, what I was objecting to was the way Tony Jones behaved in that he didn't act as a moderator, rather as a protagonist. I always understood that the moderator was supposed to be neutral and not show bias. Most people I have spoken to feel the same, so maybe you were watching a different programme.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
I don't think he showed any bias. He tested him. As he tests most panelists. As he should do. As a good journalist.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
I didn't think Jones moderated any more poorly on that particular episode than he normally does.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Dark Knight, what I was objecting to was the way Tony Jones behaved in that he didn't act as a moderator, rather as a protagonist. I always understood that the moderator was supposed to be neutral and not show bias. Most people I have spoken to feel the same, so maybe you were watching a different programme.
Is this the first time you've watched Q&A, or something?
To be honest I avoid the show most of the time, more often than not they create panels that are designed to be insufferable. If I want serious debate of a topic I'll go watch Insight on SBS.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reuben
Shipmate
# 11361
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
The language of Diocesan publications is subtly changing. Teenagers are going on missions overseas to cast out demons.
Vulpior sorry but this type of conduct is not coming from Sydney / Moore College vernacular to invade your Diocese. 99% of Sydney Anglicans consider demon casting the preserve of the loony pentecostals and don't go near it.
--------------------
"I got nothing." Barrie Unsworth
Posts: 227 | From: New South Wales | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Such a shame when Anglican Sydneyites post credible sounding comments.
I wish you would all go away and let us continue to live in our little bubbles of bias and dislike.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
I idly wonder if someone could cast Tony Jones out of Q&A?
He used to be like that when he hosted the 7.30 Report. Finds it hard not to see himself as a participant rather than a compère or reporter.
Though he seems less hyped up than in his 7.30 Report days.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Tony Jones on 7.30 Report? When was that?
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Reuben:
quote:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
The language of Diocesan publications is subtly changing. Teenagers are going on missions overseas to cast out demons.
Vulpior sorry but this type of conduct is not coming from Sydney / Moore College vernacular to invade your Diocese. 99% of Sydney Anglicans consider demon casting the preserve of the loony pentecostals and don't go near it.
Yes, I realise that Sydney doesn't "do" charismo-penty. Free from the strictures of Diocesan theology, anything can happen!
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Dark Knight, what I was objecting to was the way Tony Jones behaved in that he didn't act as a moderator, rather as a protagonist. I always understood that the moderator was supposed to be neutral and not show bias. Most people I have spoken to feel the same, so maybe you were watching a different programme.
Have you read this thread at all? I posted a link in which the speaking time on the show is broken down, demonstrating that Jensen spoke more than anyone in the show, and more than Jones.
And like orfeo said, have you never watched the show before? I am starting to wonder if you saw the show yourself.
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Left at the Altar:
Tony Jones on 7.30 Report? When was that?
You're right. I was thinking of his hosting of Lateline.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I have frequently watched Q&A and I reiterate that my objection was the protagonist attitude of the moderator which is nothing to do with the amount of time either he or Jensen spoke. I also find that the audience tends to be stacked to present a particular point of view. When Q&A visited my state we also found that only specially chosen people were allowed to ask questions of the panel The whole show is rigged. I much prefer Insight on SBS.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
That's what Collingwood are saying about the umpiring on Friday. Rigged.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Left at the Altar:
That's what Collingwood are saying about the umpiring on Friday. Rigged.
Not at all. It was perfect. So perfect that I'm not feeling particularly hellish about anything or anyone anymore.
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
