Why Dont You Blog?

The tragedy of missing Madeleine McCann seems no closer to ending than it did three months ago. During this time the media personification of the parents has alternated between saint and sinner - sometimes seemingly at random. For the most of it, in Portugal, the McCann parents have been looked at as (at best) negligent parents while (again, for most of the time) in the UK the middle class, white, professional, religious status of the parents has ensured they have been seen as saints who are undergoing a terrible ordeal. This changed recently, when for a short period the tabloids smelt more blood and in the wonderful manner of the press changed allegiances, barely stopping short of calling for their execution (mentioned previously). Given the natural order of the universe, the “truth” probably lies somewhere between the two extremes and I certainly have my own personal opinion. I should stress at this stage that my opinion is based on nothing other than gut feeling and the information made available by the press, so I have no intention of going into detail about it.

Before I go on, I would also like to point out that one of the main search terms which is driving traffic here recently is a variation on the words “Kate McCann Guilty Violent Murderer.” Given that this is generating a LOT of traffic, I can only guess at public opinion on the matter.

I digress. Risking eternal disfavour by the Great Antero Vipunen, I actually read the Sun newspaper today. I know. I am sorry. I will try not to do it again. In it, good old Archbishop John Sentamu writes a piece titled: We Must Have Faith For Maddie

Despite the overt religious tones in which the the piece is written, this is a largely secular humanist bit of writing with the basic theme being that the presumption of innocence is the bedrock of the legal system. For example, he relates this parable:

In 359AD a trial took place where a local governor, Numerius of Narbonne, was accused of raiding his own coffers. There was little proof but that didn’t stop the whispers and accusations. Still, the prosecutor was convinced the governor was guilty and said as much to the judge, the Roman Emperor Julian. At his trial, the governor denied the charges and the case was due to be dismissed.

The prosecutor was furious: “Oh, illustrious Caesar,” he raged, “If it is sufficient to deny, what hereafter will become of the guilty?” Emperor Julian’s response has been repeated in countless trials for the past 1600 years: “If it suffices to accuse, what then will become of the innocent?”

And, for once, I find my self in total agreement with the Archbishop of York. Scary.

Sadly, despite the valid comments the Archbish makes and the fact the Sun newspaper of all papers prints it, there are a few things which still make me uncomfortable about it. I agree whole heartedly that as a society we should reinforce the automatic presumption of innocence.

Now, with this in mind, have a flick through the Sun news paper (or any media output over the last, say, day) and see how many examples there are where a person accused of a crime is assumed to be guilty. It is a regular occurrence. Take poor Robert Murat for example - due to his past he was largely assumed to be guilty of anything people wanted to accuse him of. He had no support from the various churches, he had no support from rich idiots. He had to defend himself against the court of public opinion.

Not so for the McCann parents. The cynic in me is screaming this is entirely down to their perceived image as “successful” white professionals - anything which implies this part of our society can harbour evil seems to damage the national psyche. In the same edition of the Sun which calls for the return of innocent until proven guilty, OJ Simpson is pretty much called a murderer several times. Is this hypocrisy?

Anyway, enough ranting about this obvious state of the world. Dr Sentamu concludes his article with something that produced mixed emotions:

Our focus must again be upon the love of the parents for their lost daughter, for their hope that they may one day be reunited with her and for their faith that she is still alive.

These must be our watchwords — faith, hope and love. For as St Paul once wrote, in the end it is these three which remain: Faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

Wonderful words, and I too hope she is alive and unharmed. The adult in me is aware that this hope is pretty much doomed to be dashed against the rocks of reality, but I would like it to be so.

Sadly, and again this is cynic in me now, the plight of poor Maddie has shown that despite all the prayer in the world (and the wishes of his representative on Earth, the Pope), the Christian deity will not intervene to save even one life, nor will s/he take action to return a lost child to an apparently grieving family. From this I can only draw one of three conclusions:

1. God exists but is evil or totally uninterested in the human race, with no intention to get involved in any of our affairs.
2. God hates Christians.
3. There is no God.

It is up to you which option you go for, but I know which one I think is true…

[tags]McCann, Madeleine, Kate, Kate McCann, Maddie McCann, Sentamu, Archbishop of York, Society, Law, Rights, Liberties, Philosophy, Robert Murat, Gerry McCann, The Sun, Tabloids, Media, UK, Culture, Civil Rights, Trial, Crime, Murder, Dr John Sentamu, Church of England, Catholics, CofE, Roman Catholic, Pope, Portugal, Police, Atheism, Humanism, Faith, Hope[/tags]

Popularity: 90% [?]

Popularity: 90% [?]

The Angel (Archangel?) Rafael has commented on a blog post, here. There must be a good few thousand words in the comment, at least a dozen of which are connected.

Sadly. I can’t discuss what Rafael says as the translation from the angelic language to English seems to have passed through the Tower of Babel on the way. Unspiritual human requirements for comprehension - such as paragraph and sentence breaks - have been omitted. I assume that this is so that nothing as dull as grammar disturbs the flow of inspirition from angel to mortal.

I had to Google the “angelic language” to see if there was supposed to be one. There doesn’t seem to be a name for it. I had a vague idea it was called Adonic or something (based on thinking it’s in a poem by William Blake or Milton. Yes, I know they have less than nothing in common. And yes, it will almost certainly be neither of them and the language will be called elohimic. You’ll find no authority here, sorry.)

Although, no less an authority than one Ashley_StarFIRE seems confident of their knowledge, in a comment on a post about angelspeak on belief.net (As so often, the clue’s in the title. If you can find someone to take the bet, you could stake a fair sum on belief.net not being on Planet Humanism or Planet Atheism or the atheist blogroll.)

Angels do indeed talk together….. Furthermore, angels speak Hebrew, and their written language (and possibly also their spoken language) is known as ‘Angelic Script’ based on the formations of stars (angels are also referred to as stars) or the Alphabet of the Malachim (Hebrew for angel/Messenger).

Hence, angels speak Hebrew, then? (Or a spoken script - which is pretty impressive even for semi-divine beings, unless script doesn’t actually mean writing in the angelic sphere.)

You have to marvel at the certainty with which Ashley_StarFIRE holds forth on the tongues of angels.

Equally impressively, “GIRLS ALOUD star NICOLA ROBERTS” (a/c the Sun). a minor pop singer, of whose existence I was mercifully unaware until now, is holding forth in the Sun newspaper about crime and punishment. In a PVC catsuit.

The Sun contrasts her with the new Home Secretary, not given to wearing PVC catsuits as part of her job, although the Sun presents this fact as if it reflects badly on her. As they do with the fact that she has a degree from Oxford. Straight from the Sun:

WHO WOULD YOU VOTE TO BE THE HOME SECRETARY?
Jacqui Smith
AGE: 44
EDUCATION: BA Philosophy, Politics and Economics, Oxford.
POLICIES: Give yobs voluntary acceptable behaviour contracts.
CAREER: Home Secretary, 2007.
STYLE: Smart suits, but has flashed cleavage in the Commons.
Nicola Roberts
AGE: 21
EDUCATION: St Chad’s High School, Runcorn.
POLICIES: Lock up criminals after first first offence, build more prisons.
CAREER: Joined Girls Aloud at 16 and topped charts.
STYLE: Miniskirts, high- heeled shoes,skintight PVC catsuits.

This is just to give you a flavour of the quality of the standard of political discussion in the biggest-selling newspaper in the UK. You may be confused as to how having an opinion on law and order qualifies you to challenge for the post of Home Secretary. Clearly, it’s so rare for a Sun reader to process a fully-formed thought that having any opinion at all would make Nicola Roberts well worthy of the job.

The actual interview with Nicola Roberts is so masterfully ironic that you suspect it was scripted by a Sun writer with a secret sense of humour.

Talking about a recent particulalrly horrifying murder, she is reported as saying:

And I blame TONY BLAIR and GORDON BROWN. We don’t have tough enough laws — the people that did this to Rhys need to be locked up.

I imagined that murder had already been illegal for quite some time but I may have been misled here. In that case, we really do probably need a law against it. Well done on spotting a gaping hole in the UK legal system, Nicola.

And another one - nothing is being done to lock up people who’ve committed crimes that aren’t against the law:

….They are bound to have committed other crimes but no one can do anything about it because the laws aren’t in place to get them put away…

Throughout this silly piece, the Sun’s suggesting that Nicola has some opinions on law and order, hence is more suitable to be Home Secretary than the implicitly over-educated and non-fun Home Secretary, who probably couldn’t sell a pop record to save her life.

So it’s nice that it says:

Nicola believes youngsters should be taught about politics at school so they learn how important it is in their lives.
She explains: “I was never taught anything about politics….

Who’d have thought it?

Popularity: 20% [?]

Popularity: 20% [?]