Letters to the editor

August 23, 2017

It’s time Ewan

WHAT’S a conversation about marriage equality without Ewan McDonald?

I wondered when he’d pop his head out of his foxhole, and he didn’t disappoint in your August 16 edition.

Ewan, the answer to your question about ‘why’ the Riv doesn’t cover the argument against marriage equality is simple: there is no argument against it. Why? Because it doesn’t affect you one little bit.

Your marriage, nor mine, will not be less valid. Your children, nor the baby I am expecting in the next few weeks, will not be sacrificed at glitter-covered altars by gay people.

Gay people will get married and we’ll all be okay. I promise.

You don’t even have to go to their weddings if you don’t want to, though if you’ve ever been to Mardi Gras, you’d know that gays have the best parties. Glitter! Feathers! Inclusion! Dancing! What’s not to love?

The unfortunate thing about some religious people — and yes Ewan, I’m referring to you here — is that you think freedom of religion means freedom to beat the rest of us over the head with your outdated and exclusionary views.

Oh and your baseless concerns about freedom of speech being under threat because of the plebiscite, Ewan?

It’s invalid – Australia does not have explicit freedom of speech in any constitutional or statutory declaration of rights, unless you’re in parliament.

That I am about to bring a child in to a world where I have to vote on the freedoms and rights that we all should be enjoying is nothing short of a disgrace, but I’ll play along with the plebiscite if it means a step forward towards equality.

Reasonable Australians – not you Ewan, you can stop reading here if you like — make sure you are registered to vote, read the plebiscite paper carefully and vote to support equality. It’s time.

Jess Aitken, Deniliquin

Let common-sense policy prevail

IT IS disappointing the role hard-working Australian food producers play in feeding our nation, and others throughout the world, continues to be hindered by those seeking political gain.

In the past week, we have had full page newspaper advertisements from the union-funded GetUp organisation that denigrate food producers as it tries to score a political ‘head’ in the form of Water Minister Barnaby Joyce.

It is unfortunate and to the detriment of our nation that these environmental lobby groups ignore the full facts in their quest for ideological goals.

They will not acknowledge our food producers are among the most efficient and environmentally responsible in the world, and have been forced to make significant financial and productive sacrifices to ensure water is available for environmental flows.

It is also a bitter pill to swallow when we read GetUp advertisements attacking our food producers which are authorised from an office in Pitt St, Sydney – arguably the most environmentally damaged area in Australia.

Imagine the uproar if regional Australia demanded the city of Sydney be demolished and the land returned to its original ‘natural’ state?

That may sound ludicrous, but it is precisely what city-based environmentalists are demanding, despite having virtually no idea of the food producing environments they claim need ‘protection’.

What we need across the Murray-Darling Basin and other agricultural areas of Australia is common-sense policy that encourages food production (we all need food) in collaboration with environmental protection.

Vicki Meyer, Deniliquin

Rid roads of rage

ONE of the most successful campaigns waged on road deaths in Victoria – Declare War on 1034 – with intensive media coverage and state government involvement (such as the compulsory wearing of seat belts and random breath tests) has reduced the road carnage by almost 1000.

I feel the ‘star weaving to end violence’ campaign initiated by Maryann Talia Pau can have an even greater impact on our population in the decades ahead.

Road rage is becoming an increasing cause of deaths.

Our local schools are getting on board, how about you?

You can phone me on 0435134264 if you would like to support this campaign.

Barry McDougal, Echuca

Religions versus science

COMMONSENSE reason tells us that human beings are, potentially at least, rational beings.

Which is a work in progress for us, not open to inanimate creatures.

That’s something we can know with certitude.

Upshots of that certainty are other certainties – the reality of God, the immortal soul of man and the actuality of Natural Moral Law.

Rational certainties – not just probabilities or hypotheses.

Science and revealed religion are, however, in a different league – offering probabilities, useful enough, but never 100 per cent certain.

What price the idea that science is the one way to truth? It’s self-contradictory wishful thinking.

Is it the same for revealed religion?

Perhaps there is a difference – due to God himself being necessarily real and rational, which the objects addressed by science are not.

Does that make one’s religious experience trustworthy in a way that scientific knowledge can’t be?

Arnold Jago, Nichols Point


BAMAWM’S Peter Wynd would like to make a correction printed in Wednesday’s Riverine Herald on page 6.

Under the letter Postal vote won’t produce fair result Mr Wynd made a typographical error.

The fourth paragraph should have read — ‘Can you imagine anyone in the Labor/Greens coalition not voting yes’.

More in Riverine Herald
Login Sign Up

Dummy text