Archive for the 'Australia' Category

21
Dec
07

Santa fired on account of his hos…

Apparently Santas Jolly Ho, ho, ho, could be perceived as an insult by the Australian populace. A Santa has therefore been fired for uttering Saint Nick’s classic  greeting:

In the latest incident, the Cairns Post newspaper said 70-year-old John Oakes was fired on Monday for saying “ho ho ho” and for singing the Christmas song Jingle Bells.

Westaff spokesman Bert Jansz told the paper Oakes had been dismissed because of his attitude, and not for his ho ho ho-ing. – [Yahoo/Reuters]

Riiiiiiiight… I know exactly what got him fired. He got canned for letting his employers know they were being uptight, anal retentive, politically whipped wusses. Seriously, if any one of you out there can realistically take the greeting “Ho, Ho, Ho” from a Santa as an insult, then you really need to find a bad habit. Maybe drink more, or smoke some pot or something. ‘Cause you really need to loosen up some.

Laughing Santa gets the old heave ho ho ho – [Yahoo/Reuters]

Advertisements
20
Nov
07

Naked Politics. Ummm… No.

First we have an obsession with Hilary Clintons cleavage, and now the political “full monty”? Is this what politics have come down to?:

More Australian voters would like to see Labor Opposition leader Kevin Rudd naked than their current prime minister, John Howard, a poll showed on Sunday just two weeks out from a hard-fought general election. – [Yahoo/Reuters]

Granted this was an Australian poll, but still, somehow, politicians and nudity in the same sentence? Just not working for me. Seriously. Some people have waaaay too much time on their hands…

Which politician do voters want to see nude? – [Yahoo/Reuters]

18
Nov
07

More car crushing idiocy…

It would appear that Australia is taking a page from Californias law book of senseless and excessive practices:

Street racers in Australia will soon see their beloved cars being deliberately smashed by the authorities in videos posted on the Internet.

The often flashy, souped-up vehicles will be wrecked in crash tests under laboratory conditions, the New South Wales state government announced. – [Yahoo/AFP]

Now I’m sure some of you out there are thinking “Serves them right!”, but I assure you, this law is not a good thing. There is a reason this hasn’t been done in the past. This is technically a violation of an individuals rights. When convicted killers go to prison, even they do not have their belongings destroyed. They may be confiscated and cataloged, but they get them back when they get out. If they get out.

So how exactly can anyone think that this is a fair penalty for any lesser crime? I’d rather impose this penalty for drunk drivers, rather than street racers. At least the street racers are actually in full control of their faculties, and some of them (let me iterate the *some*) are actually really good drivers. The same cannot be said for drunks. But the kicker is that ultimately, as a deterrent, it wouldn’t work for that either.

These kinds of knee-jerk, intimidation-based legislative decisions set very dangerous precedents that could have very profound future ramifications. And to top it off, it’s not like this is going to deter anyone from street racing anyway. Most of the folks who street race will do it regardless of the penalties. Literally. These laws are little more than public displays to make others feel like something is being done about the problem, when in fact, it will have little effect on any hard core racers.

However to their credit, the Australians have adopted a better use for the vehicles than just crushing them. They will be used for crash tests. Which is orders of magnitude better than Californias pointless “crush ’em all” solution. But both laws are seriously troublesome. The law will have to be very specific on what constitutes “street racing”, and even then I’m sure many police officers will still abuse it, much like how the “aggressive driving” box is seemingly checked on tickets at will, as opposed to, let’s say, the tickets of drivers who actually meet the legal definition of “aggressive driving”…

Aussie street racers to see cars crashed by govt – [Yahoo/AFP]

29
Sep
07

Chimps and Humans… Close but No Cigar.

I ran into an interesting article a couple of days ago that kinda left me scratching my head:

 Animal rights activists campaigning to get Pan, a 26-year-old chimpanzee, legally declared a person vowed Thursday to take their challenge to Austria’s Supreme Court after a lower court threw out their latest appeal.

A provincial judge in the city of Wiener Neustadt dismissed the case earlier this week, ruling that the Vienna-based Association Against Animal Factories had no legal standing to argue on the chimp’s behalf.

OK am I missing something? Look I love animals, and I am all about protecting animals, but how did we get from protecting animals to giving them human rights? Chimpanzees are not people. They are Chimpanzees. No amount of legal wrangling will change that fact.

You can give the chimp a name and dress it up in a monkey suit and it will still be a chimp. Yes, they have needs and they have interests, but, by definition they are not human interests, and I’m quite certain that their legal status is not one of them. Neither is being human. Chimps just want to be chimps.

 “It is astounding how all the courts try to evade the question of personhood of a chimp as much as they can,” Balluch said. – [Yahoo/AP]

Avoiding the issue of chimp personhood?!?! Issue? What issue? There is no issue dagnabbit, they are freakin’ CHIMPANZEES, not PEOPLE!! Sheesh!! This whole thing makes no sense to me. If these people want to help out these poor chimpanzees so bad, why not buy out the shelter? Or set up a new one just for the chimps? Or just buy the chimps outright?

If they are so darn worried that they may get sold to someone outside Australia, then someone needs to pony up the cash and buy them before that happens. These chimpanzees can’t exactly get a job. After all (in case I haven’t been clear enough on this), they are chimps, not humans. And someones got to pay for the food on the table…

Court won’t declare chimp a person – [Yahoo/AP]




Feed Your Inner Objectivist

Add to My AOL
May 2018
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
Advertisements