The Guardian 8 November, 2006
Readers are invited to submit letters to The Guardian.
Letters may be e-mailed to guardian@cpa.org.au, or posted to:
The Guardian, 74 Buckingham Street, Surry Hills NSW 2010, Australia.
Letters of 300-400 words are preferred.
Letters to the Editor
Another aspect of pollution
There is an interesting omission in the present discussion of climate change and the dangers different pollutants present. Nobody as far as I can see has touched on the most obvious cause of pollution. I am talking about the military sector which is one of, if not the most prolific producer of pollution. From production to destruction the military cycle does not do anything productive as far as the environment is concerned.
I am not even talking about the inevitable loss of life. Even if nobody is killed or injured when a rocket is launched or a missile fired the environment is hit every time. We’ve just watched with horror the destruction of the Lebanon — how much has it contributed to global pollution?
Do you remember how those "smart" bombs pulverised Afghanistan’s mountains? Depleted uranium is still scattered across Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon and continues to poison soil, water, plants as well as the people.
We have not had any meaningful discussions at the international level about global disarmament for years. Apart from hysterical outbursts about "threats from the rogue states", nothing is done to stop the real proliferation of all kinds of weapons from the most dangerously armed countries.
The US recently announced that it was planning to take control of space stating that its domination is crucial to America’s defences as an air and sea power. The US opposes the establishment of arms control treaties that would restrict US access to space or set any limits to its use of space. Now if this is not a deeply worrying development I don’t know what is.
One can only shudder at the thought of what this kind of development could do for further polluting the world and aggravating existing problems such as climate change.
It is all very well to heed the calls for an individual to do his or her bit for the environment. And a lot of people do try to save a bit of water, electricity, etc and be more aware of things that can be done. At the same time we must be aware of the big-time polluters and expose their actions against humanity.
Peace and disarmament would be a worthwhile contribution to the alleviation of the present crisis.
S W Sandford
Canberra, ACT
Secular state — keep it that way
I’ve been out of the country for some time. Must admit that overseas news agencies are not generous with news about Australia. Maybe just as well, otherwise we’ll be a laughing stock. I am particularly puzzled by John Howard’s new initiative to introduce chaplains to schools.
Ninety million dollars over three years to be spent on clerics going to schools — at the time when we are told that there is no additional funding for state schools, some school buildings need urgent renovations, etc. Not to mention the extra money that can be spent on improving literacy and numeracy. Schools have to try hard and find extra money for sheer necessities, let alone provide extra funds for chaplains.
There are quite a lot of schools, you know. Where is Mr Howard going to find all those chaplains he is so eager to parachute into schools? Many churches are struggling with compensation payments due to the "pastoral care" of priests who sexually assaulted children in their care. There have been too many cases in too many countries for the practice to be written off as "some bad apples". Who is going to be responsible for making sure that this abhorrent practice does not flourish again?
As far as I know many churches are short of priests — where are they going to get all these chaplains then? By far the most serious concern is the idea itself — that is the blending of church and state into another entity. If there is a separation of church and state, why should taxpayers be paying for Mr Howard’s religious ambitions?
How many chaplains should there be in one school if there are pupils of different religious backgrounds? Will there be a competition between the likes of Hilaly, Pell, Jensen brothers and evangelical fundamentalists?
Australia is a secular state last time I checked. Why try and turn it into a theocracy? History is full of wars and bloodshed caused by religious fanatics. If anything we need more secular education.
Leave religious beliefs to individuals if that’s what they want. But please do not drum it down the throats of those who choose to be free of religion. It’s bad enough to have politicians who put their religious prejudices before the good of the society.
We’ve had unfinished debates on abortion, stem cell research and other issues which were intensely coloured by religious attitudes. The last thing we need is to bring it on all those kids at school who need their proper teachers and well-trained and qualified councillors to help them through a difficult stage of growing up and becoming good citizens — with an optimistic, broad outlook on the world and the magnificent variety and richness it offers.
Maria S
Melbourne, Vic