Nice point about him (ab)using the children for his political gain. That is ugly.

As an aside, I like the way they’re referring to this whole issue over at The Road to Surfdom: Howard’s War on Indigenous Unpleasantness.

(That’s a nice article, by the way, pointing out that Howard’s managed to create a structure for this “War” which for now makes it look like he’s strong and in charge but which sets up a body to be the scapegoat if it all goes wrong. Sweet.)

It’s a pity that something so fundamentally important has been (seemingly) reserved for this political crossroad.

There are many forms of child use and abuse, and this is surely one of them.

(And this coming from someone who tends to favor Coward over Crudd.)

51. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
…
(xxvi.) The people of any race, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws

I’ve written about some on the other points you raise in a new post just now, too.

And just so everyone’s clear on what I think about children, this recent Gaping Void cartoon sums it up:

1. I see this is being reported as a “crisis”. What — it’s only a crisis because the govenrment has decided to do something about it in an election year? This is an issue that has been around for a very long time — why hasn’t the government addressed it before? I am a bit surprised nobody has tried to make a big deal out of this fact yet (or maybe I missed it).
2. The policies suggested are not that radical. In fact, they reinforce the status quo and the disempowering nanny stateism that has led to this situation in the first place. I think this whole “crisis” is a big non-sequitur — the real issue is the poor socio-economic status of Aborigines. Make serious attempts to improve this and I think the social problems will start to diminish.
3. This is Howard’s modus operandi. He likes to pick on minorities to play wedge politics: Asian migrants in the 80s, asylum seekers, Muslims. How is this latest front of his not racist? Is there not child abuse in other areas of the community that need to be addressed as well? Why isn’t the greater community subject to this? However, I think there is a section in the Constitution that does allow for laws to be applied to particular racial groups. Constitutionally lawful racism — noice.

breathe

That’s the syllogism that goes “Something needs to be done, this is something, therefore…”

If child sexual abuse is “rampant” somewhere, then der, of course something needs to be done. However:

1. It needs to be the best “something”.
2. It needs to be done by the right people.
3. It needs to be done in the right way.
4. It needs to be done at the right time following the right timeline

Howard’s plan clearly fails the first 3 criteria and I reckon the 4th looks a bit wobbly too.

Well I wouldn’t barge in with some half-arsed racist neo-colonial white-man-knows-better scheme which is really about appeasing far-right rednecks. I certainly wouldn’t screw around with the rights of everyone in the community just because some of its members have committed crimes.

I’d ask someone who actually knows something about the causes of child sexual abuse and address those issues. I’d actually consult with the communities and figure out what they think is appropriate. I’d identify the criminals and do what’s appropriate with them.

In short, I’d do what’s going to work best for the people concerned, not for my flagging opinion poll figures in an election year.

I am totally fucking sick of “we must protect the children” being an excuse for abandoning human rights for others. Even the title of the report, Little Children are Sacred is offensive. Little children are humans, just like you and me, no more or less “sacred” than anything else.

“Every sperm is sacred,” and all that shite — bah!

Admitedly Johnnie is being a bit of a hypocrit atm, but something does need to be done, does it not?