RAF

My third son wants to join the RAF.

Dilemma:

Perfect career for his personality, versus ethics of potentially having to kill people who may sincerely think they are defending themselves against the evil British.

Personally, I do believe it is OK for Christians to serve in the armed forces - as per the 39 articles - imagine what would have happened if we had not won the second world war! But I would be a useless soldier, trying to aginise my way through moral dilemmas in the heat of battle.

Engineering for sexual health

Listening to “Start the Week” on BBC Radio 4 on the way to work this morning…

The logic starts in Kensington High Street. There used to be pedestrian guard rails along the edge of the pavements (that’s sidewalks to you Americans), but these were removed and there has been a reduction in the number of accidents because drivers are now being more careful, taking more responsibility for themselves. (This is corroborated by articles in New Civil Engineer - the magazine of the Institution of Civil Engineers)

The next step is the increase in smoking among teenagers co-incident with an increase in advertising for nicotine patches as part of ‘no-smoking’ policies – the kids now think that they can give up when they want to.

This leads the discussing on to America. [I’m only reporting what I heard on the radio here] Apparently Oprah Winfrey has been complaining about an increase in oral sex among teenagers. But this has happened in the states which have introduced stricter abortion laws for that age group, with requirements to tell parents etc. So, the kids feel less safe having sex, and go for the intimate ‘kissing’ instead, and this has resulted in a reduction in sexually transmitted diseases.

Clearly, tough love works, whereas excessive protection (guardrails, abortion etc) can be counterproductive.

Hereford

So, it starts.

As expected, the sexual orientation regulations give rise to prosecutions against the church for obeying scripture. In my opinion, some of these prosecutions will be malicious, ie provoked as part of a planned campaign, simply to push the church into the world rather than on the merits of the case itself.

I cannot understand why the church should be obliged to employ people who oppose its doctrines. (Note it is not a matter of the person's orientation, it is a matter of their theology and practice concerning that orientation)

Perhaps the church should also be prosecuted for not appointing muslims to the synod? Or Satanists?

Perhaps Manchester United should be required to pay Steven Gerrard to kick balls into the United goal?

Perhaps the Tory party should be obliged to employ communists to prepare party policy?

Perhaps America should put Bin Laden in charge fo national security?

Tax morality

I am now supposed to be glorying in my new role as director of my own company. However, life never runs smooth. In view of changes to the tax regime there have been huge numbers of people doing just the same, and this means that my company's bank, which should have foreseen the problem, can't cope with 18,000 simultaneous applications for new business accounts from people like me.

So I am still being paid through the old system subject to the new tax regime and paying far more than i should. AAARRRGGH. [Some of my colleagues are in a worse situation, having been abandoned by their respective partners and not getting paid at all.]

But all this raises questions. The tax regime has changed to stop people abusing the old system. Was i abusing the old system? Is it moral for a Christian to seek out the most 'tax-efficient' arrangement? Should he not willingly pay extra into the state which guarantees his welfare? Great theory, but little comfort when I have 6 kids and a mortgage.