Our dearly beloved politicians seem to have reached consensus that the disgusting heat of summer is only conducive to rest and relaxation, so they haven't been too forthcoming in giving me grist for my blogging mill.
That said, Premier Muscat has proceeded apace with running the country, some say into the ground, though the Lil'Elves and Switching Trolls still seem bemused and bedazzled by his aura of being able to do no wrong.
Not so much His Holiness the Pope, who came out with a dictum that has confused many observers. Taking his zeal for inclusiveness and tolerance forward, he has let it be known that for a year, priests are able to forgive confessors to the sin of abortion.
I am perfectly in line with Pope Francis on the matter of tolerance and brotherly love, even if only because this has kicked certain Bishops into the 20th, if not quite the 21st, century, but I confess to some perplexity as to the matter of abortion. I am on record, despite the assumption by many that I am a dyed-in-the-wool liberal sinner (being pro divorce and anti-censorship didn't help dispel this impression, I admit) as being against abortion, though I would not presume to sit in judgement on any woman who resorts to it, being unable to cast stones myself.
I don't see how protection of the unborn child is helped by the position taken by Pope Francis, given that the media tends to be - how shall I put this? - somewhat shallow (!) in reporting selectively. I'm pretty sure that the Pope qualified his statement by requiring true contrition and all the other caveats that accompany absolution being given, but with all due respect, I doubt that the issue has been clarified to any great degree.
A similar state of mind accompanies my interpretation of the move towards removing the ban on gay men from giving blood. This is a matter that can only be discussed within the purely scientific and medical context of proper risk assessment.
Being gay does not mean that your blood is any more dangerous to recipients than blood donated by promiscuous straight (can I use that word in this era of shrieking political correctness?) individuals, but I, for one, prefer the matter to be discussed at the medical level, not made subject to position-taking and sound-biting by LGBTIXCERC advocates, who are not necessarily basing themselves on solid medical evidence.
By all means remove prejudices and intolerances from the debate, but this includes removing the same traits when demonstrated by the people wearing white hats too.
It is incumbent on the people who make policy not to pander to specific lobbies and embrace risks that might not have been properly assessed.