Blog Archives
Et lite innlegg i homofili-debatten
Jeg kunne i Agderpostens 18.desember-utgave lese med stor forskrekkelse den pensjonerte presten Gerhard Woie, skrive i positive ordlag om Jan Olav Olsens syn på homofilt ekteskap. Det er neimen ikke ofte jeg føler for å debattere mot presteskapet men her kunne jeg ikke la ting forbli usagt.
Jeg er kristen selv, og tror på Jesus, bare for å ha klarert det først som sist. Det jeg misliker sterkt er enkelte kristnes evne til å drive “shopping” med hvilke tanker og ideer Bibelen leverer, og som de velger å følge. De som er i mot at homofile skal få gifte seg, argumenterer ofte vagt med at “Det står i Bibelen.” (For det gjør det jo også, i 3. Mosebok 18/22) Men det er mye annet som også står i Bibelen.
2. Mosebok (21/7) sier at det er greit å selge datteren sin som slave. Dette er noe vi har gått bort i fra i vårt moderne samfunn.
I 3. Mosebok (25/44) står det at jeg kan eie både mannlige og kvinnelige slaver så lenge de er
kjøpt i et naboland. Stakkars svensker.
I 3. Mosebok (1/10) står det at man ikke skal spise skalldyr. Her er det vel opptil flere sørlendinger, prester også, som synder hver sommer ombord i båtene sine med reker og krabber. For ikke å snakke om havets kardinaler om høsten!
I 3. Mosebok (21/20) står det klart at man ikke kan nærme seg Guds alter dersom synet er dårlig. Kirkebenkene er vel tomme nok som de er, så man bør vel ikke begynne å diskriminere basert på synet?
For en måneds tid siden klippet jeg meg kort. Jeg gikk fra lange lyse krøller til kort på sidene og litt lengde på toppen av hodet. Dessverre for meg så er det tydelig en synd i følge 3. Mosebok (19/27)
Bestefaren min eier et lite småbruk. Han synder mot 3. Mosebok (19/19) fordi han planter to ulike avlinger på samme jorde. I samme tekst står det også at man ikke skal bære klesplagg vevd av to ulike stoff. Ooops, her sitter jeg i en genser laget av polyester og bomull.
Mange har i dag en dum uvane for å banne i dagligtalen, meg selv inkludert. Er det en rimelig straff at hele Arendals befolkning møtes for å steine de som misbruker Guds ord, slik det står skrevet i 3. Mosebok (24/11-16)?
Felles for alle disse lovene er at de er fra det Gamle Testamentet. Lovene i det Gamle Testamentet var lagt frem av Gud som reglene hebreerne måtte følge for å være rettferdige, for å sone for synden fra Adam og Eva og for å komme til Himmelen.
I følge kristen tro, kom Jesus fra Himmelen som Guds sønn og døde på korset for å tilgi oss våre synder. Hans offer på korset var ment som den ultimate gjerning som ville fri oss fra de gamle lovene og gi oss innpass i Himmelen ved å leve etter hans eksempel. Dette er derfor kristne ikke trenger å omskjære sønnene sine, ofre dyr eller la håret gro, eller noen av de andre lovene jeg har nevnt fra 2. og 3. Mosebok.
Når kristne da gjengir lovene fra Mosebøkene som Guds lover og de sier at dette er lover og regler vi må følge fordi det er hva Gud eller Jesus vil at vi skal, så er det de egentlig sier som kristne at Jesus’ offer på korset ikke gjelder. Han døde forgjeves fordi du tror vi fortsatt skal følge gamle lover. Det du da impliserer, som god kristen, er at Guds eller Jesus’ plan for din frelse ikke er bra nok for deg.
Det står mye rart om synd og homofile i det Gamle Testamentet. Vi som protestantiske kristne, tror på lovene i det Nye Testamentet. De gamle lovene fra Mosebøkene døde Jesus på korset for at vi skulle slippe å leve etter. Når man argumenterer mot homofilt ekteskap med Bibelen som “bevis”, driver man “shopping” etter de ideer og tanker man liker fra Bibelen hvis man kaller de andre lovene i 2.- og 3. Mosebok for irrelevante eller utdaterte. Slaveri er forbudt i Norge, og polyester og bomullsgensere selges uten restriksjoner på det åpne marked.
Jeg sier ikke at man skal kunne stå for alt som står i Bibelen, og jeg respekterer at andre er i mot homofilt ekteskap. Jeg ønsker bare om at man tenker seg litt om før man drar Bibelen inn i diskusjonen om homofili.
Julens budskap er et budskap om kjærlighet. Kjærlighet til hverandre, som venner, familie, kjærester og ektefeller. La oss derfor huske på det som står skrevet i Paulus’ første brev til korinterne, kapittel 13, vers 13:
“Så blir de stående, disse tre: tro, håp og kjærlighet.
Men størst blant dem er kjærligheten.”
Med ønske om en fortsatt god jul. Det er flott at vi kan feire Jesus fødsel, vår frelser som aldri hadde et vondt ord å si om homofile.
Cecilie Larsen
Leder, Arendal Unge Høyre
Election results
This summer and early fall I have been working so hard to reach one goal, and one goal only. To change the country’s prime minister from Jens Stoltenberg (Labor party) to Erna Solberg (the Conservative party)
Monday, September 9 was election day, and I was working as an election official to make sure everything went smoothly. As the election came to an end towards the evening, the results were published shortly after.
And the results spoke for them selves. When all the votes were counted, the non-socialist parties had won, meaning Erna Solberg, the leader of the Conservatives and our prime minister candidate, will create a government together with the Liberals, Christian Democrats and the Progress Party.
Erna Solberg will be the second female prime minister in Norway.
Long nights, lots of work. It all paid off. When I went to bed that night, after the election, I felt a sense of emptiness. What will I do tomorrow? Just go to work? No more campaigning? The campaign has been a part of my life since late July, so it was kind of a shock to return to the daily life and reality. But it also feels good. Knowing we did everything we could, and that we actually made a difference. A huge relief. And a self confidence booster for sure.
This is my first weekend off in a long, long time. I look forward to just go to work for a few hours tomorrow, Saturday, and other than that – just relax!
Next weekend I’m jetting of to new adventures in Oslo, Stockholm and Copenhagen, on a privately chartered aircraft. Stay tuned 😉
Cecilie
Employment, contracts and pay checks
The European Union’s Directive on Temporary Work will in a few words, reduce the economic difference between temporary workers and permanent workers.
The purpose of this Directive is to ensure the protection of temporary agency workers and to improve the quality of temporary agency work by ensuring that the principle of equal treatment, as set out in Article 5, is applied to temporary agency workers, and by recognising temporary-work agencies as employers, while taking into account the need to establish a suitable framework for the use of temporary agency work with a view to contributing effectively to the creation of jobs and to the development of flexible forms of working.
Yes, that was one sentence.
I have yet to make up my mind if I want to vote for or against the Directive during this summer’s national convention for the Young Conservative Party. Both opponents and supporters of the directive within the party, argue that they want more temporary workers, and a more flexible work environment. I agree, I think it is important to have flexible employment opportunities, but I think that only applies to certain sectors. And aviation is certainly not that type of sector.
Either way, if the Directive is passed, and employers will have to pay the same wage to a temporary worker, as a permanent worker (which is a good thing), temporary workers will still have loads of challenges. How are they supposed to go to the bank and apply for a loan to buy a house, if they can’t provide proof of permanent employment?
Why would I argue against the use of contract employees or temporary workers in the aviation industry? Because it is a great financial risk for the employee. It increases stress. It leaves the employee feeling insecure about his/her job situation. All these impacts will be brought in to the flight deck. I don’t want stressed out, fatigued pilots, flying my plane.
There is an ongoing struggle between the Norwegian Air Shuttle (NAS, Norwegian low-cost carrier) and their pilots. The CEO of NAS, Bjørn Kjos wants to reduce costs to compete with other European low-cost operators such as Ryanair and Wizz Air. Understandable. I think that reducing cost is essential, because the Norwegian market needs NAS as a competitor, to the partly-government-owned Scandinavian Airlines (SAS). NAS plans on starting long-haul operations starting next year with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. I would love to fly for Norwegian, and the Dreamliner, but my dream might just remain that way – a dream.
Bjørn Kjos has announced, through Rishworth Aviation, pilot openings for their LH-ops, The catch is – you have to be based in Bangkok, Thailand. No matter how tempting that may sound when you’re in your 20s and would love to live in a warm, humid climate, I’m not so sure how established pilots with families, kids, station wagon and a furry dog would appreciate that the same way.
Norwegian might be in clear weather right now, but I see some potential Cumulonimbuses brewing in the horizon.
The pilots currently employed (permanently), of course, are not very happy about the situation, and are threatening the company with a potential strike.
NAS’s answer to a possible strike? Wet-lease aircrafts from other carriers in Europe. Sparking even more tension to the situation, and leaving the papers full with stories of Norwegian-passengers boarding “filthy” and “unsafe” (passengers’ words) airplanes from Latvia.
The pilots say it’s not about the wages (because they are good) but more about the employment situation. This supports my idea that it is better to be permanently employed, rather than temporarily, with a possible lower pay check each month, but with good job security.
The cost of living in Norway is horrendous. It is so expensive to live here, which forces the employers to every year increase the pay checks for their workers. This applies to all sectors. I think we are approaching a limit here, very soon. Just look at the shipping industry. I fear that the same situation that we see there today, with the Captain being Scandinavian, and the rest of the crew from the Philippines, will be the state of the aviation industry in the future if we don’t do something.
My thoughts:
– Vote in FAVOR of the Directive on temporary work, so that employers loose a financial incentive to hire part time workers (with the Directive implemented, it will be just as “expensive” for the employer to hire part time v.s permanently)
– Advocate for permanent employment contracts in the aviation sector, with the consequence that the pay check will be slightly reduced, but with an increase in job security
– Allow for a flexible employment situation in areas it is deemed appropriate. I repeat, aviation is not such an area.
– Cecilie
Cecilie Larsen 