Letters to the editor | March 18, 2019

I understand the feelings of those who were abused or whose child was abused by the likes of Pell, but I think the judgment on Pell himself was fair and considered, and there is nothing to be gained by heaping the entire sins of the Roman Catholic onto his shoulders, no matter his standing in the church hierarchy.

The judge could only go on what was put before him, not just any hearsay or scuttlebutt. He did speak about Pell's previous 'good character' and the thought did cross my mind that it was only because he was never 'found out' about anything else, but again, he was being tried for these five crimes only and as such, the penalty was satisfyingly adequate in my view.

I suspect that there will be those who think the penalty inadequate but being burnt at the stake is no longer our prerogative and we must leave that to the higher court that Pell must eventually answer to, given his commitment to that belief system.

To Justice Kidd I say, well done, you have acquitted yourself well and I for one have no cause for complaint or criticism of your handling of such a delicate matter.

UNLIKE Mary T. Bates (The Examiner, March 10), my impression of young people in relation to the church is that they have no interest in it at all. I have discussed this topic with many of them and have invariably received the same answers.

An acquaintance of mine, who teaches senior classes at a local private school, told me that not one of those students believes in God. The teacher is also an atheist.

In 1974, I did a prac teaching session at St. Patrick’s College

Having been brought up in an extremely strict Methodist family, I was stunned to discover that the resident brothers, all teachers at the school, smoke, drank, swore and gambled. Two of the six subsequently left the priesthood, because they were unable to remain celibate. Even then, I thought it was sad that very young men and women were choosing between two completely different lifestyles, without having experienced both.

Now, 45 years later, nothing has changed.

It is normal and natural for a human being to seek a loving, intimate relationship; denying that opportunity is not.

"HEY true blue, don't say you're gone, say you've knocked off for a 'smoko' and you'll be back later on".

The lyrics of that great John Williamson song seem to reflect what's happening in our country at the moment with the minority tail, not just wagging the dog, but strangling it. And I'm wondering if there are any "true blue" Aussies out there who still care.

Political correctness driving us to distraction, free speech being stifled by various devious means, the habitats of frogs and birds more important than valuable jobs for struggling families, attempts to remove gender from birth certificates, school programs confusing young students about their gender, universities rejecting a course on western civilisation while allowing Islamic studies, transgenders with the advantage of their biological male physique wanting to enter women's sporting competitions, the right of parents to decide what moral principles their children will be raised under being eroded away by radical ideologies of the state.

If there are any "true blue" Aussies out there who loved Australia the way it used to be, before the radical minority took over, we could sure use your help.

HOW disappointing that a week on from Clean Up Australia Day, a trail of cans, bottles, and assorted fast food wrappings tossed out of car windows, is already littering so many of our roadsides and gutters.

Quite apart from the pollution aspect, this isn't a good look for a place that's now widely considered to be a top tourist destination.

First impressions are important if Tasmania is to maintain its glowing tourism reputation especially since tourism plays a significant part in the health of our economy.

So just as we all pride ourselves on ensuring we have clean and tidy homes before we welcome visitors and guests, it's time to extend that ideal, and ensure all those visiting our island home see it at its best.

That includes being able to travel on roads free from so much carelessly discarded rubbish that could, and should, be disposed of in the council bins we all have at home.

IT IS funny how our minds work.

If I were to receive dividends with an accompanying statement that they were income tax-free I would be happy.

If I were told that the company, in which I had bought shares, was a good corporate citizen and had paid its company profit tax of 30 per cent, I would be still happy.

If I were told that I was a shareholder and therefore an owner, of a sort, of that company and that the company tax was therefore really part of my income tax calculation then I, being a low-income earner might all of a sudden feel cheated.

I still have the exact same amount of dividend money in my pocket though.

Definitions are usually important.

Most people think a company is a tax paying legal entity in its entirety and its own right and should pay its tax on its profit.

The idea of dividing the tax divvied up in the secondary hands of investors, is really as bad an idea as double taxing those dividends, which was where all this foggy thinking started in the first place.