The Ambassador was speaking at a conference organised by the Pontifical Council of the Family yesterday, on the theme of family businesses and values.
according to Zenit
Ambassador Baker noted the role of the family as the root of society's moral center. "You do not have to be religious to recognize that the family is at the heart of our social and moral structure. And also to accept that law, regulation and the free operation of the market can never be a substitute for morality."This from the Ambassador of a country where the crackpot cavalier wrecking attitude of the Prime Minister is incapable of realising that "the Family" is an institution that is essentially heterosexual. Like the Durtnell family every family, up until now, is dependant on the bond of marriage, it has an historical context that spams the generations. It is heterosexuality of its members that ensures that!
"In business, as in the rest of life, the family can help to provide that underpinning of an essential value system that may be missing elsewhere." Turning back to the examples provided by his own country, he continued: "It is clear that many of Britain's most famous business names were forged on the rock of family, very often also reflecting values derived from a strong religious sense of responsibility to the workforce, to society, and to family well-being."
The ambassador concluded: "If, as I do, you believe that the family is the repository of the best of the values that society can deploy, you will also believe in the family business."
4 comments:
Seeing as it was a building firm he was talking about raises other issues that we need to be concerned about if conditions are favour the family. It makes me think that we have hurried to the defence of the family in the face of obvious nonsense such as the "gay marriage" idea whilst ignoring the more insidious pressures on the family that apply all the time.
The most family-unfriendly policy is war. We should not forget that many of the problems that families experience today can be traced back to the two world wars.
Next is economic instability. Governments should ensure that families have a the means to provide themselves with a livelihood (which is not the same as giving everyone a job). It is a fundamental right. Economic policies with targets like keeping unemployment at X% are not family-friendly. Nor is the policy of telling people to get on their bikes to look for work. Commuters living in Brighton and travelling to London every weekday hardly get to see their children except at weekends. How family-friendly is that?
Then there is the chronic difficulty of keeping a roof over one's head, which puts people in acute debt to banks for more than half their working lives. That is not family-friendly.
It does nothing for credibility to focus on one issue to the exclusion of others.
governments given the responsibility of the 'good' of the family have destroyed the family because the family came to believe that the governments should oversee the 'good' of the family.
a healthy dose of indepence with regard to world authorities and their 'concern' for that which doesn't belong to Caesar is, well, healthy.
p.s. my brother and his wife have five kids and have never looked to Caesar to correct their lives and are, uniquely, the better for it.
@wretchedwithhope
How about this, nicely balanced set of duties?
STATE’S DUTY
DEFEND THE REALM
MAKE LAND AVAILABLE
COLLECT THE RENT OF LAND
APPLY JUSTICE
DEAL WITH EMERGENCIES
INDIVIDUAL DUTY
PERFORM MILITARY SERVICE IF NEEDED
KEEP THE LAND IN GOOD ORDER
PAY THE RENT OF LAND
OBEY THE LAW
SUPPORT ONESELF AND FAMILY, IF ABLE
What is the point of the Prime Minister's move to homosexual unions? As an American I am tempted to forecast that he is chasing a pipe dream that the Conservatives will capture the gay vote as a permanent voting bloc without losing any of the more genuine conservatives.
Post a Comment