Freedom, indeed, is not free


 The above advert came from December 2010's Living Now magazine, which, aside from being an embarrassment to the publishing industry, is a published platform for pseudo-scientific nonsense and outright idiocy in NSW, QLD, VIC and WA.

Meryl Dorey's AVN, in this advertisement, is taking an awful risk - this is, in essence, a fundraising appeal - as well as a ball of spit aimed at the authorities - and the OLGR have placed some severe restrictions on the AVN's fundraising activities.

That, though, is not the bit that interests me. I'm for Meryl Dorey getting belligerent with the authorities. I want her to kick and scream and tangle herself in even more legal knots. The more she fights, the worse things will get for her. Every time she breaches an OLGR ruling, she'll be lining herself up for even more strife, which is something I want.

The bit that interests me is the only true sentence on the entire advert (aside from perhaps the AVN's address) - and that is "Freedom isn't Free".

Freedom, indeed, is not free.

First, in terms of personal freedom or freedom of action. We, as members of a productive society, are not free to take any action we like regardless of its effect. If one of us, for instance, steals or kills, that person can expect to have his or her freedom curtailed - we jail criminals. We place restrictions on their freedom, and sociaeties worldwide do this as a matter of course. This indeed is the type of restriction on freedom Meryl Dorey is under right now. She has not, so far, been found guilty of criminal misconduct, however her organisation has been found to be in breach of its responsibilities as a charity, and has therefore been punished by both the HCCC and the OLGR. The AVN could be said to be in "charity jail".

Second in terms of cost. We are also expected that, in order to perform positively as members of society, we bear the costs of certain responsibilities. We are expected to act in manner befitting that society, and if we do not bear that cost, we can expect the disapproval of our fellow citizens.

This is the disapproval Meryl finds herself facing from groups such as Stop The AVN.

Her behaviour in attempting to expose children to preventable risks is, in a very true sense of the word, anti-social. She is, deservedly, a pariah among thinking society as a result, and is increasingly having to retreat into a segment of society which denigrates evidence in favour of ideology, and Meryl's behaviour and public statements are increasingly coming to reflect this.

She is at the head of her very own Herbal Tea Party, and her flag-wrapping indignant freedom rhetoric reflects this.

OLGR and HCCC are, of course, aware of Meryl's attempts to circumvent fundraising restrictions, just as they are aware of her breaches of fundraising statutes, such as her attempt to sell two cheap badges and two bumper stickers for a vastly above-value $55 - a tactic which is specifically called out in the legislation. Sooner or later, Meryl's antisocial behaviour will result in further punishment. Fines or jail time are not out of the question according to the lawbooks. This is what happens to people who want to live in a society without playing by its rules.

And that's just fine.

Go on, Meryl. Go all-in. We're dying to see who wins.

posted @ Wednesday, December 1, 2010 10:53 PM


Comments on this entry:

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by Michael at 12/2/2010 7:13 PM
"They're not allowing us to accept donations ... despite a clean bill of health in all investigations"

Which bit of the ruling did she miss?

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by Jason at 12/2/2010 9:07 PM

All of it?

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by Coran at 12/3/2010 8:17 PM
"... in some cases, we interpret these sources differently to the conclusions of the article."

Perhaps Dorey is simply 'interpreting' the investigations' findings the same way she 'interprets' studies.

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by reasonablehank at 12/11/2010 3:43 PM
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
April 7, 1775, p. 253 [Life of Samuel Johnson]
Boswell's full mention of this statement reads:
Patriotism having become one of our topicks, Johnson suddenly uttered, in a strong determined tone, an apophthegm, at which many will start: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered, that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self-interest."

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by Maureen at 12/11/2010 3:59 PM
@ Coran, how can you simply disagree with the conclusions of a paper without doing a thorough analysis of the study design and methodology? Much like a journal club does, for example.

If you don't understand the study design and methodology how can you comment on the conclusions?

# re: Freedom, indeed, is not free

Left by Ausduck at 12/11/2010 4:36 PM
@Maureen - you can comment like Meryl does, along the lines of 'the conclusions of the experts/researchers are all wrong because we has teh raw data, we has read teh raw data, and we has different conclusions...'
as the indicated to the HCCC in her reply.
Way to cover up for a) not reading the whole paper b) not understanding what you are reading and c) therefore making sh*t up
Comments have been closed on this topic.
Vaccination Saves Lives: Stop The Australian Vaccination Network
Say NO to the National School Chaplaincy Program