Welcome to Quadrant Online | Login/ Register Cart (0) $0 View Cart
Menu
October 01st 2017 print

Joy Heath

When Rainbows Were Just Rainbows

Down in the paddock with the horses, beneath an arc of gloriously intense colours that spanned the sky, I remembered an ancient covenant and a sign of peace and hope. From the world beyond our fences, the news was of woe and abuse and I thought then that there are rainbows ... and there are rainbows

rainbowThere was a rainbow this morning as I went to feed the horses. I paused to admire its brilliance as it stretched from the bottom paddock over and across the road to fall among the trees on the neighbour’s property.  We often get rainbows over the farm and the beauty of each one never ceases to amaze. Sometimes the colours are intense and vibrant, at others pale and disappear within minutes.

Quite often the end of the rainbow falls among the grazing cows and you feel like running down there to let the colours fall on you as well, but you know this is just a fancy.  I sometimes wonder if I went to where the rainbow touches down, would my husband see me wreathed in its magic?  Just as waves wash over a beach, rainbows are washed away by the moving clouds.

As I paused and watched this morning’s rainbow I felt a great sense of peace. I recalled, as I always do, the rainbow that told Noah of a covenant that the waters never again would flood all the earth. Our creek flooded several times this year and the ground underfoot was muddy as I stood there with the horses and looked toward the sky. Like Noah, I took it as a sign that the flooding would be no more, not that year anyway. One of the horses gave me a nudge in the back which brought me back to the task at hand and I tipped their feed into the bin.

I had a spring in my step as I walked back to the house, even though my rubber boots were sinking in the mud. I was greeted by my husband who announced that one of the cows had calved overnight and all was okay.

Time for coffee and see what was happening in the other world. Whatever troubles the radio reported, here on the farm everything was as it should be on a rainbow-blessed morning.

Comments [13]

  1. Bran Dee says:

    One hopes the word ‘rainbow’ will not be redefined like the word ‘gay’. Other good words that are under threat from the homosexual marriage lobby are father, mother, husband, wife, and others like the word family.

    Homosexual couples are said to comprise less than 1% of all married and defacto couples so some of their noisy support must be coming from social revolutionaries, anarchists, and the Utopian virtue signalers.

    • The left have ‘redefined’ in an Orwellian sense many, many words besides gay. Think of how words such as ‘liberal’ have been changed – ‘liberal’ once only applied to people who believed in free trade, no longer. ‘Progressive’ once implied improvement, no longer. ‘Safe’ once meant secure and free from harm, this is certainly no longer the case for our schools and education system or for unionised workplaces.
      Think also how the Nazis [Germany's National Socialists] have now somehow become ‘right wing’ [as have some religions] when the original meaning of the word ‘right wing’ applied to those who believed in free trade and minimal government involvement in everyday society [and sat on the right hand side of the French assembly]. Think also how totalitarian Islam has morphed into the religion of ‘peace’, think how AGW has morphed into ‘climate change’ and then ‘unexplained weather events’ etc. etc., and now the left want to redefine ‘marriage’ to help achieve ‘equality’ – I must ask, equal to what?

    • Jody says:

      How can it be a virtue to support homosexual love making? There’s something inherently tragic about it. Completely.

  2. MichaelinBrisbane says:

    In my book real rainbows have seven colours — red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. As Joy so eloquently explains they lift one’ spirits.
    If I see one splashed about on a sticker or flag with only six I get very wary.

    • psstevo says:

      False prophets rarely get it right, which may be why they get much else wrong as well.
      As the prophet Ezekiel wrote, some of us are called to be ‘warners – (to others on the wrong path)’perhaps we ned to respond to the ‘false rainbow’ people in this age.

    • Jimbob says:

      Seven is the number of completeness; six is a falling short.

      Seven begins the number for God; six begins the devils number.

      Satan is an “imitator” not a Creator often disguising himself as an “angel of light”

      It’s all about “love” but only of churches are burnt and Christians are crucified

      Just saying…….

      Yep – there are only 6 colours in the Sodomite flag

  3. Keith Kennelly says:

    I see the Poofballers in the NRL have banned all political statements banners etc from the grand final today BUT they said rainbow scarves and shirts are ok.

    Anybody who thinks the NRL are not biased and attempting to politicise the game today are in the managerial lala land.

    Get rid if these tunnel vision gooses.

  4. Warty says:

    I suppose one should give credit to the left where it is due, in particular some of the linguistic appropriations that have served them so well at least since 1848, when the Communist Manifesto was published. It is hackneyed to say the least to say that a particular use of language can be immensely powerful, which is why George Orwell wrote ‘political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind’.
    Homosexuals have been amongst some of the most creative in society, and their influence in the film industry and in advertising has been used to help change public attitudes towards homosexuality. So it is not surprising that the words like ‘gay’ have been appropriated to create a desired impression; or that the term ‘rainbow people’ and the rainbow symbol should be used to similar effect.
    David Meagher wrote a disingenuous article, ‘Gays bear the brunt of the divisive same-sex marriage debate’, in the Australian today, in an attempt to point the finger at the ‘No’ campaigners, with regards to the predominance of loathing demonstrated in the current SSM campaign. I order to give some validity to his argument he resurrected memories of the 1978 homosexual rally organised by by the ‘Gay Solidarity Group’ where a number were beaten by the police and or arrested. Apparently the SMH published the names and addresses of some of those arrested causing varying degrees of distress and even sackings (imagine the SMH doing that today!). Had they (the homosexual activists) been ignored there may never have been the annual Gay Mardi gras we have seen since. As far as I can tell the Mardi gras was a Brazilian appropriation, and to call it ‘gay’ was either the icing on the cake, or mud in your eye, depending on one’s view point. Personally I cannot understand why the ‘in your face’ cavorting doesn’t continue to give homosexuality and lesbianism a particularly bad name, but apparently people flock to watch it.
    It continues to say something about the times we live in, and highlights the increasing number of words that undergo significant shits in meaning to suit nefarious political purposes.

  5. Warty says:

    I had no desire to be crude when composing my last sentence (above): the relevant phrase ought to be ‘shifts in meaning’.

    • Warty says:

      Normative response (1): bene. Normative response (2): melius. Normative response (3): optime. Normative response (4): not given, but ought to be a series of raised middle fingers, despite accusations of micro aggression.

  6. Keith Kennelly says:

    And the Hypocrasy of the NRL was on acute display with the rainbow fireworks and the big screen exhotions to vote yes.

    Really those responsible should be shown the door and the toe end of a footballers boot.

  7. gardner.peter.d says:

    Anyone who remains unsure about the dreadful consequences of same-sex marriage should take a look at this piece of Canadian legislation for the state of Ontario

    https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/S16023

    Do you really want this in Australia?
    If you spouse doesn’t want a child but you do it’s easy. Just get him or her to put it in writing and you can have one with someone else and legally the child is yours but should you break up, you will have no right to claim maintenance from to your spouse. Marriage is however, correctly defined as nothing more tan living in conjugal relations with one other and ends when one walks out. Just like a girlfriend or boyfriend, no difference. But a parent can be one or more of up to four people and needn’t include either of the blood parents. If a man wants a child for posterity he need only arrange a bonk with a would mum and disclaim all responsibility for the child. Great!