It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Zealand Votes to Legalize Smacking Kids

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Smacking children to remain illegal in NZ

THE New Zealand government has refused to bow in the wake of a national referendum that overwhelmingly called for a law change to give parents the right to smack their children.

Prime Minister John Key said the referendum result would not be ignored but neither would the law be changed.


www.news.com.au...





posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by sliceNodice
 


i came here 5 yrs ago from Scotland and yes its a beautiful place. 15min drive to great beaches and 1hrs drive into snow covered mountains.

it still has the same problems as other countries though. Domestic violence, drugs, gangs.

but still, there are only 4 million people here and theres lots of space to live.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by grantbeed
 


4 million people.
40 million sheep.

Rwarr.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 


This is cool. Newfound respect for Kiwis. I shall keep supporting NZ goods. (Like what?)






posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   
The thing is that this is not about smacking children or not smacking children, child discipline, child abuse or anything like that.

It is about Section 59 of the Crimes Act, that "had to go" because it was made clear in the media in the early 2000s was a UN DEMAND and so would happen no matter what, as it had been promised by our government.

It all started in 1997 (12 years ago now) with the "campaign" of a minor party in parliament (which self destructed shortly afterwards and hasn't ever been heard from since) to have Section 59 of the Crimes Act repealed. S59 was the defence of "reasonable force" if you were to be charged with assault. In this publicity campaign we were told that "child abusers were hiding behind this section" and all of a sudden there were advertisements on TV, radio and in newspapers depicting adults beating small children with sticks and lumps of concrete and throwing them against walls - and we were told that this had been deemed in the past to be "reasonable force". It was made clear from the start that the agenda was to outlaw any physical discipline of children whatsoever and we had staged public "debates" on TV and radio with people talking about "hitting" and "beating" children instead of "smacking" children.

Between 1997 and 1999 public opinion was canvassed twice and the result was (and this is a quote from a government publication) "an overwhelming majority of NZers" didn't want the law tampered with. Then in 1999 there was a change of government, but the new prime minister took up the cause and made it clear that she backed "ending S59". There were also a lot more revelations as to her motive and the motive of a lot of others for that to happen. She revealed that it was a UN demand and being such a UN obsessive, she would make sure that the law was changed "come hell or high water". She did it very cunningly and found a minor politician in the "Green party" to put her name to the Bill. The government "adopted" this "private members Bill" (which had been dubbed "the anti-smacking Bill") and the government made absolutely sure that it was passed into law.

The government (or should I say the UN) finally got its way in 2008, but not before several other polls of the general population all reaching the same conclusion, i.e. 88%, 94%, 93%, and finally 97% of the population not wanting their right to discipline their own children interfered with by government.

So we have a "no smacking law" - which btw is rigorously enforced - and our ex-PM - Helen Clark - how has a cushy job in the UN in New York, paid for by the freedom of NZers.

First our PM proposed "yes we will eventually change the law anyway, but we will do so after an 'education campaign" to educate people on how to be good parents and how to think the right way. At one point I was engaged in "idle chatter" with a parlaimentary secretary who answered the telephone when I telephoned someone in parliament about a press release that they'd put out about this and the woman said to me "no of course it is not about smacking children, it is about hitting them over the head with iron bars". I was too stunned that anyone could believe that that I didn't say anything to her at the time.

Parliament was never going to let us have a proper referendum on the facts and dictated the wording of the referendum to make the question asked as ambiguous as possible so as to ensure voter confusion. The question really should have been "do you want S59 re-instated"!



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
With all this talk about "legalization" I could have swore that title said "Smoking Kids"


LOL..

Anyway... back to the topic "at hand"



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigfootNZ
Just to clarify this a little.

.... Sue Bradford of the Green party took on a personal crusade to bring in this law change that would make even technically a light smack a criminal offense ....


You know, it had absolutely nothing to do with Sue Bradford. Sure she was a real idiot for agreeing to put her name to it, but she was used very much, by Helen Clark. Seriously, do you think Sue Bradford has the capability of putting a Bill together?

You might remember when it was first "mooted" in 1997 by Laila Harre of (the then existing) Alliance party. After Alliance died a natural death and after the election of 1999 it was taken up by Labour who did a lot of talking and threatening, but didn't actually propose anything "concrete" until a "private members" Bill appeared with Sue Bradford's name on it which was "adopted by the government" and it became a government Bill, and it might have been backed by Sue Bradford, but she wasn't the one behind it it.

Do you remember Helen telling us "yes we will eventually change the law (despite what you say) but only after we have our 'education campaign'"?

Followed articles in newspapers and magazines, television and radio trying desperately to confuse smacking with child abuse. All of a sudden there was no such thing as "smacking" or "disciplining", there was only "hitting" and "beating".

Helen showed her utter contempt for the public of NZ and she is now number two in the UN in New York probably showing her contempt for everybody else as well. Of course "H2" (Heather Simpson) her long time companion has gone with her.

We have paid for Helen and Heather to fulfill their lifes ambitions with our freedom and now we have a reputation for being a country of idiots.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Oh just though of this and I just had to share it with everyone.

I was listening to the radio in the early hours of Saturday morning while waiting for the baby to wake up to be fed (she didn't take long as usual, and hopefully will be past late night feeds soon).

Anyway, I digress. Sue Bradford made a statement about the referendum. It really was the stupidest thing I have ever heard a politician say, and I have heard some "doozies".

She said "with the 46% of people who didn't vote, combined with the 11% who voted 'yes' and the 1% of voters who 'spoilt their papers', 60% of the population sent a clear message that they want to retain the law outlawing 'hitting' of children".

(or words to that affect - obviously as it was radio I can't quote her word for word).

Can you believe that anyone would be that dumb, or arrogant perhaps?

That's totally a new one on me, claiming the non-voters for yourself. This is unbelievable.

This is what your taxpayer dollar is paying for. She is a list MP btw, NOBODY AT ALL voted for her.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


Oh, the timeout.
Along with grounding is one of the most pathetic forms of discipline invented by Americans.

No wonder you have the largest prison population on the planet. At some 3 million, that's 1% of your entire population. What a great pristige for your country.






posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
An odd smack on the behind now and then(for bad behaviour) helps children to learn respect. Only parents should be allowed to do this. If you do not smack your child when he is out of line, he will be smacking you when he gets older.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by mogul

You know, it had absolutely nothing to do with Sue Bradford. Sure she was a real idiot for agreeing to put her name to it, but she was used very much, by Helen Clark. Seriously, do you think Sue Bradford has the capability of putting a Bill together?

**Whole lot of good points**



Hey totally agree with you, thing is im a Labor and Greens supporter in reality, just not on all points
... just will never be able to support National ever, they go against my moral grain, big business, banks and pandering to farmers and all that.

Not sure if your post was hoeing into me or not, back in 1997 i was just a fresh from college kid, wasnt until that year i even read the news paper or watched the news every night, unlike now.

Didnt realize it was an Alliance members bill to begin with, interesting considering I voted Alliance the election around that time. My comments on Sue Bradford is more about how shes the person who ran with it, and seems to have taken it like it'll be her immortal stamp on the countries history... then whines about the public up roar like its being unfair.

Id hardly call our country full of idiots...we got em but I still think we've got that spark of common sense some other larger countries lost a long time ago... no offense to others in this thread



Originally posted by mogul

She said "with the 46% of people who didn't vote, combined with the 11% who voted 'yes' and the 1% of voters who 'spoilt their papers', 60% of the population sent a clear message that they want to retain the law outlawing 'hitting' of children".



Yeah I read that on Teletext and couldnt make heads or tails of it until your post (i spoilt my paper due to a crud question but my vote wasnt going to be in favour of her). Shes flustered and clutching at straws over a shock to her reality that most of us dont agree with her. Looks like Family First are starting to really push the government over accepting the referendums out come for a repeal of the law change. Will be interesting (although I aint holding my breath, its National after all unless they really are scared of being in only one term this time around)

Pity Labors rudderless
(even though I think Goffs not to bad, just weak)


Originally posted by mogul
This is what your taxpayer dollar is paying for. She is a list MP btw, NOBODY AT ALL voted for her.


yeah one of the biggest problems with our governmental system, i say once the smacking fiasco is over the public get busy on cutting parliament down to those who actually won their seats
, oh and excess parliamentary privileges.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by BigfootNZ]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Hey totally agree with you, thing is im a Labor and Greens supporter in reality, just not on all points

I'm not at all. I'm not for National either. I think the country shouldn't and doesn't actually have to be monopolised by two parties. I will always vote for smaller parties and I encourage others to do the same so we can diversify the Parliament. Most people I know don't like either party but they'll vote for one of them because those are the two major contenders and I think, that's a plainly bad idea. People will vote in 2 parties that do not represent the opinions of the people because the people don't know the point of voting.

You aren't betting on a horse that you think has the best change of winning, you're voting for the party you think has the best policies.

I don't know, maybe you do think that's Labour (I certainly don't think it's the Greens).

Last election, I voted for the Legalise Cannabis party.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Last election I didn't even bother on voting. Mates tried coercing me into voting for Labour or another lefty party, which I would've probably gone for if I had have voted, but I don't even know. I just don't believe what any politician says. They're all a bunch of people with motives behind their smiles.

I guess at least our prime minister is a man, and not a woman that looks like one, I guess. Oh well, she had a good run.

I dunno, politics seems way too sarcastic in this country. I kinda like that we're not an extremely politcal nation, I already feel ostracised as is.


Not to say that I think I'm beyond the system or anything, I just believe that each and every one of us is.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Whine Flu
 


I guess at least our prime minister is a man, and not a woman that looks like one, I guess. Oh well, she had a good run.

You could say that, but you could also say he's an absolute smug twat as well.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


That he is, that he is. Something about his grin says "I invite you to punch me in the face".



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dallas18

Smacking children to remain illegal in NZ




no adult has a right to hit a small child..it is an act of violence.


“Children need love, especially when they do not deserve it.” ~Harold Hulbert



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by eldard
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


Oh, the timeout.
Along with grounding is one of the most pathetic forms of discipline invented by Americans.

No wonder you have the largest prison population on the planet. At some 3 million, that's 1% of your entire population. What a great pristige for your country.






The timeout has worked great for my son. Last time he had a timeout was probably 6 years ago.

I haven't had any disciplinary issues with my son since then. I've never had to smack or otherwise hit my son, and he does everything that is expected of him.

Maybe I just got lucky.... Then again, my father hit me all the time, and I never did anything he wanted me to.

Some of us just don't respect violence.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by peaceonearth
An odd smack on the behind now and then(for bad behaviour) helps children to learn respect. Only parents should be allowed to do this. If you do not smack your child when he is out of line, he will be smacking you when he gets older.

I got 1 smack after sneaking downstairs to watch tv after being sent to bed like half a dozen times already, one barely anything smack, didn't hurt at all but I was so shocked I never did it again.

he will be smacking you when hes older?

I didn't. Not once, Not ever. I'm living proof against what you just said.

are you American?
"peaceonearth=smack them now or they'll smack you later"
sounds American to me.

P.L.U.R.I
-B.Morrison



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
We now have something to hold over our kids. "Pack your bags, we're moving to New Zealand."



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Nice that they can vote and change laws. Look at the mess the US children have been making. Why? because they can turn their parents in for spanking, slapping or any other kind of "abuse". We in the US screwed up when we let overeducated, underexperienced bookworms make policy.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join