Sunday, April 22, 2007

Bradford is getting desperate

I watched Sunday on TV One tonight.
You can watch it here

In tonight's programme, Bradford was asked for some comments. Being so blown away by the brazen lies that Bradford was letting roll off her tongue, I grabbed the weekend Press and scribbled down what she said on it. not verbatim...

Bradford was asked "So you're trying to change the mindset of New Zealanders?"
Bradford: "Yes".
"Isn't that what they call social engineering?"
Bradford: "You can call it that if you want to, but I think that it's worth it to stop kids from dying from smacking, hitting and beating."

From her own lips, Bradford states that
a) smacking has killed children
b) social engineering is good

Bradford looks miserable, is acting desperately and looks like she could do with a good night's sleep.


John Heatley said...

Read this and go suck a dick you dumb fuck. I hate it how the religious right are always full of bigotry in fighting for their causes that they ignore what's happening in the society they live in. I had a gay friend who committed suicide because of the constant pressure and judgment people like you put on him. Christians who claim to love their neighbours are often the most hypocritical and mean people in the community.

Anonymous said...


I totally agree with you. But, hey, please keep your language civil. People will not take you seriously if you use course language. :-)

The article you forwarded re the beaten child, certainly does reflect the true issues surrounding Section 59.

The likes of the Destiny Church are wanting to push their own righteous far-right evil agendas. They are not Christian. They are bigots and anti-Christian and give genuine Christians a very bad look!

dad4justice said...

Hey John Heatley cut crap talk - Bradford is looking more and more as a weak,feeble , fragile and moral being. Enough of the nanny social engineer - enosh ! No one has been damned for having committed too much evil to be forgiven ;but many are in hell for one sin of which they would not repent .The art of overlooking is as valuable as the art of forgetting.Every act is a boomerang . I suggest you do kind ones .

Wackford Squeers said...

I have just read that link too about the 3-year-old child being smacked to death for soiling his pants.

Apparently this family frequently hits (or smacks) their children.

If that 3 year old had behaved himself he would not have died from over-smacking.

We need to keep Section 59 to maintain discipline. The risk of children being harmed or killed from over-smacking is a very worthwhile risk to take in order to maintain discipline in our homes. The courts are very good at dealing with this unfortunate, but sometimes necessary outcome, even though it may (and sometime may not) lead to a conviction.

Furthermore, Section 59 needs to be widened to reflect the discipline laws of the 18th and 19th centuries. Morals began to fall when husbands were banned from chastising their wives or partners. When this discipline was banned THAT is where the social engineering began – so this is really nothing new. Sue Bradford must have done all of this before in past centuries during her previous lives.

Section 59 should allow employers to chastise employees, children should be caned in schools as well as in the home, male partners and husbands should be able to chastise their woman partners, spouses or wives and the birch should be used in the Military.

As long as reasonable force under Section 59 is used then no harm can come from it. You can also ensure that smacked employees will be more productive.

NZGabriel said...

Lol: "...children being harmed or killed from over-smacking is a very worthwhile risk..." "...during her previous lives." "...smacked employees will be more productive." "...Section 59 needs to be widened to reflect the discipline laws of the 18th and 19th centuries." [we are in the 21st century!]

wackford squeers said...


Unfortunately the 21st century is a very undisciplined era. Employees are grumbling over low pay and poor conditions or otherwise become dole bludgers unwilling to work. Children are running riot all over the place. Woman have forgotten their place in the kitchen and want to be independent instead. A totally undisciplined lot. All of this social engineering to make people's lives happy and worthwhile is totally unacceptable! People should be living as disciplined non-complaining compliant beings for the common good. And if they refuse, then Section 59 should be systemically applied to their bodies. A good few hard whacks with the birch or riding crop is what they all need.

Did all this undisciplined rabble happen in the 18th and 19th centuries? I don't think so. 18th century discipline will fix all of societies woes forever. Everyone will know their place and not complain, but instead do God’s work willingly and knowingly.

Jonathan said...

wackford squeers,

I'm going to assume your comments are in jest.

If they are not made in jest then please stop posting your opinion here. think think most people in the %80 who oppose the smacking bill would not find it such a bad thing if the only alternative is what you are suggesting here.

Jonathan said...

John Heatley,

Thanks for your comment (excepting the fowl language).

Sadly your perception of Christians is a common one. However I hope you come accross enough Christians in you life time to change this perception, as I know many many many christians who are not as you say.

When Jesus came to earth the people he was most critical of were not murderers, prostitutes, etc... the "sinners". He was most critical of the pharisees, who were the religious leaders of their day, and were legalistic and hypocritcal.

A Christian should be following the example of Jesus Christ and should not be judgmental, hypocritical and legalistic, and sadly the exact opposite of this you have seen from your own experience.

Regarding the news article you linked to. That poor boy was beaten to death. And there's not even the remotest chance a sensible jury made up of people like yourself and myself would allow this man to get off this assult charge on the basis of Section 59. This wouldn't and doesn't happen. I suggest that this man will be going to prison because of law that currently is in place and is suffient.

Anonymous said...

Hi Jonathan,

Actually, I think it is a woman who is charged over the murder of the 3 year old boy. (I stand corrected if that is wrong)

Regarding Section 59 Jesus Christ (I am a Christian) did not condone the smacking of children and would not support Section 59 as it stands. The Proverb in the Bible "Spare The Rod" is totally mis-represented (I think deliberately for self-serving interest over generations)

The Rod (and staff) is a tool used by the shepherd to guide their sheep. The shepherd never hit of struck the sheep. It is exactly the same with children.

Jonathan said...


have you ever worked with sheep?

Anonymous said...

I was brought up on a farm!!! What are you inferring??

Jonathan said...

I'm inferring that sheep don't just go where you point your staff.

If the "Rod" in proverbs is a shepherds staff then it is more an argument for smacking than against.

DO you know a sheep farmer who has never used force on his sheep?

And if he has... how does he have them crotched, shawn, drenched, etc?

Jonathan said...

sorry that last line should read...

And if he hasn't(ever used force)... how does he have them crotched, shawn, drenched, etc?

I'm also curious to what support you have for you claim that Jesus would not support section59!

Anonymous said...

Do you crutch, sheer, and drench your children?

Get back to the point!. A shepherd does not beat his sheep and cause pain to them. He simply uses the rod to guide them. I think you are just trying to support the argument that it is OK to cause pain to children under the guise of "discipline".

Jonathan said...


That is the point.

What I am trying to support is the argument that it is sometimes necessary for a parent to smack (yes it causes pain!) their child not 'under the guise of "discipline"' but for discipline.

A shepherd does not beat their sheep. Correct... but they sometimes use force when required to do things (as mentioned earlier) as it is for the benefit of the sheep.

A real Parent would not beat their child... but they sometimes use force when required as it is for the benefit of the child.

Pain is important. It warns and teaches us...

If we had no pain then if we have our hand on a hot element then it will burn and be permenantly damaged. But thankfully for our own good we were designed with sensors that tell our brain "ouch... that's hot!". The pain warns us of bad things, in this case a burn, so we can move our hand before any permanent damage is done. It also teaches us, the element is hot when it's red, I won't touch it again cos it hurts.

It's quite simple really. Pain is a mechinism the brain has that warns us "this is wrong" and teaches us not to do it again.

Telling someone that the element is hot may work, but for some people the pain is needed because they just like to find out for themselves.

Diablo said...

fool! you cannot save the boy... now you shall join him - in Hell

Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Your word. - Psalm 119:67

David wrote in that familiar psalm, Psalm 23, "Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me." The rod and the staff were shepherd's tools. The staff was a long, crooked instrument the shepherd would use when a sheep was going astray. But the rod was simply a club, which was used when the staff wasn't working anymore.

We may think that a club is extremely cruel to use on a poor sheep. But better to get whacked with a club than to be eaten by a wolf. Sheep are incredibly dumb. They will actually line up to die. If one sheep goes over a cliff, the other sheep will say, "Get in line. We are all going to die today. Let's go. Single file." The shepherd sometimes has to use extra corrective measures on a wayward sheep that could lead others astray.

I have seen the Lord use the rod of suffering or sickness to get someone's attention. He will say, "You really shouldn't do that," and then convicts them by His Spirit. But they might ignore Him. So He tells them, "Don't do that. You really shouldn't do that. I don't want you to do that." If they continue to ignore Him, BAM! God will use His rod: "I told you—don't do that." I have met a lot of people in hospitals who have come to Christ. Unfortunately, a lot of them don't stay with Christ. But others continue to walk with the Lord.

Maybe God has recently whacked you with His rod to get your attention. Maybe He has given you a wake-up call in the form of suffering or sickness, and you've been wondering why. It is because He loves you.

- Greg Laurie

Anonymous said...

Jonathan and Greg,

Maybe God whacked you with his rod??

God's Love??

Here is a true story resulting from childhood corporal punishment, LEGAL under Section 59.

This is a PERSONAL story so as true Christians, I expect you to respect the truth within it.

Please NO NOT attempt to minimise my story to support your argument that pain and discipline in childhood is acceptable.

It stuffed up my life BIG TIME!!!

April 2007
A true life story

Pain was a major participant in my childhood – both psychological and physical. I experienced terror in my childhood. I was forced to witness pain and humiliation being inflicted on my peers as well as on myself at school - in the name of “discipline”. “Smackings” from my parents all contributed to my fear and isolation. This childhood treatment resulted in “pain play” that served as an escape from the psychological pain and isolation caused by corporal punishment.

As an adult, I came to realise that this behaviour has its roots set deep in childhood. The causes are very complex. Drawing from my own experiences, it is the result of psychological humiliation, caused by the common use of corporal punishment. The fear and anxiety generated by such treatment induced isolation that cannot be expressed in childhood. The outcome is the expression of pain and solace in childhood dysfunctional play. My story explains some of this phenomenon.

The psychological shame and fear surrounding such behaviour has been very devastating. For a very long time I never spoke about it. The associated isolation has also been unbearable. This caused me to become suicidal. Throughout my childhood and into adulthood it was a closely guarded secret. It was many years before I found the courage to speak to another human being about my pain play behaviour.

When I was around five or six years old, I would go into gorse bushes. I would use the prickles to jab myself. This produced a sexual arousal, which interacted with the pain – similar to the pain inflicted by corporal punishment. It is from here that the pain play behaviour developed. I began to use this to create secret self-induced “fun” and “comfort”. This became my way of dealing with the isolation I experienced as a child.

I used several methods to “create” pain in my childhood and teenage years. One was by dripping hot wax on to my arms or legs with a candle. I invented this in my early teens, or perhaps even earlier than that. Later, the behaviour began to take on a new turn when I began self-mutilation by cutting and burning myself. But sewing needles and pins were my most favoured options in my childhood for playing.

The description “pain play” may not be exactly accurate either. Because it is rather, the repression of pain that is a major component of the play. I now understand that this behaviour is very addictive. I also understand that the addiction comes from the endorphin release in the body while pain is being induced under controlled conditions. The higher the “endorphin rush” the higher is the pain threshold. Under “normal” conditions, I have a very low pain threshold. During “pain play” I choose sites to pierce or cut that would usually be very painful indeed. Pushing needles through at normally painful sites induces a high excitement at levels that I could never experience at any other time. This certainly puts me out of touch with reality. No wonder it served such an important role in my childhood. In BME and BDSM circles this phenomenon is described as “subspace”.

In my late teens and into my twenties, this pain play behaviour remained a closely guarded secret. This secrecy was enforced by the fear and shame surrounding the behaviour. I was certain in my own mind that I was the “only one in the world” who did such things to myself. I have since discovered that this behaviour is common within our society.

A life-long struggle with my shame has finally ended. Instead, the shame is now appropriately placed at the feet of those who caused distress in my childhood. Those who advocate hitting children in the name of “discipline” like my parents and school teachers, now appropriately carry the burden of that shame. I take a pragmatic approach that I should have been able to do years before. My confidence has been a long time coming. This writing serves to completely remove my shame, secrecy and psychological pain. I now claim my dignity that was taken from me as a child. Today, I bear physical scars from my many years of self-harm and ‘pain play’.

I need to be able to safely and appropriately speak about my behaviour. So every time some ignorant fool condones child “smacking” to cause pain I provide my true story with purpose.

Section 59 Survivor
Palmerston North
New Zealand

Mister said...

My dear Wackford,

You are entirely correct to point out all the pernicious faults of the present age: please note these also include "indiscriminate tolerance", general lack of good breeding & the refinement of Gentlemen, lack of self-discipline, & a spirit of egalitarianism & socialism. The rot really started to set in with the abolition of slavery & the needless education of women in matters of politics, science, technology & innumerable other fields of endeavour that need not & indeed should not ever have become matters of concern for them. As a result of such abominable liberties eroding away all boundaries of common decency, one wanton whore of Babylon named Sue Bradford is actually entertaining grandiose thoughts of Reform that will surely unveil once & for all the full horror of this degenerate society.

A restoration of the natural condition of civilized society will necessarily include the reintroduction of the rum ration to all naval personnel deprived of it by that fop of an admiral Hill-Norton; reintroduction of titles & priviledges, introduction of work houses for the poor & other assorted vagrants of society, abolition of all pensions & benefits, reintroduction of capital punishment for all offences for which it was used (including the divers methods prescribed for each type of offence) in England as of 31 March 1554. Just as important will be the reintroduction of serfdom for the lower orders of society, a strict curfew & limitation of their movements & the abolition of freedom of speech. All public notices should once again become subject to strict censorship.

Above all, all methods of corporal punishment in common use in England as of 31 March 1086 should be introduced.

graemea said...

S59 debate and law

Sue Bradford needs to be reminded some say, law is more based on who can win the argument then truth or justice. Did you know that lawyers can lie in court? Example if a lawyer knows someone committed a crime they have to do there utmost to try and get them off in the way of a good defense.
Sue Bradford needs to remember the law can be an ass. I know someone who confessed to murder on video and signed a written confession. They got off because the police made a technical error by mistake. I know of a rapist who got off because the police mixed the clothes in the bag for DNA evidence and there was a 0.1% chance of cross-contamination. None of these things are fair and certainly is not justice for the victims. But that’s the system we have and take the good with the bad it is not perfect by any means.
People might be asking what’s this got to do with S59 being removed, well everything in my view.
If people used S59 reasonable force to discipline their child and got off then that’s the system we have as unfair as it may be. If a jury let someone off for using a plastic pipe to discipline a child (which I don’t agree with) then it proves my aforementioned points about the law and our system anomalies.
Murderers, rapists can get off sometimes on a technicality, that’s the price we pay for having this type of system. Are you now going to change all the loopholes or flaws Sue?
I know someone who killed a person claiming self-defense because they said it was reasonable force under the circumstances, are you going to remove that as well Sue?
Years later the truth came out but because of the double jeopardy law the person could not be charged again. Not everyone using S59 gets off and in fact it’s hardly used when you compare it with the amount of child abuse cases. The only issues I have with removing S59 is that innocent parents will suffer which will be another injustice.
In the same way I know of guilty people getting off I know of the innocent who have been wrongly convicted. Again that’s the price we pay for the system.
You are taking away peoples right to justice if light smacking on the bottom with the hand would result in parents being convicted by the removing of S59. That’s equally as wrong as the people who get off using a pipe under the guise of discipline.
Sue you need to let the court and justice system run its course and we all live with the consequences right wrong or otherwise, unknown like David Bain, Arthur Allan Thomas…
I think Sue’s idea equates to the cure being worse then the cause because it will put so many other people in an unfair position. It also gives CYFS even more power then ever when they can’t be trusted to handle what they already have.
I am in favor of stopping any excuse for child abuse but don’t see your idea as the way forward. There are other factors that need to be addressed that could make a bigger difference and not penalize good parents in the way your current idea does.
I think physical punishments should be the absolute last resort and only used when the child is in danger of hurting themselves or others. While Sue might say her Bill allows for this I disagree. It takes away any defense and relies on the police discretion.

Jonathan said...

Section 59 Survivor,

Thank you for you honest comment.

I can't begin to imagine how someone in that situation would feel as I have never experienced anything like that. No one under any circumstance should have to experience 'terror' in their childhood. Unfortunately many do.

There are many many stories of tradedy in our society. The Kahui twins, lillybing and many others who unfortunately are forgotten due to the sheer regularity of such things.

The fact remains that parents who unlovingly abuse their children are currently criminals under the current law.

... Many many people drive far to fast for the conditions and cause severe injury and death. But rather that ban driving altogether we have speed limits imposed.

So you could say that Section 59 is the smacking limit.

I do not condone beating. beating is abuse and can cause lasting or permenant damage. What I'm refering to is force that is reasonable under the circumstances.

I was smacked as a child. It cause pain at the time and made me cry. But in the end it did me no harm.

I am not trying to make light of your story, but that is my story.

Section 59 Survivor said...


I really needed to post my story after the hurtful comments you made earlier.

I need to make it clear to you that I was hit very similar to you - so the 'smacking' was 'reasonable'.

This is NOT about Sue Bradford - and I do not think parliament is handling the situation appropriately either.

However, present legislation clearly allows the treatment I suffered as a child - THAT is NOT to be denied.

I think there is a lot of ignorance out there surrounding childhood and mental trauma and this needs addressing.

I have reiterated a couple of paragraphs in my story that I need to repost to clarify how I was damaged sexually as result of smacking.

At the end I give you two website links. The first illustrates "pain play" behaviour and the second is about self-injury.


When I was around five or six years old, I would go into gorse bushes. I would use the prickles to jab myself. This produced a sexual arousal, which interacted with the pain – similar to the pain inflicted by corporal punishment. Inflicting pain on a child can cause damaging sexual arousal that can be devastating later in life. (This apparantly happens with some children and I happen fall into that group, which I discovered years later when receiving professional help to understand what happened to me as a child). It is from here that the pain play behaviour developed. I began to use this to create secret self-induced “fun” and “comfort”. This became my way of dealing with the isolation I experienced as a child.


The psychological shame and fear surrounding such behaviour has been very devastating. For a very long time I never spoke about it. The associated isolation has also been unbearable. This caused me to become suicidal. Later in life, this led to two suicide attempts – the second attempt being almost a success. Throughout my childhood and into adulthood my self-injury was a closely guarded secret. It was many years before I found the courage to speak to another human being about my pain play behaviour.


Some of the behaviour is extreme which shows the extent, the addiction has on some people (These people have no insight into their behavour)

Self-injury information:

Section 59 survivor said...


You said:

"I was smacked as a child. It cause pain at the time and made me cry. But in the end it did me no harm".

I really do envy you. I wish I could say the same!!!!

Section 59 survivor said...

el diablo,

What do you mean by that comment?

Are you trying to call me a liar?

If so you have better think again - very carefully!!!

Section 59 Survivor said...


That message from el diablo has a link to an offensive image.

I suggest you remove it if possible as it is totally inappropriate here.

It also confirms the type of low-level ilk that this person is.

Andy Moore said...

No more punks posting rubbish on this blog. I have enabled comment moderation - it's a shame.

I agree, S59 Survivor - thanks.

dad4justice said...

Thank you Andy, good move to stop trouble , as punks calling me a paedophile on kiwiblog has resulted in a angry overflow of emotion - that has seen me banned for a period .
The pro section 59 social engineering gulag gang are unctuous, stupid and twisted . They are from the dark one and God is my strength to whom I turn , for O God you are my stronghold -the God who shows me love .

Anonymous said...


One must wonder about Greg Laurie who calls himself "El Diablo" (The Devil).

1. He quotes the Bible
2. He presumably regards himself as Christian (I have my private doubts - yet who am I to judge).
3. He seems inclined to distribute pornographic images.
4. Seems slightly reminiscent of a certain former Christian Heritage MP doesn't it?

The "section 59 survivor" asked you to remove the objectionable material and I support that idea. Why haven't you done so? And while I'm about it, can't you get rid of those ridiculous, though admittedly
quaint and amusing contributions by a couple of "characters" from Dicken's novels "Nickolas Nickleby" and "David Copperfield"?

Alexander Nevsky

Andy Moore said...

Good on you D4J.

All comments will be published - apart from ones that contain excessive bad language, unrelated material or links to offensive pages.

Section 59 Survivor said...

Hi Dad4justice,

That is absolutely terrible and totally inappropriate. No one deserves to be called and labeled such libelous statements.

I also totally agree with the comments made by "Alexander Nevsky" regarding Greg Laurie.

In closing, I Wish you all the very best in your endeavours.

S59 Survivor
Palmerston North.