Thursday, April 19, 2007

Stars coming out to fight smacking bill

5:00AM Thursday April 19, 2007

Former All Black Mark 'Bull' Allen

As the smacking debate returns for another round of argument, the opposition to the bill is bringing out its stars to win over the public.
Next month, Green MP Sue Bradford's controversial bill - aimed at eliminating the defence of reasonable force in relation to assaults on children - will once more be debated in Parliament.

Yesterday lobby group New Zealand Family Values In Jeopardy announced plans for a mass rally on Parliament's lawn on May 2. Speakers include Destiny Church Bishop Brian Tamaki, with former All Black and church member Mark "Bull" Allen officiating. "I'm a parent, I have five children, and I think that how you parent your children is a personal responsibility," Allen said. "I don't think we bring our children into this world to be told how to parent them by other people. When we use a corrective smack on our children, provided that it's done in a controlled fashion and a loving manner and done with an explanation, I think that is pretty reasonable." Allen, whose media-friendly manner and distinctive bald head won him great popularity in his playing days, is by no means the first celebrity to have loaned their cachet to either side of the argument.

Family First, which has been at the forefront of the campaign against the bill, began the celebrity parade when notables such as radio host Simon Barnett, former All Black Michael Jones, Oceania football player of the century Wynton Rufer and former Silver Fern Linda Vagana signed an open letter which called on MPs to reject the bill.

It did not take long for the bill's supporters to respond in kind. In March, when MPs last debated the bill, journalists Judy Bailey, Paul Holmes and Linda Clarke, rugby commentator Keith Quinn and Bishop Richard Randerson were among well-known people to put their names on a banner showing support for Ms Bradford.

(Who the heck cares what Paul Holmes has to say? And the weak kneed bishop from Auckland? Selling out to the overtly anti-Christian agenda of the Clark/Bradford Regime? Laugh - I think that's all you can really do.)

"This is a chance for us to do something tangible to protect our children," Bailey said at the time. The banner was organised by Every Child Counts project manager Deborah Morris-Travers. The former MP said its aim was to use celebrities to highlight community support for the bill, and to address the fear and misinformation surrounding it.

(Every child Deborah? - what about the 15,000 kiddies that are murdered by the State every year?)


Anonymous said...

Judy Bailey? That's unbelievable. I thought she was a Christian.

Anonymous said...

I was wondering when someone was going to mention the murdering of thousands of babies each year??

Andy Moore said...

Right. The communists, femminists, greenies, the left are desperately trying to ignore the issue of abortion, at least just until they can rush this anti-democratic bill through.

Propaganda, exagerations, lies and deceit are the only tools they have left with which to push this poorly-written bill through Parliament.

Wackford Squeers said...

Speaking about the murdering of babies, a parent is presently before the courts in Auckland for bashing her 3-year-old child to death. Apparently the family frequently hits (or smacks) their children.

This is OK. It has to be expected that some families are going to go too far and harm or even kill their children – that is the “nature of the beast”.

We need to keep Section 59 to maintain discipline. Casualties as mentioned above are a very worthwhile risk to keep order in the home.

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 it is nothing new.

Section 59 should allow employers to chastise employees, children should be beaten in schools and the birch should be used in the Military.

As long as reasonable force is used then no harm can come from it. You can also ensure that employees will work harder!!