• Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

    “That’s some of the reasons why the ACT party stands for the repeal of this anti-smacking legislation, and that’s why I do too,” said Mr Tashkoff Press Release: Friday, 26 June 2009
  • Recent Posts

  • Networkedblogs

  • Recent Comments

  • Christian Blog Topsites

    Christian Blog Topsites
  • Tags

  • Don’t Vote Labour

    www.dontvotelabour.org.nz
  • Unity For Liberty


    Anti-Smacking Petition
    Signature Counter


  • September 2022
    M T W T F S S
    « Oct    
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    2627282930  
  • abort73

    For more information about abortion and what you can do to help, please visit... Abort73.com http://www.abort73.com/
  • Archives

  • Statcounter since February 2008

  • online counter
  • Meta

  • Blog Catalog since May 2008

  • « | Main | »

    Referendum

    By HEF Admin | June 18, 2009

    CONFUSED?


    You soon will be

    For the past 72 hours, politicians and commentators have screemed that the Referendum question is confusing

    “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in NZ”

    It seems pretty clear to us! The law currently says that a good parent raising great kids who uses a light smack for the purpose of correction is committing a criminal offence – subject to a possible complaint, possible investigation and temporary removal of kids by CYF, and possible investigation and in some cases prosecution by the police. (these have all happened – view cases HERE)

    But please take a quick moment to listen to this…

    Green MP Sue Bradford attempts to explain the effect of the anti-smacking law to an increasingly confused National Radio’s Sean Plunket this morning

    LISTEN

    Classic Confusion!!!
    Try and listen to the whole thing – and then ask yourself “so what am I legally allowed to do??” (An excellent written summary by Blogger Dave Crampton HERE )

    Doesn’t it seem incredible that our politicians are confused by the Referendum question – yet expect parents to understand the anti-smacking law, how it will be enforced, and its effect on how they should parent.

    This is why the referendum question is worded the way it is – because not even Sue Bradford knows the present answer.

    And that’s why we’ll continue to fight to have it fixed.

    Have a great weekend


    Bob McCoskrie
    National Director

    http://www.familyfirst.org.nz

    Topics: Referendum | 1 Comment »

    One Response to “Referendum”

    1. Dianne Woodward Says:
      June 21st, 2009 at 9:29 pm

      VoteNO is how the question will be answered by 9 in 10 Kiwis Sue said smacking laws were never about the real issue of child abuse. Suss Sue Reids NZ Herald article out then like me you will definitely decide NO to parents being made criminals for a light smack. Voices of 90% of us will be heard soon in agreement with what Christine Rankin, Simon Barnett and Dianne Woodward said on the 2nd April 2007 TV3 Campbell Live smacking debate still ON the TV3 CAMPBELL LIVE INTERNET webSITE. because Labour Party ignored section 59 identifying what a smack actually is as it does not bruise maime or kill, it is just one quick sharp pain a 30 second reddening of the skin that can correct bad behaviour in an instant. So Sue ignored John Key when he tried to explain this logic to the Labour Party in 2007 they with Sue Bradford ensured we all now must pay the price of 9million$$$ to promote policy NZers never wanted. Act Party tried to reason with commonsence but it feel on deaf ears. Christine Rankin has been ripped to shreds for speaking up for us in saying voteNO. FamilyFirst need our PM John Key to observe overwhelming evidence parents persecuted presently prosecutions proved.

    Comments