One Response to “Opposition to Smacking Law Based on Right to Parent, not Right to Smack”

  1. Mrs Dianne Woodward says:

    Sir Edmund Hillary observed that as a child his Dad gave him a few hidings in the woolshed for discipline and he said it didn’t do him any harm, I’d say he turned out ok with his determination and strength to overcome danger, so it’s obvious his thoughts on Political Correctness. All children after being warned must know there is a consequence if they disobey and 85% of good parents know a stinging smack is a reasonable option out of many others that parents may choose to use to protect or correct their children if they break the rules. Even time-out could damage a child if used too often just like cruel words spoken in anger but surely you can’t out law time out or monitor speech therefore I agree with Lindsay Perigo NZ’s a Nanny State when clearly 8 in 10 Kiwis didn’t want so called experts Miss Clark, Jim Anderton, Peter Dunne and Sue Bradford spying and interfering into private home lives, wasting police time investigating a light stinging smack. Thinking but guilty feeling Mums and Dads signing Sheryl Savills petition for a referendum by the 25th June (21 days) will allow parents the last say on election day. How dare Cindy Kiro tells me to move on she’s the only one qualifyed enough to move on and out, I may not have all her qualifications but I sure as heck know the diffence between smacking and bashing as the Miss Clark did before she became PM. Anyone who thinks a smack is child abuse isn’t in the real world. Mr Key said he would fix it we’re counting on 390,000 signatures so he can make good on his promise.

Leave a Reply