Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 89631	2008-05-06 13:46:00	Section 59/Antismacking Referendum	stevensaaron (6348)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
666654	2008-05-06 23:16:00	Also got the strap and cane at school. :) Yeeees, felt sooo gooooood - especially when the headmaster had nothing on but frilly underware and high heels. Them was the days in the 50's Ken	kenj (9738)
666655	2008-05-06 23:31:00	No I disagree with that . Everyone should have a right to say because it's a societal issue that affects us all in one way or another . What about prospective parents? Besides, we were all children once . I'm not trying to take away your right to say what you want - after all it is a free country . I was just making the point that you need to have had the experience of bringing up children before you really know what's involved . It's a whole lot different to what you may have been led to believe . I feel quite certain that most parents will agree with that .	Roscoe (6288)
666656	2008-05-07 00:41:00	So - if nothing changed, why was it brought in in the first place? Why were our politicians sidetracked on an issue for so long to pass a law that would 'change nothing'? Surely there were more important issues for our fat-bellied politicians to focus on. Inconsistencies in the law are an important issue for politicians because Parliament is the supreme law-making body in New Zealand. Our law does not countenance violence against adults - but the section in question countenanced violence against children. This is a plain inconsistency. Now judges are in no doubt as to the intentions of parliament in this respect.	Deane F (8204)
666657	2008-05-07 00:43:00	Yeeees, felt sooo gooooood - especially when the headmaster had nothing on but frilly underware and high heels. Did he wear lipstick too?	Deane F (8204)
666658	2008-05-07 01:03:00	=Deane F;671159]The repeal has changed nothing . Parents are not being charged for simply disciplining their children with a "reasonable level of violence" . Check out this weblog ( . blogspot . com/search/label/Some%20Normal%20Families%20caught%20up%20with%20Po" target="_blank">familyintegrity . blogspot . com lice%20and%20CYFs%20since%20Section%2059%20amended )about cases where normal parents have been 'dobbed in' because people have seen them grab their kids from running out onto the road, or because some neighbour heard crying/Squealing next door and many more . You cannot say that this has repeal has changed nothing . Innocent parents who lovingly discipline their childeren are being put into the category as abusers . or Click here ( . blogspot . com/2008/02/loving-father-labeled-child-abuser . html" target="_blank">section59 . blogspot . com) =Deane F;671159]All you Press F1 members who don't agree with the repeal can still use violence on your children as long as you don't go too far - so what's the problem? Sue Bradford . . . was asked whether it would be possible to smack children after her bill becomes law - and she said no . " - Newtalk ZB, March 15, 2007 What about this: Click here ( . org . nz/2008/parents-call-police-over-violent-kids/" target="_blank">familyintegrity . org . nz) . blogspot . com/2008/02/childrens-commissioner-smacking . html" target="_blank">section59 . blogspot . com The problem kids can see that "parents can't touch them" and are being taught to dob in their parents . Now I'm not advocating abuse, if children are really being abused by parents etc then they should be prosecuted, but the items in the top link are just stupid cases, waste of police time, they could be out there catching the real criminals not parents that stopping their kids from being run over .	stevensaaron (6348)
666659	2008-05-07 01:23:00	Children should have full recourse to the law if they are victims of common assault. Full. Stop. So are you saying that smacking is assault?	SolMiester (139)
666660	2008-05-07 01:27:00	No I disagree with that. Everyone should have a right to say because it's a societal issue that affects us all in one way or another. What about prospective parents? Besides, we were all children once. The fact that Section59 was even passed just goes to show how out of touch our politicians are with the tax-paying public who pay their wages. The fact that someone like Sue Bradford even managed to get traction on the issue just makes a mockery of our current political system. Social issue that affect all?, dont think so, only parents and children are affected,how do prospective parents get involved, they have yet to experience parenthood!	SolMiester (139)
666661	2008-05-07 01:32:00	The repeal has changed nothing. Parents are not being charged for simply disciplining their children with a "reasonable level of violence". All you Press F1 members who don't agree with the repeal can still use violence on your children as long as you don't go too far - so what's the problem? Why do you call it thus Deane, are you on a wind up? What makes me laugh is people like you, even if you have 50 yrs experience of child care behind you feel knowledgeable enough to attempt to disprove thousands of years history. You apparently also have a better understanding of life than the bible... You only need look to the USA to see what Green\Liberal America's alternative measures have done to their society. No respect and look out, we are going the same way. Do you even have children?	SolMiester (139)
666662	2008-05-07 02:27:00	Social issue that affect all?, dont think so, only parents and children are affected,how do prospective parents get involved, they have yet to experience parenthood! Discipline of children is a societal issue. Try thinking about it for a bit.	legod (4626)
666663	2008-05-07 02:34:00	"Should a smack as part 'Good Parental Correction' be a criminal Offence in NZ?" Typical twisting of the meaning of the bill by the opposition. Why dont you ask a non leading neutral question rather than load it totally so that it makes it near impossible to vote in favour.	globe (11482)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9