| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 84908 | 2007-11-22 23:43:00 | Sue Bradford is a liar | SolMiester (139) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 614136 | 2007-11-23 03:31:00 | Nice work Sue Bradford.......I for one wish you a speed expiry from this earth! As I remember, all but seven MPs voted for the Bill... I for one wish christianity a speedy expiry from the Earth. It's killed more people than cancer, that religion. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 614137 | 2007-11-23 04:03:00 | I for one wish christianity a speedy expiry from the Earth. It's killed more people than cancer, that religion. Care to explain? |
george12 (7) | ||
| 614138 | 2007-11-23 05:17:00 | Care to explain? Not sure. But if it is ok to post this kind of pro-religious sentiment: "2000+ years children have been disciplined with the hand as stipulated in the bible, however this B*tch thinks she knows better than the lord.....WTF!" ...then my statement looks pretty mild by comparison. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 614139 | 2007-11-23 05:34:00 | I cant answer any replies at present far too drunk!....LMAO....Hmmmmmm, could be more to this than the open hand!?... | SolMiester (139) | ||
| 614140 | 2007-11-23 22:59:00 | As much as I cant stand that sour woman SB, religion should never have a say in anything, especially politics. | rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 614141 | 2007-11-24 00:49:00 | As much as I cant stand that sour woman SB, religion should never have a say in anything, especially politics. Whilst I agree with you about religion, have you ever met Sue Bradford? I used to work with her when I lived in Auck, and have met her occasionally since then (Parliamentary Select Committee, airports etc). Sour she is not - anything but. She doesn't suffer fools gladly, but since when is that a sin? She is a sincere advocate for vulnerable people like children. It isn't obligatory for you to like her as a person (or any other person in gumberment come to that), but I suggest that if you want to argue against her, you deal with her arguments/points of view, not her as a person. |
John H (8) | ||
| 614142 | 2007-11-24 01:54:00 | Whilst I agree with you about religion, have you ever met Sue Bradford? I used to work with her when I lived in Auck, and have met her occasionally since then (Parliamentary Select Committee, airports etc). Sour she is not - anything but. She doesn't suffer fools gladly, but since when is that a sin? She is a sincere advocate for vulnerable people like children. It isn't obligatory for you to like her as a person (or any other person in gumberment come to that), but I suggest that if you want to argue against her, you deal with her arguments/points of view, not her as a person. I have met her, we didnt see eye to eye. She mistook me for someone else. Misunderstanding yes. And I cant stand somebody who can make these silly laws and get away with it. Absolute rubbish. Also I cant argue with her about these laws as it will not do anything anyway. Sour is nicer then what some others would say. |
rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 614143 | 2007-11-24 02:11:00 | I have met her, we didnt see eye to eye. She mistook me for someone else. Misunderstanding yes. And I cant stand somebody who can make these silly laws and get away with it. Absolute rubbish. Also I cant argue with her about these laws as it will not do anything anyway. Sour is nicer then what some others would say. Yes, there have been worse things, and less defensible things said about her, by people attacking the person rather than the arguments. However, SHE didn't "make these silly laws" - as someone above said, all but 7 MP's and the Governor General made this law. The only role Sue had was to be the only MP that had the guts to put the bill forward - the rest agreed with her that it was only sensible to take away a defence that had allowed child abusers (sorry, caring parents) to get away with thrashing kids with riding crops, jug cords etc. And as you and pctek have pointed out, there is no justification in using religion to support thrashing kids. Personally, I think the Prosecuting Police Sergeant quoted in the Stuff article referred to by PaulD had it summed up right. Good on him. |
John H (8) | ||
| 614144 | 2007-11-24 03:40:00 | Yea I get your points. I do, but somethings just crawl under my skin. She may be a nice lady, I havent seen that side yet. Mind you we have only discussed business. | rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 614145 | 2007-11-24 06:36:00 | The problem I have with this whole thing, is the fact that the boy was smacked quite a long time after he went home from school. For a smack on the bum to be effective in a disciplinary manner it needs to be applied immediately after the offense. I think the father must have lost his temper a bit, instead of hitting the boy, he could maybe have sat down and talked about it and find out why the boy misbehaved and exactly what it was he did at school. Teachers are unfortunately powerless to correct behaviour. I bet there aren't many of us out there who didn't get a whack from a teacher at sometime. Didn't hurt us did it. I mean we all turned out pretty good ay? |
lakewoodlady (103) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||