Dennis Morris-Traveller - 1st Interview: Vote Yes? No! 'SATIRE'

[dafecat]

This isn't just about the facts anymore.

%89 voted against this bill and communist Labour ignored them.

I'm voting for the NZ peoples voice, I'm voting for NZ Democracy, I'm voting in favour of discipline, I'm voting against the anti smacking bill.

[headlessrd]

89% did not vote against the amendment to s.59

Latest polls have showen 30% now oppose the legislation, 113 MPs voted for the amendment and a YES VOTE

is supported by BARNARDOS, PLUNKET, UNICEF, SAVE THE CHILDREN,

WOMENS REFUGE and 70 other NGOs

[annimasy]

another example i asked child psyhologist my friend what her advise when kids doesnt listen to you and she told that at work she advise parents talk to kids but in reality she does punish her kids coz talking not always help.

[annimasy]

i think ppl have to understand that there is difference between abuse and discipline.and so what they offer if parent once smack child take kids away?do they think that it sbetter for kids grow up in foster home.if you look back most of older ppl grow up and their parents would smack them once in a while and now with all this talking that smacking is wrong most of kids have no idea how to behave right.

[headlessrd]

However if a defence allows people to escape prosecution for beating their children should this be allowed?

Because that's what was happening when reasonable force was there.

No Good parent has been prosecuted because of the law change. That's what family first deliberately isn't telling anyone.

[rossgnixon]

Excellent video, though maybe too 'close to the bone' for misotheists!

[kurtsharpe]

Lame video.

But seriously- physically harming children is not cool. This video is irrelevant- hitting the most vulnerable in our society is not right.

[cheetah100]

A quick smack on a child's bottom harms the child physically not at all. If there was harm is would be abuse. The main point of a smack isn't physical its physiological. It is to show a line has been crossed. It should not be used frequently nor in anger. There are many behaviours we might consider undesirable - smacking being one - but there should be a clear line between this and physical abuse.

[vientorio]

What a spin, any person who attained 5th from English in any NZ school can perfectly understand the question presented in this upcoming poll. MP's calling it "ambiguous" and "cloudy" are merely trying to spin this into a take-away of our right for citizens to bring a nationwide referendum.

How quick was it a new "bill" to be put up to destroy this right? Days. How long for a law change regarding dangerous criminals? Decades. It should be clear what the mantra is.

[kurtsharpe]

Not correct, no right to Citizen Initiated Referenda has been taken away- blatant fallacious statement. There are always bills going through the house relating to crime... do you actually follow what goes on at Parliament?

[75brucifier]

Clearly you failed 5th FORM English!

[vientorio]

Very well made parody Renton. Discipline of our children is a god given right to parents. Now I see S Bradford is drafting another bill to get this.... stop people from using the democratic referenda and replace it with "State Sanctioned" "non binding" questionaires.

[bjwhitaker1]

Ah the irony of it all.

Deborah Morris-Travis representing the YES vote accusing the NO vote of Confusing & misleading statements (Morning Report 14 June 2009).They are the group that cant string a sentence together without blurring the distinction between smack and beat. Its at that point that the confusing and misleading statements begin and where they largely rest 3 years after the debate began.

[johnyohyeah]

I just cant get over this it disgusts me!

Child abuse is no fucken joke u sick old man

[rynso]

This post is illustrative of the type of foul, abusive language that has often been used by those who would claim to be against abuse...sweet irony...

Future posts with foul, abusive, or violent language will be deleted and the poster asked to repost using more acceptable terms...

[kurtsharpe]

Just because someone swears or calls you 'sick' doesn't make the language violent. Therefore it is not ironic.

[cheetah100]

Child Abuse is certainly no joke. The real question here is what effect will this law have? By conflating a small inconsequential smack on the bum with beating the living daylights out of a child we very well may actually reduce reporting of child abuse. John Key talks about this law "working" - but to date I have seen no statistical evidence to support such a claim.

[johnyohyeah]

You people need to get a life, this law is about making real change.

Deborah is an honourable women who doesnt believe in violence against children.

[chuckbirdnz]

"Or is morality determined by majority vote rather than a higher law?"

In a democaracy yes. I am strongly opposed to the removal of section 59. However if I was in a small minority I would likely reconsider my position.

To compare someone getting a very early legal abortion with someone who tortures a small child to death I find quite repugnant. If I was undecided on the referendum your stance could encourage me to vote yes.

[rynso]

3 things:

1. Is there any moral basis on which the will of the majority can be opposed? Hitler had majority support in Germany. Was he right in what he did?

2. IF... you were undecided on the referendum...' etc. This is hypothetical. Alternatively, you could see the hypocrisy, decide, you wanted nothing to do with it, and vote No.

3. The photo shown was a 28 week girl - minus head, the same size as some born kids. What is it that confers value and thus justifies granting protection?

[chuckbirdnz]

Hitler, is getting even further from the original topic of parental discipline than abortion. I got home a little late. Would you kindly till me how many abortions 28 weeks or more were preformed in New Zealand in the last year and on what grounds? I do not think the Hitler analogy is fair any more that the 28 week abortion. I will respond when I hear your reply on the number of late term abortions.

[rynso]

chuck: I don't have the numbers at my finger tips. My contrast of the 28 week girl, with a born child was made simply to pose the question, 'What is it that confers value and thus justifies granting protection?'

I could have asked, 'Is it size?' Are you saying it is valid to kill kids at 10 weeks because they are smaller, but not at 28 weeks because they are bigger? If it's not size, then what is the determining critieria? And how does this apply to born kids? What confers value on them?

[chuckbirdnz]

Renton, I am not surprised you do not have the figures. The picture may not even be from New Zealand. There is no way anything can be achieved by debating abortion except creating ill will. Your first video was good. The latest is offensive. Misleading at best, dishonest at worse. I cannot see how you will sway anyone regarding restoring parental rights with your latest video.

[rynso]

It seems like for plenty of people, 'there is no way anything can be achieved by debating [parental authority and correction] except creating ill will'. You've arbitarily chosen to to make a hard distinction between killing kids prior to birth and killing kids after birth, and to say that discussion of one must not be on the table when discussing the other. I say all killing of kids should be on the table, so as to expose the hypocrisy of those who bleat about abuse, but endorse killing of kids.

[chuckbirdnz]

I am not a Christian and not a militant anti abortionist although I believe there are far too many abortions. I am also strongly opposed to this piece of legislation that undermines parental authority. I wonder if Renton has really stopped to think what he is trying to achieve. If it is to get the law amended he is going about it the wrong way. This last video linking abortion - even very early to abortion - to smacking will just put some people off who are undecided on the smacking issue.

[rynso]

Chuckbirdnz: Thanks - but a matter of opinion.

The point at that point in the 'interview' was assault against children. Any interviewer could legitimately ask the questions asked, but because most in NZ are PC, they never do. Thus the hypocrisy of the vote yes people, who bewail abuse against born kids but at the same time endorse killing unborn kids, is never confronted.

Seeing you raised it...if there are too many abortions as you say, how many too many? 5? 50? 500? 5000? 18380 (2007)?

[chuckbirdnz]

"Seeing you raised it"

You raised the topic of abortion not me.

[rynso]

The point being queried was where you said: 'I believe there are far too many abortions.' All that was asked was how many too many?

[chuckbirdnz]

rynso, the vast majority of people do not accept that a embryo is kid as you call it. Dragging abortion the debate on parental discipline weakens the case for a law change regarding parental disiplene.

If you want a law change to ban abortion start a referendum and see how many signatures you can get.

[rynso]

If the vast majority of people do not accept the unborn is a child, then that just highlights how morally schizophrenic most people are. Or is morality determined by majority vote rather than a higher law?

Whether or not it weakens the case re the law and parental authority, is highly debatable.

I've simply questioned the great unquestionable, and implicitly made the emminently reasonable point that a child's life is a single continuous life and should not be abused either side of birth.

[rynso]

askjo543:

Thanks for the compliment, and for spending minutes of your insignificant life learning and appreciating things of value.

I just note two things, seeing you seemed to have missed them:

1. It is parental authority I am upholding, which includes the judical right of parents to correct their kids, something the new law strips from them.

2. There is a referendum coming up in August and people like you need to be informed...

[askjo543]

You are surely the most retarded individual I have yet encountered. Of all the hooby-horses one can acquire, you choose to dedicate hours of your insignificant life to defending a parent's right to smack. You are clearly - like all religious types - a tyrant at heart, hell-bent on upholding tyranny. Trite though this injunction may be, it is nonetheless the most apt: 'GET A LIFE!'

[JamesHippolite]

Well done Renton.

[thevoicejam]

Very well done! Got a real good laugh out of it. Keep up the good work.

[rynso]

Thanks...

[rynso]

Reflect some more on it cheetah - and you will see they are not disconnected. In fact it should be as plain as day to someone who claims to be in anyway logical and rational. To make the disconnect is to be morally schizophrenic...

[cheetah100]

The point here is that without that unnecessary section you might actually convince someone. By moving off topic you force people to take sides. By alienating people who are pro-choice you damage the cause. I liked the quality of the presentation. The straw man business was so kooky it was appealing.

[rynso]

Thanks again cheetah.

Only it is not at all off topic - which in that section was child abuse. These folks are all in a lather about a few toddlers being killed but endorse untold thousands being killed before birth. Talk about schizophrenic!! Think the logic through...

They want to control the discussion by insisting the killing of kids before birth is off limits and somehow unrelated. That hegemony is not accepted...

[cheetah100]

Dude, you almost make some good points - then mess it all up by confusing the issue with abortion.

[rynso]

I forgot to say cheetah, thanks for the high praise...:-)