New MP Louisa Wall

March 5th, 2008 at 9:54 am by David Farrar

The Herald covers the swearing in and maiden speech of new MP . She replaces who has been “promoted” to the North Shore City Council.

I knew Louisa had been s Silver Fern but wasn’t aware she had also been a Black Fern. And even better she is keen to play rugby for the . I love the idea of the team having a woman player in it – their opponents will probably stupidly under rate her and be left wondering what happened as Wall sprints away to score tries.

Tags: , , , , ,

99 Responses to “New MP Louisa Wall”

  1. Scott (1,710 comments) says:

    The New Zealand Herald notes that she is young, Maori and lesbian. Apparently this is the new breed of people that will excite voters and better represent New Zealand. She has a degree in social work and so is the perfect labour candidate. Of the far left, a woman, a brown woman and lesbian.

    Given the overrepresentation of homosexual and lesbian MPs in the Labor Party one wonders when they will say enough is enough? Given that homosexuals and lesbians are somewhere between 0.8% and 3% of the population how come labour has so many? Labour appears to me to be totally committed to the homosexual agenda and is getting even further to the left socially.

    Hopefully at some point the sensible members of the electorate will wake up and say do these people really represent me? Unfortunately with MMP we can have these candidates thrust upon us without the cold reality of having to be voted in by an electorate. At least with First past the Post you knew that the MPs in Parliament were personally voted in by the people of the electorate to represent them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. ross (1,454 comments) says:

    Tim Donoghue and NZPA informed DomPost readers today that Louise Wall was a lesbian MP, reporting it in a rather casual manner. I could be wrong but I don’t recall other MPs, when making their maiden speeches, ever being referred to as a heterosexual MP. Maybe Mr Donoghue and NZPA could explain the significance of Louise Wall’s sexuality, and why other MPs’ sexuality isn’t highlighted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. James W (277 comments) says:

    “Given that homosexuals and lesbians are somewhere between 0.8% and 3% of the population how come labour has so many?”

    Making up for the rest of Parliament?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. david c (254 comments) says:

    “Given the overrepresentation of homosexual and lesbian MPs in the Labor Party one wonders when they will say enough is enough?”

    What the f*ck does someone’s sexuality have to do with their being an MP you bigoted twat?

    Each party isn’t deigned to prorpotionally represent the country, they have whoever they choose. Maybe you could ask “given the under representation of Maori and woman in the National party, one wonders when they will say “not enough is a problem”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. democracymum (660 comments) says:

    How many more Lesbians and homosexuals does Labour need in parliament?

    The argument for MMP was that it would produce a parliament more representative of New Zealand, its diverse groups and cultures.

    But having this many gay people in Government is not representation – it is a case of democracy being hijacked by minority groups for their own political agendas.

    How would we feel if a disproportionate number of Labour’s MPs were

    Little old ladies with blue rinses in their hair – pushing 60?
    or 15 seats were Skinheads ?
    or 1/3 were Muslim, (or Christian for that matter)

    More than anything our political system should be representative of the society it purports to represent.

    This isn’t about being homosexual – its about fair representation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. david c (254 comments) says:

    Ok let’s apply your logic,
    34/48 of Nationals MPs are male. Do males represent more than 70% of the population?
    No.

    Wow. National isn’t fairly representing New Zealand either…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. burt (7,832 comments) says:

    david c

    So the clear mesage is that we shouldn’t have two major parties. If voters don’t vote for major parties who want to run the country in an FPP style – this wouldn’t be an issue. The country gets the govt it deserves….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Scott (1,710 comments) says:

    Replying to David C. — “What the f*ck does someone’s sexuality have to do with their being an MP you bigoted twat?”

    Well David the New Zealand Herald certainly thought it was worth mentioning. We can also note that homosexual rights has been at the forefront of Labour’s agenda. So the labour left certainly thinks someone’s sexuality is important. Imagine if Labour had no homosexual MPs — what an outcry there would be from the left of the party!

    I actually think a person sexuality has a lot to do with things. It reveals the character. If a person is claiming they are homosexual, and if homosexuality is a sin which the Bible says it is, then that reveals the person’s character as deeply flawed. We should think seriously on that before electing such a person to represent us in Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    How many MPs are lawyers, compared to the total percentage of lawyers in the population?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    I actually think a person sexuality has a lot to do with things. It reveals the character. If a person is claiming they are homosexual, and if homosexuality is a sin which the Bible says it is, then that reveals the person’s character as deeply flawed. We should think seriously on that before electing such a person to represent us in Parliament.

    So do you think we should think seriously before electing anybody who doesn’t agree with the Bible? Or just the particular part of the bible that says homosexuality is wrong?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. david c (254 comments) says:

    “a person is claiming they are homosexual, and if homosexuality is a sin which the Bible says it is, then that reveals the person’s character as deeply flawed.”

    Are you a smorgasboard Christian Scott or should I start quoting parts of the bible that are so retarded that you wouldn’t follow them meaning you’re a flawed character too?

    Shit, John Key’s a Jew…I hope you’re ok with the Old Testament as well.

    In fact that nasty little Muzzie from Labour must really get your goat huh?

    Grow up son.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “What the f*ck does someone’s sexuality have to do with their being an MP you bigoted twat?”

    A lot actually, and if you got over your craven submission to the ideals of political correctness long enough to think about it, you might even realize it yourself. Many NZers are heartily sick of left wing progressives and their assault on our traditional culture. What I’m even more sick of is their attempts to suppress ideas and opinions that confront the “norm” they are intent on constructing. I’m sick too of their arrogant attacks on anyone who does not agree with their political agenda. I’m sick of their groundless allegations of bigotry.

    ( Look at the PC lamers out with their negative karma points against anyone who challenges the current trendy PC crap on this issue. What fucking mindless lemmings. Give me your negatives you pathetic robotic socialist arseholes, I’ll bear them with pride. I’m an individual, and I will think and say what I want.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. David Farrar (1,856 comments) says:

    What is this homosexual agenda people go on about? Is there a website somewhere for it? :-)

    Of course NZPA will refer to her sexuality, because it is a minority sexuality. Any characteristic someone has which is a minority tends to be something news reports will note when introducing someone. If someone is a Buddhist and becomes an MP I expect they will report they are a Buddhist, but might not if someone is agnostic or Christian as they are both common characteristics.

    The Labour Caucus is (officially) 5/49 gay. That’s 10% -yes more than the global population but not exactly a huge bloc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. david c (254 comments) says:

    Redbaiter it’s cute when you think you can join in discussions but you made a bit of a fallacy.

    “What the f*ck does someone’s sexuality have to do with their being an MP you bigoted twat?”

    A lot actually, and if you got over your craven submission to the ideals of political correctness long enough to think about it, you might even realize it yourself”

    Then you say that NZers are sick of “left wing progressives”. Last time I checked, being a homosexual didn’t make you a “left wing progressive”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    People get excited by young lesbian Maori?

    I would have thought the excitment would start with other lesbians and trail off as it filtered through the young and Maori demographic.

    Shes not hitting any key hot spots with the podgey middleaged anglo/saxon/maori joe six-pack deomgraphic at this terminal.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. helmet (807 comments) says:

    “The Labour Caucus is (officially) 5/49 gay.”

    You think there’s some unofficially gay Mp’s in there too then?

    [DPF: Yes, but not just in Labour, and sexuality isn't quite a binary choice so I'm not to going to put labels on MPs they haven't chosen to use themselves]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. democracymum (660 comments) says:

    davidc

    The difference between National and Labour is this:

    Politics has historically been the domain of middle-aged men
    National is starting to attract different groups and interests, such as Pansy Wong, more women, younger MPs etc
    But parliament is not an easy place for mothers as Katherine Rich has recently demonstrated

    Labour on the other hand, actively attracts minority groups to support its socialist agendas.
    Hence the high proportion of gay MPs
    And the others are cynical attempts to attract voters from minorities to bolster her party vote.
    If Helen thinks she could attract the vote of headless chickens
    She would make sure she created a Ministry of Poultry in her cabinet!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. James W (277 comments) says:

    “The Labour Caucus is (officially) 5/49 gay. That’s 10% -yes more than the global population but not exactly a huge bloc.”

    Add in the one National MP (Finlayson) and you have 6/121. That’s less than 5%. Which is pretty similar to the proportion of homosexuals in NZ.

    “a person is claiming they are homosexual, and if homosexuality is a sin which the Bible says it is, then that reveals the person’s character as deeply flawed.”

    Yes, cos the Bible is such a wonderful reflection of modern values. Here are a couple of pearls of wisdom…
    - You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk
    - If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death
    - If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property
    - Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Last time I checked, being a homosexual didn’t make you a “left wing progressive”.”

    Well, I dunno where you checked, but you need to look again. I agree that homosexuals are not all committed to trendy left wing progressive ideas that assault our traditional culture, but the vast majority of them do. I actually admire homosexuals who have the independence of thought not to buy so cravenly into that sickly pseudo liberal bullshit, but they’re damn few and far between.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “What is this homosexual agenda people go on about?”

    Fair question. I’ll answer it with another couple of questions. What is Labour’s “Rainbow Faction”? Why does it exist, and what are its political and social objectives?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. GerryandthePM (328 comments) says:

    Under FPP, MPs were elected to represent all the population of their geographical Electorate. They were the conduit between the people and Government, and bound by law to faithfully represent all those people and all matters of concern within that precinct. And by and large they did, regardless of party affiliation. Any shortfall in that performance was generally because of a lack of individual calibre, rather than an ideological refusal to represent not just the majority, but the individual as well, to the full extent of the law. The MPs office door was open to people of all political persuasions (or however else they wished to define themselves), and the MP dealt with their concerns in a professional manner. Those that did not measure up to people’s expectations could be removed at the ballot box.

    MMP offers little such representation or integrity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. david c (254 comments) says:

    Alright, alright you got it guys. There IS a homosexual agenda. It’s grand plan is to turn EVERYBODY gay. There’ll be sodomy in the streets if they get their way.

    All men will drive pink VW beetles with Pekingnese Dogs in their man-bags.

    Women will drive trucks, play softball and not shave their arms.

    We’ll all live in a utopic bliss of childless sin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. clintheine (1,563 comments) says:

    I don’t really care what anybody, including any of you lot get up to in the privacy of your bedrooms. Sex with opposite sex, same sex, sex with furniture… hell, it doesn’t bother me one little bit.

    I am uncomfortable that Labour likes to showcase this to us like it’s trendy and in essence giving us too much information about the sexual habits of their MPs.

    Personally I am only interested in how they perform in the house and what good they do for NZers, and in Labours case what plans they have for when they become unemployed after the election. Surely if ones greatest feat in Parliament is being Labours first dyslexic, gay, Micronesian Jew then I suggest they head to the job centre right now :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Craig Ranapia (1,912 comments) says:

    I could be wrong but I don’t recall other MPs, when making their maiden speeches, ever being referred to as a heterosexual MP.

    Never heard a maiden speech or valedictory where straight MPs didn’t pour the syrup on their wonderful spouses/partners/CUPcake and children. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but do you breeders really have to keep flaunting your lifestyle like that? I love my heterosexual relations (or ‘straights’ as they like to be called), some of my best friends are straight and I’m very tolerant of their life choices. But do have to keep shoving what you folks do with your genital down my throat? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. democracymum (660 comments) says:

    I don’t care what sexual persuasion anyone is either (And I am a Christian)

    I happen to think Chris Finlayson does a fine job of representing me in parliament.

    It is the disproportion that I dislike.

    (David are you sure of your figures, 5/49 seems a little on the low side)

    ITS ABOUT BALANCE!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. James W (277 comments) says:

    democracymum,

    Is 6 out 121 really that bad? Less than 5% of Parliament? I can’t see any sort of homosexual recuitment drive (as Brian Connell so eloquently put it) succeeding with those low numbers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Well, I’d rather see someone open and honest about their sexuality rather than someone living a lie for political ends.

    (oooo what am I insinuating??????????)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. dad4justice (7,791 comments) says:

    Another disgrace to enter the gallery of absurdity. It paid tribute, “to her late post hole digging( PhD) father.”
    What a collection of motley useless cretins.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Would the “a politician’s sexuality has no influence on his job” clique care to answer the questions I asked above? I’ll repeat them for those who think the scroll ain’t worth it-

    What is Labour’s “Rainbow Faction”? Why does it exist, and what are its political and social objectives?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. democracymum (660 comments) says:

    James W

    I don’t think David’s numbers are right

    If it is more like 10 out of 49 that’s 20%

    In the general population I think the figures are 3% to 5%

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. bwakile (757 comments) says:

    How many closets are unopened in the beehive?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. James W (277 comments) says:

    “What is Labour’s “Rainbow Faction”? Why does it exist, and what are its political and social objectives?”

    Oh no, Redbaiter has uncovered you now. Labour’s Kirk Branch (disabled faction within the party) had better watch out. Redbaiter might uncover their secret agenda – to force children into wheelchairs! Won’t somebody please think of the children?!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. James W (277 comments) says:

    “I don’t think David’s numbers are right

    If it is more like 10 out of 49 that’s 20%”

    Got any proof of that?

    Street (L)
    Chauvel (L)
    Carter (L)
    Barnett (L)
    Wall (L)
    Finalyson (N)

    = 6 out of 121 = less than 5%.

    Wow.

    Big conspiracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. battler (116 comments) says:

    The bigoted homosexuals should remember if it wasn’t for the hetrosexual intercourse of their parents, they wouldn’t be here.

    If everyone was homosexual the earth would have no humans in less than 120 years. Is homosexuality really as ‘normal’ as hetrosexuality? Or is that an illegal question under this government?

    In the last year there were something like 439 civil unions vs over 20,000 marriages. Yet from the noise we’ve heard from the rainbow labour party you’d think there was a great throng of previously oppressed homosexuals lining up for civil unions to give them the ‘rights’ they’ve been denied in nz for the last 160 years.

    [DPF: I've not met many homosexuals who want everyone to become gay.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    Battler, you’re asking a lot of different questions there

    Is homosexuality really as ‘normal’ as hetrosexuality?

    Well, it depends what you mean by ‘normal’, and I note you’ve used quotes so clearly you feel there are multiple definitions. In the broadest sense of the word, no, homosexuality is not as normal as heterosexuality, since homosexuality is far less common – whether it is 0.3% to 10% of the population, most people aren’t homosexuals. However, to say something isn’t normal is not the same thing as saying it’s bad.

    As for civil unions, I agree it seems that there wasn’t a big desire for them after all. (IIRC, there have been a couple of thousand, still far less than marriages, and it must be remembered that some civil unions are heterosexual couples) But saying civil unions are a silly idea is one thing, having a problem with homosexuality is another thing entirely. One can not have a problem with homosexuals in parliament (in general; one might have a problem with specific homosexuals for the policies they advocate, and Ms Wall might well be one of them) and be anti civil union. Similarly, one could be pro civil union and yet have a problem with homosexuality, in parliament or outside of it (although admittedly I don’t know of anybody like that)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Glenn (69 comments) says:

    What is Labour’s “Rainbow Faction”? Why does it exist, and what are its political and social objectives?

    I’ll take a crack, even though I’m a Nat. Labour’s Rainbow faction is group of non-heterosexual Labour Party members, much like the Young Nats are a group of non-old National Party members. It exists, I presume, to promote equal legal rights for non-heterosexuals, particularly the recognition of non-heterosexual partnerships and families. It also exists, I presume, to resist he kind of intolerance and marginalization we see in this thread, particularly the crude collectivist idea that one’s ideas and politics are determined by one’s sexuality. Big fucking conspiracy, Redbaiter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    [DPF: Yes, but not just in Labour, and sexuality isn’t quite a binary choice so I’m not to going to put labels on MPs they haven’t chosen to use themselves]

    As I understand it David Benson-Pope is fairly binary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Right of way is Way of Right (1,129 comments) says:

    But the real question must be, did Louisa Wall get a toaster oven?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    I would argue there is a difference between an MP who is gay and a Gay MP. There are those who choose to politicise certain factors about themselves, be that Race, Gender, Religion or Sexuality. Some who do so use a percieved level of discrimination as some sort of permission to conduct themselves in a morally superior way, as it allows them to play the Race, Gender, Religion or sexual discrimination card should anyone deign to criticise this person.

    This behavior is not limited to parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    God I can’t stand those bloody pekingnese dogs!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Oh no, Redbaiter has uncovered you now.”

    Can’t answer the question right you waffling PC bimbo??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. battler (116 comments) says:

    Everybody is well aware that Civil Unions were created as a form of “Same Sex Marriage” without using those words and that the fact that Civil Unions are open to opposite sex couples was purely a smokescreen to prevent more opposition to Civil Unions. Uptake has clearly demonstrated this with something like over 80% of registered civil unions being homosexuals.

    The rationale used by the “gay lobby” for advancing their various causes usually hangs on two assumptions: One being that homosexuality as as normal as hetrosexuality. The other being that homosexuality is not a “choice”, it’s just how people are born. Neither of these stand up to any sort of scrutiny.

    The fact that humanity would likely go extinct if all people turned homosexual clearly demonstrates it is not ‘normal’ if one has any intention of the species surviving.

    People who have exited the homosexual lifestyle/community report that inside that community there is huge social pressure to never question their homosexuality. They can question anything else in their life and society, but they are never to question their homosexuality. It’s at the point that they dare to question their homosexuality they realise that it is a ‘choice’ and that it’s not a fulfilling lifestyle and exit it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. James W (277 comments) says:

    “Can’t answer the question right you waffling PC bimbo??”

    I think Glenn has actually answered it very succinctly for me, but thanks for asking.

    A “PC bimbo”? Very amusing Redbaiter. I’m actually a long-time National supporter and will probably be voting Act this year. So glad you didn’t try and label me a socialist or homosexual.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. goodgod (1,363 comments) says:

    Percentage of population compared to percentage in a postion to influence society through legislation is not an equal comparison.

    Average homo joe on the street can’t vote in parliament. Does that come as a big surprise to you all? So 5% in parliament that can vote is actually a greater real percentage when compared on how much effective influence they have.

    Had average anyone on the street been able to vote for or against the amendment to S%( we would have seen a very different result. So %5 gay MP’s may actually have 100% more power than anyone else.

    And yes I know DPF is pro gay, but really, forgetting that Rainbow Labour have a website and an agenda is remarkably like the selective amnesia of the left: Completely and utterly unbelieveable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “I’m actually a long-time National supporter”

    Yep I’d believe that. Helps explain why they’re so fucken useless.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. James W (277 comments) says:

    Yea they’ve gotten that way haven’t they Redbaiter. I mean, letting a homosexual in caucus. Disgusting isn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. battler (116 comments) says:

    Glenn,

    It’s funny how when the tables are turned and the questions are directed at the homosexual agenda that the ‘tolerance’ doesn’t seem to apply.

    The homosexual and feminist activists can deny natural law and question every institution of society and there has to be ‘tolerance’ to their view. They can push to have transgender toilets in schools, homosexual civil unions, force employers to accept homosexuality, force police officers to receive ‘diversity training’ and impose ‘liasion officers’ for the “GLBT Community” and all of this has to be ‘tolerated’ and anyone who dares to question it is a ‘bigot’.

    As soon as those who subscribe to natural law question the deviance of homosexuality and feminism, the ‘tolerance’ no longer applies and saying things like “Natural sex is where a man puts his penis in a vagina. When a man puts his penis up another mans butt that is unnatural and unhealthy” it is “hate speech” and there is no “tolerance” for that view.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Chuck Bird (4,685 comments) says:

    Below are a couple of letters from express, homosexual newspaper. Firstly, it shows left wing homosexuals have no problem threatening to OUT homosexuals who do not agree with there agenda. The second letter supports what most of us know. That is there are a lot more that five homosexual Labour MPs.

    Below is a reference that puts a lie to the 10% myth. The true figure is about 2%.

    http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch2.pdf

    If as many of us believe that 20% plus of Labour MPs are homosexual or bisexual I think we have a legitimate concern. It is as much of a concern as if MPs were Communist Party members in the past and although they may have let their membership lapse are still very sympathetic to the cause.

    A number of years ago I had a more liberal view towards homosexuals but since they started intruding into families and heterosexual relationships I became a lot less sympathetic.

    Tim Barnett’s success in putting de facto relationships on par with married couples was one thing that made me a lot less tolerant.

    Labour’s change of policy regarding allowing HIV+ migrants and refugees is another example of how their agenda affects everyone.

    THE MEDIA AND MARK TODD – Express 6 July 2000.

    I was surprised to find Dominion and other of county’s newspapers found Mark Todd’s supposed sex of such importance to makes headlines. Today with gay people prominent in all spheres of life: education, sports, politics, the sports and environment, sexual orientation isn’t an issue of such shallow scandal.

    The mileage the print media ally made from this story (apart from selling papers) was the malicious unnecessary nearing of Mr Todd’s professional reputation.

    I think it is only ethical or newsworthy to publish a person’s sexual behaviour if it is a) harmful to the public good (eg rapists and paedophiles); or b) exposes hypocrisy.

    Regarding the latter, I would love to see newspapers highlight the hypocrisy and betrayal by those ex-Ministers from the last National government who have same-sex relationships and sexual encounters (three immediately spring to mind) who deliberately used their conscience vote in recent months to vote against even discussing issues of same-sex relationships in parliament. The outcome of which could give equal rights and dignity to those people out of the closet.

    It takes guts to confront real issues of scandal rather than repeating the brainless candy floss from British tabloids. I was hoping our print media had more integrity.

    LESBIANS IN CABINET PARLIAMENTARY SEX, HYPOCRISY, AND THE RELATIONSHIPS (PROPERTY) BILL – Express – 20 July 2000

    I compliment Jill Angus Burney for her Myth of Mark Todd opinion-piece (express, 6 July). Anyone with a hint of gay pride would share most of her views, especially the contrast she draws between closeted Todd and his openly gay fellow New Zealand equestrians.

    I wish I could feel the same empathy with the outpourings of Dean Baignent-Mercer in the same issue. In his attack on the New Zealand media for running with the Todd saga, he seems more concerned with the messenger than the message. Although I’m not condoning the Sunday Mirror’s tactics, once it is out there it becomes a revelation, not an allegation and we are entitled to think and reflect upon it.

    I also take issue with Baignent-Mercer’s cheap political shots about National MPs having same sex relationships and encounters and condemning, their betrayal and hypocrisy when voting on the Relationships (Property) Bill. They are two separate issues.

    If Mr Baignent-Mercer knows that these men are hypocrites, let him name them. If we all must sink to this level perhaps I might ask the half a dozen Labour lesbians, inside and outside Cabinet, why they don’t declare pride in their own identify and offer a stunning role model for young New Zealand women.

    On the second issue it might interest Mr Baignent-Mercer to know that many gay people who voted National (I am one) share his concern for equality of property rights for same sex couples but do not want a law that compels them to enter into, or contract out of a relationship that imitates a heterosexual marriage or partnership.

    Ross Baxter
    Auckland (edited)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    Uptake has clearly demonstrated this with something like over 80% of registered civil unions being homosexuals.

    More like two thirds actually battle, unless you distrust Internal Affairs’ figures. But I don’t see how you relate this to whether or not it’s good to be homosexual or to have homosexuals in Parliament.

    The rationale used by the “gay lobby” for advancing their various causes usually hangs on two assumptions: One being that homosexuality as as normal as hetrosexuality. The other being that homosexuality is not a “choice”, it’s just how people are born. Neither of these stand up to any sort of scrutiny.

    Whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice is something that I have heard gay people express differing views on. Both viewpoints can be used to criticise homosexuality – “Oh, it’s a choice so why validate it?” and “Oh, it’s genetic, so it can be cured”.

    The fact that humanity would likely go extinct if all people turned homosexual clearly demonstrates it is not ‘normal’ if one has any intention of the species surviving.

    That’s true, but it doesn’t mean homosexuality is problematic in and of itself. After all, if everybody became a Catholic Priest, humanity would also end. That doesn’t mean being a Catholic Priest is bad.

    People who have exited the homosexual lifestyle/community report that inside that community there is huge social pressure to never question their homosexuality. They can question anything else in their life and society, but they are never to question their homosexuality. It’s at the point that they dare to question their homosexuality they realise that it is a ‘choice’ and that it’s not a fulfilling lifestyle and exit it.

    Do you think it’s possible that one could realise that their homosexuality is a choice, but still find it a fulfilling lifestyle?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    Tim Barnett’s success in putting de facto relationships on par with married couples was one thing that made me a lot less tolerant.

    So do you have a problem with all de facto relationships having being on par with marriage? Or just gay de facto relationships?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Ross Miller (1,664 comments) says:

    Muchado about nothing folks. She should be judged on how she performs as an MP as should Finlayson (++) as should all others of that persuasion. And turning the arguement around, what about the absolutely useless MPs? To my mind that should be the focus of attention … Tizard etc etc etc.

    Move on people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. David Farrar (1,856 comments) says:

    I agree with Ross. I am amazed so many people are debating her sexual orientation which I didn’t even refer to, and from
    what I can see she isn’t making a big fuss of. It is just part of who she is – same as being Maori and female.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Normalcy is relative. I, as a heterosexual, find homosexuality abnormal. Homosexuals would probably find heterosexuality abnormal.

    However, just because I find something abnormal to me personally does not mean I cannot accept it in other persons. It also follows that I should not be forced to think so. For the record I do have a number of Gay and Lesbian friends, or should I say friends who happen to be Gay or Lesbian. I don’t want them to change and they don’t want me to. I don’t understand why they feel the way they do but such understanding is not a prerequisite to acceptance, and nor should it be. To me it is a non issue and it amazes me that certain politicians wish to make it one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. siobhan (278 comments) says:

    Thanks David and Ross, I have found the tone of this thread generally disappointing as it shows us all as the stereotypes each believes the other to be. I.E. gays are left and rednecks are right.

    If you go by some of the comments, there is a proportionate representation required based on sexuality. If we go there then it follows that representation should also be proportionate to race, religion and gender. I am confident that a politician (liar, scoundral or thief) does not make policy decisions (excluding specific policies such as civil union) based on which gender spins their wheels.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. battler (116 comments) says:

    Slightlyrightly

    Normalcy is not relative. Normal is the standard, the regular, the natural.

    Hetrosexual relations between a man who has come of age with a woman who has come of age is natural and it is the means by which all of us are here today.

    Homosexuality, Paedophilia, Bestiality etc are deviations from that which is regular and natural. All are unhealthy and lead to destruction of the lives of those involved and if practiced by all people over a long period of time would lead to the extinction of humanity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. battler (116 comments) says:

    David,

    If people’s sexuality is not an issue in politics, why is there a rainbow labour party group? Why did Tim Barnett make reference in media to the fact that we will not always have a “Queer friendly” government?

    These loud but minority activists have made sexuality an issue in politics by forming groups on the basis of their sexuality (i.e. rainbow labour etc) and for pushing their sexually based agenda.

    By forming political groupings based on sexuality and pushing policy on the basis and with reference to their sexuality, these people have made it an issue in politics and therefore made it a legitimate subject of public debate and discourse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. baxter (893 comments) says:

    I wonder if she got a loan of that feathered cloak she seems to wearing from Owen Glen.. One saving grace is if she does play for the Parliamentary Rugby team separate changing rooms shouldn’t be necessary. Is she related to the late unlamented Gerry Wall.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Scott (1,710 comments) says:

    Well David, with all due respect, I do not agree with Ross. It is not much ado about nothing. Although you did not mention her sexuality the NZ Herald article you linked to certainly did.

    Labour has explicitly pushed the gay and lesbian agenda during its entire time in office. Many many people were opposed to civil unions. But labour pushed it through anyway. I believe the gay and lesbian agenda is central to Labour’s identity. So as far as labour is concerned it is very important.

    As far as Christians, and also people of a conservative persuasion, are concerned it is also vitally important. Nothing shows more clearly the rejection of the biblical values upon which our Western civilisation is based, than the embracing of homosexuality as normal. If homosexuality is okay then anything is okay. Once we embrace homosexuality, then all concepts of right and wrong are up for grabs. Now to the atheistic left that is no problem — they see human nature as infinitely malleable as they pursue their socialist utopia. To the libertarian right it is also no problem — it now leaves plenty of room to manoeuvre and pursue whatever sexual desires they happen to want without those pesky Christian morals getting in the way.

    However what about this. What sexual deviancy would preclude a person from being morally fit to serve in Parliament as an MP? A man living with two women? A man living with a 12 year old in a sexual relationship? A man living with a goat? (My apologies for having to bring this up — unfortunately paedophilia and bestiality seem to be the only boundaries for some people, and for some people not even that).

    Where would you draw the line? Or is there no line and everyone does what is right in their own eyes?

    [DPF: 12 year olds cannot consent. Neither can goats. As for a man living with two women - well assuming you don't mean flatmates, I'd just make the point that many many MPs have affairs - and that is arguably worse than openly living with two partners. And I am sure many MPs enjoy some bondage - which many label a deviancy - should they all be excluded also. ]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    Personally, I would draw the line at a man living with a twelve year old or a goat. The difference being, the two men or one man and two women involve consenting adults, the goat and the twelve year old don’t.

    The idea that ‘if homosexuality is okay, everything is okay’ is one I just don’t understand. Let me turn it around – if homosexuality is not acceptable, how is agnosticism or atheism acceptable?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Chuck Bird (4,685 comments) says:

    So do you have a problem with all de facto relationships having being on par with marriage? Or just gay de facto relationships? /i>

    The short answer is both. Many people who lived in a de facto relationship did so for a reason. That reason being that they did not want to be treated as a married couple in regards property division. This caused the breakup of many long term de facto relationships.

    Barnett introduced his de facto property legislation to help legitimatize homosexual relationship. This adversely affected many heterosexual de facto relationships. Barnett was warned of this during submissions but could not give a damn.

    I the same way homosexual activist lobby for homosexuals to be able to give blood with caring that they will put the general population at risk.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. battler (116 comments) says:

    “Do you think it’s possible that one could realise that their homosexuality is a choice, but still find it a fulfilling lifestyle?”

    If one finds living in a relationship where nothing is procreated fulfilling and satisfying. If having a man push his penis into your bottom where poo normally comes out is fulfilling and satisfying. If having higher rates of STDs is fulfilling. If having lower life expectancy is fulfilling. If having your conscience constantly bug you because your natural conscience knows that homosexuality is deviant is fulfilling. If living in a sub-culture with high levels of jealousy is fulfilling. If being told be the people in your subculture that you should question everything in life except never question your homosexuality is fulfilling.

    A lot of homosexuals are brought into the subculture as younger people and they are seduced in by older men. They are brought into a social environment where they are drilled again and again to never question that their homosexuality is the cause of their bad feelings about life and always taught that the “system” the “society” is intolerant and the “system” and “society” needs to change to accept homosexuality and then everything will be good in the world.

    It’s when people break out of the ‘group think’ and dare to question their homosexuality that they are able to find freedom.

    [DPF: Okay well first of all many many woman enjoy having a penis in their bottom also. Also many hetero couples do not procreate.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Battler.

    You have your idea of what constitutes normal, I have mine. What is Natural to you, and you seem to have very established ideas on that, may be un-natural to others.

    Me, I am a White, Heterosexual, Right leaning, semi lapsed agnostic, who drinks alcohol and coffee, eats meat, including pork, monogamous, married family man.

    You take any one of those personality traits, and you can find a person who considers that abnormal because they don’t see the world, or our place in it, in those ways.

    My lifestyle will anger intolerants in many communities including Gay and Lesbian, militant Feminists, Muslims, Jews, Baptists, vegetarians, vegans, mormons, those who change their middle name by deed poll to “Thankyoufornotbreeding” (yes I know of such an individual) and left wing persons.

    But then that’s their problem. I can’t influence how they live their lives in order to make me happier about the world I live in, but then neither can they.

    My advice to you battler, is to pull your head in, accept that some things you find abnormal are going to happen, and deal with it by accepting it, even if you will never understand it.

    Bye, I’m off to get a Ham sandwich.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. dad4justice (7,791 comments) says:

    Oh dear not another queer !!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. battler (116 comments) says:

    Slightlyrightly,

    Us humans don’t get to determine what is normal. Normal is set by the laws of nature.

    We can’t break those laws of nature, we only break ourselves when we try and live outside the parameters of those laws.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. david c (254 comments) says:

    Does that mean that infertile couples are against the laws of nature?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. battler (116 comments) says:

    [DPF: Also many hetero couples do not procreate.]

    The funny thing about nature is that the hetero couples and the homo couples who don’t procreate don’t produce any offspring to carry on their way of life when they die.

    When they die, their way of life dies with them since their way of life didn’t involve procreation. Perhaps that’s why some older homosexuals target young people at a vulnerable point in their life and try and convince them that homosexuality is natural and that they were born homosexual and they better get used to it and never question it. Perhaps that’s why they push for homosexuality to be taught in schools and for schools to have transgender toilets.

    [DPF: Okay my tolerance has a limit and your linking homosexuality to paedophilia reaches that tolerance point. Be warned]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. david c (254 comments) says:

    What the hell are you talking about battler!? I’m yet to see these homo-recruitment drives you’re talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Grendel (957 comments) says:

    a ‘homo’ recruitment drive would at least be an interesting party. can’t imagine sitting around reading the bible with Battler decrying all the abnormal people out there doing the ‘nasty bottom sex’ thing is going to be overly exciting.

    battler give it up, just becuase you think its normal or abnormal does not mean anyone else does or give any validity to your views.

    This new MP is probably going to be the usual wet, pointless, socialist drain on society the rest of labour are. whether she is straight, bi, lesbian, hermaphrodite, blue, a mormon, jew, teacher, DandD player, or a soulless grumble old church botherer like battler is totally irrelevant.

    edited for bad spelling :)

    [DPF: Actually what I would find interesting to observe would be a lesbian recruitment drive. Hell I'd even provide the popcorn :-)]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. siobhan (278 comments) says:

    Interestingly, I know gay people, muslim people, european and maori people, christians and atheists as well. And never have I heard the sick bigoted drivel from any of those people that I have had the misfortune to read from battler.

    I have never understood why some people seem hell bent on ramming everyone it to a nice little frame called “normal”. The problem is what I see is normal is different to what a muslim sees as “normal” which is different from what a somali sees as “normal”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. battler (116 comments) says:

    Notice the ‘tolerance’ starts to wane when people present a different viewpoint to the homosexual agenda?

    They try and state that normal is “relative” and that you can’t state that something is “right” or “wrong” and yet these activists themselves want attitudes to “finally come right”. So they tell us that we can’t say something is “right” yet they want us to have an attitute that is “right” – right only insofar as it lends support to their deviance and attempts to push this onto vulnerable young school age people.

    Tim Barnett is quoted as saying:

    “We will not have a queer-friendly government forever. I believe there is a real urgency to completing the equal-rights agenda, so that moving backwards becomes totally unthinkable and untenable, so that over ensuing generations, attitudes can finally come right.”

    —- Funny how there can only be an ‘ensuing generation’ through natural sexual relations and the homosexual activists will be long since dead with no offspring to be around in the ‘ensuing generations’ —-

    “We know much more than most about what Government could do and is doing, and we have the luxury of being full-time stirrers.”

    “As queer politicians, our mission is to deliver equal rights under the law, and ensure that the Government machine is working for our community.”

    —– this again is where these activists rightly come under public scrutiny – they want to ensure that “the Government machine is working for our community” —–

    “Comprehensive action to make all our school environments safe for young people coming out as queer. That should include access to counselling, ……– and inclusion of relevant studies in the curriculum.”

    —–It’s one thing for these people to live out a deviant lifestyle and to do to each other as they please in their own bedrooms. Pushing it into the school curriculum of children is another thing altogether. Their agenda has been “outed” and that’s why Barnett is running for cover this election and Labour know that they’re toast. ——

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    Oh shit, watch out David the right wing homophobes are attacking. HIT THE DECK!

    Here goes another post that is completely full of hard out right wing Christian fundamentalists who need to get a new lease on life.

    So what if she is gay? that is who she is and how ‘god’ made her. If only you got on with your lives and had some respect for other people.

    Just think if we had a Parliament that was made up of 50% gay/lesbians, 50% woman, and 50% men – there you go.

    How great would that be!

    P.S – Of course I believe MPs should be elected off merit. It just so happens that the 5 Labour MPs are gay – but they are fantastic MPs – that is why they are MPs!

    So what!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. battler (116 comments) says:

    James – it wouldn’t be an issue that any MP is homosexual except for the fact that they themselves form political groupings based on their sexuality and that they are pushing a particular agenda through public politics that is strongly tied to their personal sexuality. This is what makes it a legitimate subject of public debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Rex Widerstrom (5,274 comments) says:

    What Ms Wall chooses to do in the bedroom doesn’t interest me in the slightest and – aside from occasional laws which try to regulate morality and which have no place in Parliament anyway – I doubt whether her sexuality will influence her decisions as a law maker.

    Whether or not we have one more lesbian / gay person in Parliament alarms me not at all. What does give me pause for concern, however, is that Labour has chosen yet another MP with absolutely no real world experience.

    Ms Wall’s official biography lists her as having armed herself with a Diploma in Sport and Recreation, a Bachelor of Social Policy and Social Work and a Masters in Social Policy. After goodness knows how many years cloistered in the halls of academia she then went on to become Manager of Maori Health Research and Health Research Council of NZ and from there to a Policy Analyst at the Human Rights Commission.

    I’d be more interested in seeing statistics, not on who puts penises into bottoms (TMI there, battler) but on who amongst those who lead us has ever held a real job outside academia, quangoes (including unions) and government departments (including teaching)? Who’s ever employed someone? Who’s ever started a business from scratch? Who’s ever been unemployed and struggled to raise kids on a benefit? Who’s been sacked by a callous employer? Who’s added measurable value to their employer’s bottom line and been deservedly rewarded for so doing rather than just being paid for turning up?

    The fact that the activities of most government MPs outside the bedroom are so far removed from the reality of the lives of ordinary New Zealanders – and thus are wildly misrepresentative of the make-up of the country – is what ought to be alarming us, folks.

    Because someone who’s never lived the lives that most people live cannot pretend to know what’s best for those people, no matter how many social policy degrees they amass.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. dad4justice (7,791 comments) says:

    Is calling someone a queer a crime now?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Grendel (957 comments) says:

    Sleep, what makes you think those nutters are right wing christians?

    i’;m right wing and think both you and battler are a waste of skin.

    This is about the people who are dickheads becuase they want to regulate how others live their own lives. you happen to be a dickhead and snivelling lefty, neither makes the other better or worse. battler is a dickhead and sounds like a christian, neither has anything to do with each other or anything to do with how he votes.

    and battler, in what world is you calling someones personal life choices deviant any evidence of tolerance?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. ross (1,454 comments) says:

    Craig wrote: “Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but do you breeders really have to keep flaunting your lifestyle like that?”

    I understand that in Sydney they have a Mardis Gras, just for us straight folk, every year. Of course, it’s not a big event and you will never see it mentioned by the media.

    DPF wrote: “Of course NZPA will refer to her sexuality, because it is a minority sexuality”.

    By the same logic, the National Party should receive more media attention than the government because it’s, well, um, a minority party! The ACT Party should be flooded with media attention because it’s the biggest minority (or is that the smallest?) in parliament. Want to rethink your logic?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. siobhan (278 comments) says:

    No d4j, a queer is a queer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. battler (116 comments) says:

    Grendel, I can tolerate people and their right to have their opinion, even though it is deviant.

    This is in stark contrast to the minority homosexual activists who wish to push through their sexual political agenda, and wish to legislate away the right of others to free speech.

    It seems you perhaps can’t tolerate others expressing a viewpoint that clashes with your own deviant views.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. pushmepullu (686 comments) says:

    If one finds living in a relationship where nothing is procreated fulfilling and satisfying.

    Speaking as a childless straight man, I do find that satisfying.

    If having a man push his penis into your bottom where poo normally comes out is fulfilling and satisfying.

    As opposed to having it shoved into your vagina, where urine usually comes out? And, as DPF asks, are you against all anal sex, or just male/male anal sex? (And what about female/female anal sex?)

    If having higher rates of STDs is fulfilling.

    Well, an individual person doesn’t have a ‘rate’ of STD, they have an STD or they don’t. If you’re asking whether being part of a particular group that has higher exposure to STDs is satisfying, no I doubt it would be; but then again, women have higher rates of STD infection than men, does that mean women should be disatisfied with their gender?

    If having lower life expectancy is fulfilling.

    Again, should men be disatisfied with their gender, due to lower life expectancies?

    If having your conscience constantly bug you because your natural conscience knows that homosexuality is deviant is fulfilling.

    Well, this is an interesting one. What do you mean by a ‘natural conscience’?

    If living in a sub-culture with high levels of jealousy is fulfilling.

    I’m not really certain that homosexuals are more jealous, on the whole, than heterosexuals.

    If being told be the people in your subculture that you should question everything in life except never question your homosexuality is fulfilling.

    So, before I answer this, what’s your problem here? You think homosexuals are too questioning, or that they should question everything?

    A lot of homosexuals are brought into the subculture as younger people and they are seduced in by older men.

    Or women, presumably.

    They are brought into a social environment where they are drilled again and again to never question that their homosexuality is the cause of their bad feelings about life and always taught that the “system” the “society” is intolerant and the “system” and “society” needs to change to accept homosexuality and then everything will be good in the world.

    Do you feel that homosexuals exist in a ‘social environment’ independent of heterosexuals? If so, do you think the problems you’ve explained above could be solved by creating a shared homosexual/heterosexual social environment where homosexuals are exposed to the viewpoints of people of varying sexuality to their own?

    And how does bisexuality fit into your view on these issues? We’ve been talking as if everybody was solely attracted to one gender, but that isn’t the case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Grendel (957 comments) says:

    i suspect you are the deviant battler, i have no problem with your odd little deviant habit of basing your life of a very old piece of fiction, and can tolerate it a lot even if it is deviant.

    however tolerating it is a stark contrast to the minority activists who wish to push through their own personal ‘moral’ agena and wish to legislate away the right of others to practice freedom of expression and lifestyle.

    it seems that you definately cannot tolerate others expressing a view point that clashes with your own deviant views.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. helmet (807 comments) says:

    Battler- “Normal is set by the laws of nature.”

    I hope not. Not that long ago I saw a female duck get pack raped six or eight male ducks by the pond outside my office. Nature’s a bitch.

    [DPF: Yeah but was the female duck wearing a short skirt?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. battler (116 comments) says:

    Grendel

    The issue isn’t so much that these people live a deviant lifestyle. The issue is that these people politicise their sexuality, and have been pushing an agenda opposed by the vast majority of New Zealand. The polls are demonstrating this and the coming election will put the brakes on this deviant agenda.

    The deviant lifestyle of these minority activists has not been illegal for over 20 years according to the NZ Statutes. This has not been enough however and they have continued to push their agenda against the will of NZ. Well the 2008 election will put the brakes on it and Miss Louisa Wall probably find herself back outside Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. gd (2,286 comments) says:

    Any of you noddys on both side of the arguement heard of the old saying “Live and let live” For me I have always and will always be happy to abide by this. What I object to is the lot who have to make a big song and dance.

    It just get boring and tiresome having the same old tune over and over again and the ourage if you dare to ask fro refrain.

    Same applies to things Maori. Over and over again and again Some of us get so tried of the bullshit.

    Its overacting big time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Seems like ‘reds under the bed’ for the 21st century in this blog…great stuff.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. battler (116 comments) says:

    gd, the good news is that the homosexual and socialist agenda has been “outed” and alot of these MPs are going to be “outed” from Parliament this year. Then the government can get back to worrying about our defence forces and balancing the budget instead of bringing in homosexual marriage by stealth, thinking about putting transgender toilets in schools and interfering with parents raising their children and putting young women on the streets as prostitutes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. helmet (807 comments) says:

    [DPF: Yeah but was the female duck wearing a short skirt?]

    Nah but it was a Mallard and everyone knows that they like to sleep around.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Battler

    For your perusal and education.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

    Now what?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. battler (116 comments) says:

    DPF Asked: What is this homosexual agenda people go on about? Is there a website somewhere for it?

    Here is the website for the lobby group that Tim Barnett has been previously Executive Director of. Presently working towards legal regcognition of “same sex parents” in the UK. I know that I would hate to have raised in a home with two “parents” of the same sex. It is so confusing and un natural for a young person to have “two dads” or “two mums”.

    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/campaigns/1949.asp

    Fertility Review

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill includes provisions to legally recognise same-sex couples as parents of children conceived during their relationship. Stonewall warmly welcomes this proposed change in the law. We believe that it is critically important for any child to be raised in a stable and loving home. Many same-sex couples already raise children in just such an environment, almost always with significant mindfulness of the importance of appropriate role models in or close to their family units. It is timely that the law reflected this.

    The House of Lords passed the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill on Monday 4 February. The Bill now passes to the House of Commons. Stonewall will continue to work hard to ensure fairness and greater legal recognition for same-sex parents and most importantly, greater protection for their children. We’ll be urging MPs to support the Bill in its current form.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. siobhan (278 comments) says:

    Who is politicising sexuality – it appears that the newspaper saw fit to comment on her sexuality. Yes Barnett made a stand on civil unions, but so did over 50% of MP’s who saw the bill pass and obviously most of them were heterosexual.

    Shit until today I didn’t know there were that many gays in government, learn something new as they say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. battler (116 comments) says:

    “Battler

    For your perusal and education.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

    Now what?”

    —– “He said, “Nobody’s really investigated this issue thoroughly…”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. battler (116 comments) says:

    siobhan asked “Who is politicising sexuality ” ?

    The Labour party is.

    http://www.rainbowlabour.org.nz/

    “Rainbow Labour is the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, taakataapui, fa’afafine and intersex sector of the Labour Party. “Rainbow” is an inclusive term used to collectively describe that community. Sometimes the communities are known as “LGTBI communities”.

    Labour leads a gay friendly government. ”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Oh FFS Battler, How about the full quote eh!

    He said, “Nobody’s really investigated this issue thoroughly, because it’s so politically sensitive. It’s fair to say all possibilities are still open.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. battler (116 comments) says:

    ” Maybe Mr Donoghue and NZPA could explain the significance of Louise Wall’s sexuality, and why other MPs’ sexuality isn’t highlighted.”

    Labour MP Maryan Street explained it for us on 8th December 2007 here: http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/32/article_5352.php

    “I hope the GLBT communities can be proud of Chris Carter and me as queer Cabinet Ministers. We are proud to be there. And with Tim Barnett and Charles Chauvel also in the Labour caucus, and Louisa Wall soon to arrive in Parliament off the Labour list as she replaces Ann Hartley who is retiring, we are keeping the numbers up as we seek to reflect back to New Zealanders what New Zealand is really like. Don’t hesitate to contact any of us with any issue you would like us to pursue.

    “Our Welcome Home Loans scheme lends itself to queer friends clubbing together to buy a first home and get into the property market together. By aggregating their incomes and any deposit savings, they could borrow up to $280,000 under the Welcome Home Loans scheme and get started in home ownership. If you want to know more about this, go to http://www.welcomehomeloan.co.nz.

    “It was interesting to see the huge response which a lesbian got recently to her public enquiry about an old dykes’ home, effectively! We, as communities now contemplating retirement and provision for our old age much more explicitly, are now ready to express our needs for particular living environments in our older years. Good on us! Recognition of our relationships and our social circles can be translated into our housing needs in the future, and so they should be.

    “But this column should really be a Christmas message I suppose. I wish everybody a safe and restful holiday season – I am certainly looking forward to one! Stay safe on the road, when socialising over the holiday period and in your sexual relationships. We need a healthy, vibrant, engaged queer community for the sake of a complete and inclusive society. “

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. PhilBest (5,117 comments) says:

    So there is NO CONNECTION between the typical Labour MP’s stated ground vis-a-vis traditional morals, and the rate of scandals and corruption that occur in that administration??????????????

    DOHHHHHH!!!!!! DOHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! DOHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Chuck Bird (4,685 comments) says:

    Why do liberals and lefties try to suppress evidence of the high rate of homosexuals offending against adolescents?

    http://www.gayconspiracy.co.uk/page49.html

    Rape of a sacred trust. How pedophiles have targeted the Boy Scouts of America

    By David M. Bresnahan

    “You shouldn’t have done it. It ruined our lives,” cried one of several boys from the back row of a Medina, Ohio, courtroom last week.

    Michael Maggy, 35, a former Boy Scout leader, had just pleaded guilty to rape and sexual battery, and the poignant comments from his victims were brought home by a sentence of life in prison issued by Medina County Common Pleas Judge Christopher J. Collier.

    “I know what I have done to you,” Maggy said to his scout victims, as reported in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. “I can’t apologize enough.” Confessing that he too had been sexually molested as a boy, Maggy said he had lacked the courage to seek help.

    “I did not get counseling or even talk about it. Look where it got me,” he said.

    Here is a case of a former victim following the same pattern.

    This is not an isolated case. There clear statistical evidence that there is a correlation between homosexuality and the sexually abuse of children particularly adolescent boys.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. gd (2,286 comments) says:

    PhilBest you must get with the new programme The new morals and ethics are that anything goes as long as you dont get caught out.

    Offering mates whanau whatever lucrative contracts jobs for life whatever is OK Stuff the citizens, those bastards dont deserve the oxygen they get to breath.

    The Socialists and their supporters mantra for the past 9 years has been Take It Take it all Keep taking it

    Stuff the taxpayer stuff the little people that we are supposed to represnt the dumb bastards are just voter fodder to get us our just and proper rewards. We are the Ruling Class and never let them forget it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. david c (254 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird I’m actually speechless. You make me sick.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    Craig, we’re straight we date. Deal with it!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Chuck Bird (4,685 comments) says:

    David, does the following make you sick or turn you on?

    The author is himself a homosexual is trying to convince other homosexuals to modify their lifestyle and reduce their number of partners as condoms are not anywhere near as effective as the homosexual activists claim.

    SEXUAL ECOLOGY by Gabriel Rotello The Synergy of Plagues 69

    “Rimming” or analingus, was almost unknown before Stonewall, but in the relaxed and presumably hygienic environment of the seventies it spread rapidly among cores of gay men who had lots of partners. Older gay men often report that they had never heard of the practice before the sixties, but by 1980 it was ubiquitous. “That gay men are exuberant in their practice is now verified,” Seymour Kleinberg wrote in Alienated Affections in 1980, “in the epidemic proportion of amebiasis in recent years, which not only demonstrated the widespread practice of rimming, “but also the fact that popularity is recent.” Oral-anal sex provides an easy route for the transmission of a host of diseases, including hepatitis and intestinal parasites. As with anal sex, it was significant in gay sexual ecology not merely because of its adoption by some gay men, but because of its adoption by men who practiced it with multiple partners.

    The parasites that were spread in this way had never before been considered sexually transmitted. Randy Shilts reports that public health departments were caught so completely unawares by the situation that at one point New York health inspectors diligently searched the Greenwich Village water supply for the source of a surge in amoeba cases in the neighborhood, convinced that such parasitic outbreaks had to result from contaminated water. Just how fast these intestinal parasites penetrated certain segments of the gay population is illustrated by the spread of Entameoba histolyitca. In the mid seventies the only reported cases in the United States were in travelers returning from abroad — there was not a single locally acquired case anywhere in the nation. By 1980, however, a mere five years later, more than 20 percent of all gay men in America were estimated to be infected.

    [DPF: Ok this thread is now closed. Far too many people obsessed with sodomy. Quite ironic considering the post was a about a lesbian MP and far far more heterosexual men take part in sodomy than lesbian women!]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote