Edwards on Easter

April 10th, 2009 at 11:08 am by David Farrar

As I had my rant about Trading on Wednesday, today I’ll merely quote from well known left voice – Brian Edwards:

If I were a retailer, I’d be pretty hacked off that in the middle of a recession, with punters keeping their hands firmly in their pockets, I was about to lose two days earnings. And all because a couple of thousand years ago a Jewish preacher and revolutionary was executed in Judea and, according to his supporters, rose from the dead two days later.

I thought it was three days later?

So somehow or other we have come to the position that stuffing your face with hamburgers, pizza or KFC, eating and drinking up large in a restaurant,  going to see No Country for Old Men (R16 Graphic Violence) at the flicks, or watching a rented porno, all constitute serving God, while buying plants or tools to tend your garden on Good Friday constitutes serving Mammon.  Though it’s no longer sinful on Easter Sunday.

Praise be to such a liberal God.

In the first place, religious belief  has no legitimate role to play in lawmaking. When and whether shops stay open must be solely a matter of industrial law and not of religious observance. Holy days and holidays must not be regarded as synonymous.

And Easter Sunday is not a public holiday. It is purely a religious day.

But if we are to have undemocratic and retrograde legislation, let it at least be consistent. Let’s not make absolute fools of ourselves by saying that it’s OK to make money renting videos, selling duty free watches and flogging pulp fiction at airports, but not OK to make money by selling someone a lemon tree or a spade to plant it with.

Either ban the lot and make us all wear sackcloth and ashes for two days, or give every trader and every potential customer the right to make up their own mind on what they’ll do at Easter. I’m for the latter. Let’s open the doors. Let’s breathe the fresh air of freedom. Let’s, for heaven’s sake, grow up!

I am sure there are many areas where I disagree with Dr Edwards, but this is not one of them.

Tags: , ,

150 Responses to “Edwards on Easter”

  1. Michael E (274 comments) says:

    Jesus was executed on Friday (the first day) and rose on Sunday (the third day).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    Somebody help me please!!!!

    I jumped in my car, I put on my sunglasses (even though it is overcast and wet), I put that gel shit in my hair and I went out looking for all the “beautiful people” at my local café.

    The place is closed!!!

    Where can I pose?, where can I be “seen” and how am I going to get through the day without my cappuccino?

    Civilisation as we know it has ended, hell I cannot even purchase a bottle of champagne or find any waiters or waitresses to abuse (cos I got so much money)

    Why are the poor people not out working today?, I know they all want to cos I asked one or two of them, don’t they know there is a recession on?.

    I have the day off and I want to be able to spend money, this is just not good enough, shops and businesses should be open when I want them to be.

    [DPF: Once again you do not know the law you defend. I'm off to a bar now for some champagne. This is around the fifth time you have got the facts of the law wrong. Really - you need to start reading it. They are online you know]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    You don’t like Easter trading laws – fine but Dr Brian Edwards offensive here and you compound it.

    So somehow or other we have come to the position that stuffing your face with hamburgers, pizza or KFC, eating and drinking up large in a restaurant, going to see No Country for Old Men (R16 Graphic Violence) at the flicks, or watching a rented porno, all constitute serving God, while buying plants or tools to tend your garden on Good Friday constitutes serving Mammon. Though it’s no longer sinful on Easter Sunday.

    Praise be to such a liberal God.

    Over the years the sanctity of Sunday has indeed been chipped away by secularists such as yourself and now you mock since the law allow the renting of Porno movies on a Sunday this constitutes worship or “serving God” in the good doctors words.

    Luke 23:39-50

    And Easter Sunday is not a public holiday. It is purely a religious day.

    The sole reason Easter sunday was not declared a public holiday along with Good Friday is that when Good Friday was granted that status nobody dreamed that Sunday would loose its status as a day set aside for rest and worship and be turned over to philistines such as yourself who perfectly free to spend it watching “porno movies”. And go for it I say – enjoy.

    But for Western Christians this is the holiest time of the year and all your mockery will not take that from them or me.

    39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

    40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

    41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

    42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. </blockquote

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    No edit sigh

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Edwards has become such a sad old bugger. Hes been a bitter bloke ever since he was given an apple when he was a kid delivering telegrams in Ireland. He was sooo annoyed that he wasnt given money instead of the apple, and since then hes gotten sourer and sourer (excuse the english)

    I think the only thinGs he agrees with now is Uncle helen and john Campbell (“hes such a nice man…..”).

    Its nasty old buggers like Edwards that make the rest of us realise just how good life can be IF YOU TRY !!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. greenfly (1,059 comments) says:

    to tend your garden on Good Friday constitutes serving Mammon

    Aww crap! Who knew?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. JC (838 comments) says:

    Blaming no shopping days on religion is tiresome and an obvious piece of bullshit.

    The number of people who go to church is close to single figures, NZ is in the top ten countries for the proportion of atheists, Sunday shopping came in a couple of decades ago, ditto abortion law reform, and to cap it off, a fearless and largely atheist resisted Easter shopping for nine years?

    The remorseless fact is that surveys show nearly two thirds of the public don’t want any further extension to Easter shopping, and its a fair bet that a big proportion of shop keepers don’t want it either.. because they like holidays as much as the rest of us.

    Given the choice between placating a handful of Christians and 64% of the general public, the politicians will go for that majority every time. Religion is just an excuse used to cover the fact that 73% of females want their family at home over Easter.

    http://tinyurl.com/clpjeu

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. MikeE (555 comments) says:

    JC, if two thirds of NZ don’t want shopping then fine. They can stay home.

    Whats wrong with allowing the other third, who frankly couldn’t give a shit about your backwards, supersticious beliefs to go out, and do what they want, while you go and praise be to a Jewish Zombie cannabalism cult…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    [DPF: Once again you do not know the law you defend. I'm off to a bar now for some champagne. This is around the fifth time you have got the facts of the law wrong. Really - you need to start reading it. They are online you know]

    Really???

    You mean you managed to find one that did not order their staff to stay away or stop them (forcibly no doubt) from earning $450 dollars for 8 hours work?

    Well done DPF.

    And for the record (as you seem to like attributing things to me that I have not actually said) I am not defending ANY law, what I aim to do is stop people like you from giving greedy bosses the chance to take away the three and a half days a year that 99% of us know we are going to have off.

    But hey, I know you have to do it by stealth.

    [DPF: You do sound like Sue Bradford - wanting to decide for everyone. In fact you almost sound communist as you rant about bosses taking away workers days off, rather than paying them double time and a half. And you know employees on average get 130 days a year off. But enjoy your fantasy world

    And you really should read the law. Arguing from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance always helps. I also suggest you actually talk to some students in their 20s who work in retail about what they think. I know it is easier for you to decide on their behalf, but just try it one day - ask someone actually affected and you may learn something]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    “Whats wrong with allowing the other third, who frankly couldn’t give a shit about your backwards, supersticious beliefs to go out, and do what they want, while you go and praise be to a Jewish Zombie cannabalism cult…”

    What part of “this has nothing to do with religion” do you not get you fucking idiot?

    I also note that you want all of us to be at work because one third want to shop, that sort od thinking is right out of the Green party manifesto.

    The vast majority DO NOT want an extension of trading hours, stick that up your arrogant arse you dick head.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    oh no, people cant go to the mall today.. the horror!! Im sure the retailers will cope. they are about to get a boost from school holidays.. and if the mall was open today, their rent would go up!

    Dime loves Good Friday.. its nice to bring the country to a virtual halt!

    Did breakfast at my parents this morning, home for a bit.. then off visiting friends. everyones off work. its fuckin great!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    can somebody wheel Brian out into the garden and tell him its going to be alright

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    “You do sound like Sue Bradford ”

    Now that IS bloody offensive!, I guess I must have struck a raw nerve there DPF.

    The “130 days off a year” comment also shows a bit more about your true intentions when it comes to Easter trading legislation than perhaps you had wanted to admit.

    Sue Bradford would defend an idea that forced 66% of us to work because YOU wanted to be able to shop on what is a traditional holiday, the real “Sue Bradford” is the one pushing for a law change that would eventually see all of us working against the wishes of 66% of the population.

    But hey, don’t bother with the facts getting in the way of your “stealth”

    [DPF: No it is quite clear. I wish to force my will on 0% of the population. I want no one to be forced to do anything over Easter. You on the other hand have decided that people should not be allowed to do what they want to do, and 100% of the population should be forced to do what you declare is good for them. It is exactly what you expect from Bradford]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “the real “Sue Bradford” is the one pushing for a law change that would eventually see all of us working against the wishes of 66% of the population.”

    eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. He-Man (270 comments) says:

    Any employees who work at my business will be fired if they do not want to work on Good Friday(90 day rule)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Big Bruv,

    I am a shopkeeper, I want to be open, my staff want to work. It is the same every public holiday, every year. I’ll take next weekend off thanks when I don’t have to sit in traffic to get anywhere or share every park or public space with hordes of others.

    This weekend though I’d like to spend some quality time for my family though, and for my family right now the best thing for me to do is to put some food on the table, or get some work done on the house. But because of you and others like you I can’t because somehow it gets in the way of your sitting around at home with your family for hours on end.

    My Indian and Chinese business partners and staff feel even stronger, as they have already taken time of for their New Year and Diwali celebrations and it didn’t cause anyone any problem, and they weren’t offended by the thought of others not doing the same as them.

    Others of my staff do not live near family and are not religious and are getting bored right about now, I know this because they are asking me if I would like to do wholesome things like spend the day playing playstation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Dime,

    “oh no, people cant go to the mall today.. the horror!! Im sure the retailers will cope. they are about to get a boost from school holidays.. and if the mall was open today, their rent would go up!”

    This is incredibly naive. Ask one of these retailers if you can have a look at their accounts, because what they tell you about how they are doing will probably be a white lie.

    The only way you would get a break from rent is if the landlord was able to use the land for something else, you don’t expect a rent break for your flat just because you’re not home. Or are you trying to say that the best thing for a tenant with rent as a percentage of turnover to do is to lower their turnover?

    How do you get a boost form school holidays, all they do is change the pattern of spending, not the total money in the system. The only way school holidays could have a positive economic impact is if it affected productivity, but the labour market is oversupplied and has been limited in its flexibility to adjust prices for the oversupply.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “and they weren’t offended by the thought of others not doing the same as them.”

    Sonny, I think BB had a point when he said this isn’t a religious issue. Christian’s don’t have the numbers to force it, and he’s right.

    Trade Unions however used to hold considerably more sway in the last govt, which might explain why Hulun, an avowed agnostic, didn’t change it then.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. James (1,338 comments) says:

    “The vast majority DO NOT want an extension of trading hours, stick that up your arrogant arse you dick head.”

    Who cares what the “vast majority” wants? Its a matter of INDIVIDUAL rights you fascist jackbooted coon. ;-)

    Rights are NOT up for a vote…..what the individual wants to do with their life,liberty and property is whats right….not your democratic mob rule.Anzac days coming up….and the irony of shops being forced to close by the state on the day we celebrate and remember those who fought and died for our FREEDOM will pass many by.

    Bruv….your bleatings are no different to those of the bullyboy collectivist left. Go back to Cuba…;-P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    James

    So as long as your rights are protected then thats cool?

    You don’t give a fuck about the rights of those who will be forced to work just as long as you can enjoy your coffee in the sun with all the other trendy fuck wits.

    While I am at it, when did so many of you lose the ability to think for yourself?, you have become no better than the pinkos who cheer on command for Labour.
    It is now a case of ‘if John Key says so it must be a good idea”, you continue to stick your brain in a jar and cheer on command, so many of you are just too fucking stupid to see you are being played like a fool, in so many ways the Nat’s are no different to Labour.

    Believe me they want a change to Easter trading laws and they will get it, they know it can only be done over time and by stealth hence the input of DPF into this.

    You can shop for 361.5 days a year, that is enough for anybody I would have thought.

    [DPF: Wow you really like making yourself look stupid on this. For the 10th time - cafes were open today. I was in town and it was packed with people at cafes and bars having drinks and coffees. People voted with their feet. Please please stop making yourself look ignorant and go read the law. Or get out of your lounge, and go into town where you will see masses of people enjoying a coffee and masses of people earning money]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    So you’re saying the right to trade anytime is an inalienable right like freedom of religion, freedom of association, etc?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Reid,

    I wasn’t talking about religion, a lot of Indians and Chinese celebrate on those occasions for the same reasons as us, its traditional to have a party then, not because they’re genuinely scared of what their gods might do if they don’t.

    More so that well pretty much all of us are happy to take the rest of our 4 weeks leave when we like and don’t feel compelled to force others to do the same. I think we should lump our public holidays in with our annual leave and let people do what they want, plenty of businesses would do what they do now and close down for 2 weeks or so over Xmas and another week over Easter. Workplaces that did this I am sure would attract and retain staff that wanted those things better than those that didn’t.

    And I don’t worry that this issue is driven by religion in NZ, it is standard muddle-headed, left wing self-righteousness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    He Man,

    And then you will be out of business in 90 days as you have no staff.

    Moron.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Reid,

    “So you’re saying the right to trade anytime is an inalienable right like freedom of religion, freedom of association, etc?”

    Are you saying that the right to force others to restrict their activities and choices that coincidentally coincide with holy days of a religious minority or celebrations of war is an inalienable right?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “and by stealth hence the input of DPF into this”

    BB, one issue with the Nats is of course much of their base is either active in or extremely mindful of, the Christian faith. On top of that, most of them are also traditionalists.

    But you say that the leadership actively want to change it. Why do you say that?

    I advocate retaining the situation, because it’s a traditional part of our heritage. It’s not particularly inconvenient. It seemed to aggravate some people that the shops were busy on Thursday night. Big deal, and newsflash – it’s only for a day and you don’t need to stock up like winter’s coming which some seem to imagine is necessary.

    The biggest reason for me however is that Easter for me is about respect and gratitude to God for the sacrifice He made for all. Each year I appreciate more the magnitude of that sacrifice and debt. To me it’s good that the nation pays respect in an official way for it honours God.

    Additionally, as many people said, it’s a family holiday – we only get two of those – Christmas and Easter. Is that too many?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    big bruv,

    “You can shop for 361.5 days a year, that is enough for anybody I would have thought.”

    self-right·eous (sělf’rī’chəs)
    adj.
    Piously sure of one’s own righteousness; moralistic.
    Exhibiting pious self-assurance: self-righteous remarks

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Sonny, re: your 1:54: I asked you, first.

    However, my answer to that is no, I don’t think that the ‘no trading situation over Easter’ is an inalienable right. However, if I can’t use that then neither can you, which rather destroys the point in your 1:32.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Sorry Sonny, I was looking at James comment in relation to my last post.

    How embarassing….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Reid,

    “The biggest reason for me however is that Easter for me is about respect and gratitude to God for the sacrifice He made for all. Each year I appreciate more the magnitude of that sacrifice and debt. To me it’s good that the nation pays respect in an official way for it honours God.”

    That’s fine Reid, as an atheist I am acutely aware that I am the product of a Christian heritage. I do not take any glee in the low rates of observance in NZ and am not opposed to the idea that the opposite might be better. However, I can not manufacture any religious belief in myself and do not believe it is appropriate for the state to force it upon me, especially when the law does not restrict religious practices.

    “Additionally, as many people said, it’s a family holiday – we only get two of those – Christmas and Easter. Is that too many?”

    Actually, you get 31 days. 20 days annual leave and 11 public holidays. Also 5 days you can take if your child is sick.

    Like many people, I have spent many periods of my life single and a long way from any family. As an independent adult, I am able to balance my life day to day so that I always make sure to maximise the market opportunities presented by state manipulation of the labour market and try to get a shift on public holidays. This is better for my family.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. MT_Tinman (2,790 comments) says:

    Hell BB, I just put on my sunglasses because the sun is shining brilliantly and, after posting this I’m going to work, just like a fair percentage of New Zealanders (certainly more than your stated 1%) will be doing today.

    I admit this discussion hardly affects me, I shop as little as possible at any time but will say that I would be very pissed off indeed should someone else’ superstition prevent me from going to work.

    I expect to hear from you that neither you nor your family turned on a light, tap, computer (whoops slipped on that one already), radio, car nor picked up a television remote or a telephone and certainly you advised your family that should you or they become ill or threatened to wait until mid-night to call emergency services for retail is not the only place people work (or don’t work) over these superstition-based days.

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

    Those who wish to trade during Easter should not be permitted from doing so by government regulation. On the other hand, Christianity is NZ’s political and social heritage. Even drop kicks like Brian Edwards sprang from its loins.

    Those immigrants who have come from other cultures to NZ did so because they preferred a society of Christian Heritage over their own. They should therefore shut the hell up about Easter being a public holiday.

    Maybe the solution is to, like Singapore, agree to have a couple of days public holiday for each religion at the appropriate time. However this does not sit well with me because of the historical fact that other religions are interlopers.

    Europeans (and others) of Christian heritage built this country. If people of other cultures see a benefit in coming here, instead of living in their own countries, why would they want to try and marginalize one of the main ingredients in mix that made NZ attractive to them? They want their own culture why don’t they go back to whence they came?

    The sad truth readers is that there is a vicious cultural war being waged on traditional western society (of Christian heritage) by the Progressives. That is the real reason we have mass migration and the politically correct idea that multiculturalism is morally unassailable.

    If you’re with the Progressives, your for every destructive bit of social and political legislation that has been enacted over the last few decades. You’re for the degradation of NZ society from something that we were deservedly proud of into a crime ridden amoral left liberal sewer that many of us recoil from in horror.

    The Progressives went from having beach heads in our society to dominating it, and the degradation you see today is the result of that domination. Brian Edwards and his ilk were their cultural soldiers.

    The Progressives must be turned back. Our culture must be restored. Think about that when you join with them in attacking the tradition of Easter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “Sonny, re: your 1:54: I asked you, first.”

    Reid, I do not think trading laws are an inalienable right. They are democratically agreed between all members of society. I would like the current laws democratically changed, that is why I am voicing my opinion. But as a retailer I am comfortable operating under the laws agreed by society and that their will always be some I disagree with. If there are too many laws I disagree with I will eventually move to a country with laws closer aligned to my beliefs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Actually, you get 31 days. 20 days annual leave and 11 public holidays.

    Er, firstly I was talking specifically about National Holidays and secondly, all the other holidays are one day events. There are only two national holidays which allow separated families sufficient travel time to meet if they want to.

    do not take any glee in the low rates of observance in NZ and am not opposed to the idea that the opposite might be better. However, I can not manufacture any religious belief in myself and do not believe it is appropriate for the state to force it upon me, especially when the law does not restrict religious practices.

    Yes but Sonny, the point is that while Easter has historical origins, those are no longer today the forces currently holding it in place. It is one of the forces but there are numerically superior alternatives such as the trade unions which have greater political power.

    What Key should do is to hold a referendum at the next election. It’s not that urgent and it takes it off the agenda. OTOH, maybe he doesn’t see a need to do even that. Personally I’m not seeing huge numbers of people protesting about the fact they’ve got a four-day weekend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    A state-sanctioned four-day weekend, furthermore.

    Blasted edit….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Michael E (274 comments) says:

    It’s not just for all Christians that shops closed today and Sunday. If you’re greek/russian/serbian or some other eastern orthodox, Easter is next weekend.

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

    You’re right Reid, the missing edit function is a real pain in the arse. I guess Mr. Farrar has other priorities, and probably thinks we should just get it right in the first place. Not easy though when you’re dealing with these little input boxes.

    I need to change “permitted” in the first line of my above post to “prevented”, but of course I can’t. Now the whole context is fucked up.

    One just has to make sure one reads and checks the whole piece completely through before posting I guess. Less haste.

    [DPF: I don't know how to fix it. I don't know why it stopped working. It is a mystery as to why the edit fucntion stopped]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Yes, Michael. Do you happen to know out of interest why the Eastern Orthodox do that?

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

    Sorry about the repost guys, but I sorely needed to change that fucked up first line-

    —————————-

    Those who wish to trade during Easter should not be *prevented* from doing so by government regulation. On the other hand, Christianity is NZ’s political and social heritage. Even drop kicks like Brian Edwards sprang from its loins.

    Those immigrants who have come from other cultures to NZ did so because they preferred a society of Christian Heritage over their own. They should therefore shut the hell up about Easter being a public holiday.

    Maybe the solution is to, like Singapore, agree to have a couple of days public holiday for each religion at the appropriate time. However this does not sit well with me because of the historical fact that other religions are interlopers.

    Europeans (and others) of Christian heritage built this country. If people of other cultures see a benefit in coming here, instead of living in their own countries, why would they want to try and marginalize one of the main ingredients in mix that made NZ attractive to them? They want their own culture why don’t they go back to whence they came?

    The sad truth readers is that there is a vicious cultural war being waged on traditional western society (of Christian heritage) by the Progressives. That is the real reason we have mass migration and the politically correct idea that multiculturalism is morally unassailable.

    If you’re with the Progressives, you’re for every destructive bit of social and political legislation that has been enacted over the last few decades. You’re for the degradation of NZ society from something that we were deservedly proud of into a crime ridden amoral left liberal sewer that many of us recoil from in horror.

    The Progressives went from having beach heads in our society to dominating it, and the degradation you see today is the result of that domination. Brian Edwards and his ilk were their cultural soldiers.

    The Progressives must be turned back. Our culture must be restored. Think about that when you join with them in attacking the tradition of Easter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    I understood what you meant RB, I’m sure others did too.

    The edit was lost in an upgrade which means its a UAT failure at the vendor end. D’oh, when you have such a vital function as Edit. Hope they’ve given the release managers a good “talking to.” The big sillies.

    Why they can’t issue a patch I have no idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    MT

    I don’t care if you go to work as I know for a fact that you are self employed.

    What those who cannot live without a coffee on Easter friday refuse to admit is that there will be a huge number of people who will have no choice in the matter if the law is changed.

    We already shop 361.5 days a year, if you take away the other 3.5 are you really going to tell me that workers are going to have a choice (as DPF is keen to stress) and that retail outlets in particular will be open only if the workers like the idea?
    I can just see Stephen Tindall and Rod Duke agreeing to that.

    [DPF: For the 21st time, cafes are open today and you can get coffee. Bars are open also. And Stephen Tindall's reputation is generally that of a very good employer who goes out of the way to keep staff happy, so yes I don't think they would break the law. I don't think many employers will break the law. Most employers go out of their way to avoid breaking the law.]

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

    “The edit was lost in an upgrade which means its a UAT failure at the vendor end.”

    OK, guess that explains why Mr. Farrar is unable to remedy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    Sonny

    “This weekend though I’d like to spend some quality time for my family though, and for my family right now the best thing for me to do is to put some food on the table, or get some work done on the house. But because of you and others like you I can’t because somehow it gets in the way of your sitting around at home with your family for hours on end.”

    Cry me a river!

    What a lot of crap, I am not stopping you doing anything at all.

    Actually when you boil it down it is the selfish people who want to be able to do what they want when they want, the bastards have another 361.5 days a year to do it but they get all bent out of shape for 3.5 days a year.

    So some of you cannot get a coffee…tough fucking luck, the rest of us are enjoying ourself, ut don’t worry, we will be back at work soon tending to your selfish wants and needs.

    [DPF: And for the 12th time, you could get coffee in dozens of places in Wellington today]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    It’ll happen, bb. It’ll be a shame when it does.

    The profits however are too great to ignore and the pressure will build.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    Yes, Michael. Do you happen to know out of interest why the Eastern Orthodox do that?

    Reid we use the Julian Calendar rather then the Gregorian calendar which differs by 13 days is the short answer.

    Its not important to me that Christmas and usually Easter don’t coincide with the Latin dates. What is important iis that our Christian heritage is not airbrushed out of existence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Redbaiter,

    I happen to agree with you in large part about our culture. The success of western countries is due to their christian heritage, and it is, as always, in competition with other cultures, and the progressive thought that unfortunately appears when success makes us too comfortable.

    At any time, about 10-20% of my staff have been practising christians who will not work on Sundays, only an idiot would prevent them from doing so and this is the same over Xmas and Easter. But I always have sufficient staff whose personal circumstances allow them to work on Public Holidays and the 50 other Sundays that aren’t protected by law without having to refuse any leave applications.

    The laws do not have to be as they are now to allow companies to close over these periods (plenty of companies force people to take annual leave over Xmas and I would think it would be attractive to workers).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “our Christian heritage is not airbrushed out of existence”

    To me Andrei it lives inside of us and can’t be. It can be denied but it exists in everyone, has always existed and will continue to exist, even if no-one on Earth believes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Poliwatch (335 comments) says:

    Now Redbaiter raises some interesting points. One of course is that Christianity could be the greatest interloper of all.

    Then it came to me …. like a flash of blinding light.

    The government should immediately call together a Grand Council to determine the date on which Maui fished the North Island out of the sea and that date should be legislated as the true great holiday of New Zealand. That Council will also have the ability of rewrite history as it deems necessary by adding, changing and deleting words in important documents. It will have the right to create a chant that people can recite before every rugby game. In future years that Council will be called the Council of Ngaruawahia.

    In the future we might even come to believe that the date adopted was actually the date on which the North Island arose. AND WE SHALL NOT SHOP ON THAT DATE except to buy cigarettes, ice creams, lotto tickets and petrol.

    But that’s right – that has been done before in 325CE.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    P.S. Thanks for your answer, Andrei.

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

    “To me Andrei it lives inside of us and can’t be. It can be denied but it exists in everyone, has always existed and will continue to exist, even if no-one on Earth believes.”

    Sorry Reid, but that is completely and sadly untrue. There are generations abroad in this country who have been raised on a culture of hedonism, narcissism, secularism, violence and crime and have no connection at all with Christianity.

    Not spiritually, or historically or culturally or in any other way.

    They are the children of the Progressives, and they have nothing but contempt for the culture you hold dear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    He-man – so ALL of your staff have been there less than 90 days ? Wow you must be a terrible employer to have that kind of turnover. You must be spending your whole time recruiting and training new staff. I’m surprised you’re still in business…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    There are generations abroad in this country who have been raised on a culture of hedonism, narcissism, secularism, violence and crime and have no connection at all with Christianity.

    That’s what I meant by denying it, RB. When you deny it, that happens. However those are behaviours you’re describing and those arise from conscious direction which arises from an interplay of experience and current emotion.

    Out of the worst offenders of that litany of bahaviour, can you think of any one that hasn’t expressed love – genuine love – to anything, at least once if not many times in their lives?

    I believe there is goodness in the worst person imaginable, by virtue of being human. It may be suppressed completely and denied and hard to spot but even the worst people in history have recorded moments showing instances tenderness and love. There might be one or two exceptions of record – Vlad the Impaler springs to mind. But by and large every single person on Earth who’s ever lived has at some points in their lives expressed love toward another – maybe not another human being, but at least another being. That was my point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Read this one instead…

    There are generations abroad in this country who have been raised on a culture of hedonism, narcissism, secularism, violence and crime and have no connection at all with Christianity.

    That’s what I meant by denying it, RB. When you deny it, that happens. However those are behaviours you’re describing and those arise from conscious direction which arises from an interplay of experience and current emotion.

    Out of the worst offenders of that litany of bahaviour, can you think of any one that hasn’t expressed love – genuine love – to anything, at least once if not many times in their lives?

    I believe there is goodness in the worst person imaginable, by virtue of being human. It may be suppressed completely and denied and hard to spot but even the worst people in history have recorded moments showing instances tenderness and love. There might be one or two exceptions of record – Vlad the Impaler springs to mind. But by and large every single person on Earth who’s ever lived has at some points in their lives expressed love toward another – maybe not another human being, but at least another being. That was my point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “This weekend though I’d like to spend some quality time for my family though, and for my family right now the best thing for me to do is to put some food on the table, or get some work done on the house. But because of you and others like you I can’t because somehow it gets in the way of your sitting around at home with your family for hours on end.”

    “Cry me a river!

    What a lot of crap, I am not stopping you doing anything at all.

    Actually when you boil it down it is the selfish people who want to be able to do what they want when they want, the bastards have another 361.5 days a year to do it but they get all bent out of shape for 3.5 days a year.

    So some of you cannot get a coffee…tough fucking luck, the rest of us are enjoying ourself, ut don’t worry, we will be back at work soon tending to your selfish wants and needs.”

    The point I am making is that the logic of “whats good for my family is good for your family” is exactly the same kind of thinking that gave us s59 and government approved food choices and light bulbs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. greenjacket (346 comments) says:

    BigBruv/Reid:
    I have to laugh at the way you spend the day honouring your god by sitting on the internet making inane comments on Kiwiblog.

    Incidentally, New Zealand’s heritage, if we are to be picky, is actually pagan Maori. The British settlers were a mixture of Anglicans, Presbyterians and Catholics, but also non-conformists, independents and Jews.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Jack5 (4,216 comments) says:

    Could it be that Brian Edwards is pissed off about Easter because he sees Jesus as a rival?

    Perhaps he forgets that the soft socialism of Labour and his other mates comes from the British Christian Socialist tradition rather than from Marxism.

    Even if you’re not a Christian believer you can appreciate the cultural heritage of Easter.

    Without being a believer you can also appreciate and respect the contributions of Christianity to the West. These include a favourable environment for the family, for law and respect for individual rights, and for instilling a sense of compassion for the less fortunate.

    Christianity, especially Protestantism, was important in both the rise of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution. Many people don’t like this, but Christianity played a huge role in civilising and developing NZ and giving Maori a strong sense of the rights of individuals. Many early Christians championed Maori rights, too.

    It’s rather pleasant to have two quiet days a year: Easter Friday and Christmas Day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Reid,

    “It’ll happen, bb. It’ll be a shame when it does.

    The profits however are too great to ignore and the pressure will build.”

    What would change for you over Easter Reid?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. greenjacket (346 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount wrote:
    “The point I am making is that the logic of “whats good for my family is good for your family” is exactly the same kind of thinking that gave us s59 and government approved food choices and light bulbs.”

    Amen to that brother!
    The fact is that what motivates the defenders of this idiot law is that they are using the law to force me to live my life according to their religious dogma.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. JC (838 comments) says:

    Instead of blaming religion, unions and the 64% who don’t want to work over Easter we might look at whats happened over the last 60 years..

    According to some US research:

    “Although it is not yet supported by independent research, one argument states the lengthening of work time in the United States may be implicated in the secular persistence on inflation. Between 1950 and 2007 official price inflation was measured to 861 percent. President Truman, in his 1951 message to Congress predicted correctly that, his military buildup, “will cause intense and mounting inflationary pressures.” Yet, even he did not appear to sense the permanent and long term price implications of a longer working time. The official inflation statistics may actually understate the real impact of the lengthening work week on prices. To give a closer estimate, it is necessary to correct for productivity increase during the same period. Using the data provided by the United State Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erik Rauch has estimated productivity to have increased by nearly 400 percent. Says, Rauch:

    “… if productivity means anything at all, a worker should be able to earn the same standard of living as a 1950 worker in only 11 hours per week.”

    The increase in productivity since 1950, ideally, should have had the effect of lowering prices of material goods. Given this, a truer measure of inflation during this period might be as much as four times higher than government figures.”

    So when you want people to work longer they intuitively know there’s a poor return for it.

    I wouldn’t know what the answer is, but someone had better think up some smarter ways to achieve productivity than cutting into people’s leisure time.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    I have to laugh at the way you spend the day honouring your god by sitting on the internet making inane comments on Kiwiblog.

    How do you know what else I’ve done today, greenjacket?

    Incidentally, New Zealand’s heritage, if we are to be picky, is actually pagan Maori. The British settlers were a mixture of Anglicans, Presbyterians and Catholics, but also non-conformists, independents and Jews.

    Yes, you are being picky. Fact is, the institutional and state-regional-democratic-functioning-well governance framework the nation enjoys today, our international relationships, our level of wealth, our international standing, amongst many other things, would never have come about without colonial settlement. It can’t be denied.

    That’s not meant to be a statement asserting rights over another, it’s merely recognizing fact.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Brian (Shadowfoot) (78 comments) says:

    Dime, is there something about regular weekends that leave you unable to have breakfast with your parents, or visit friends?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. smersh (1 comment) says:

    We all cry for the wish to climb back to the top end of the oecd. It must be remembered that when we were on top of that list, it was through the values of a Christian society that got us there. Even though the country shut down every weekend. Choice to shop or trade should be balanced against the greater good.

    Our society in the twenty first century is splintered and is pulled apart by who knows how many sets of ideas. At least the Christian heritage in the past has given us all a common set of ideals and a basic framework of society that seemed to work. The PC, ultra liberal, we can’t believe in anything other than socialism or capitalism, has to change.

    And in my opinion, DPF and Edwards are one in the same. Leave the concrete jungle and breathe the country air. Real men drink beer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Madeleine (230 comments) says:

    David was being that offensive (and historically ignorant) really necessary to put your point forward?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    It is not about honoring god, it is about honoring our traditions and heritage, if you don’t like it then find another culture to live with or do i need to quote General Napier.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    What would change for you over Easter Reid?

    Nothing, Sonny.

    Look, if trading over Easter happens, it will sadden but not distress me. To a Christian, truly honouring God is beneficial to all those who so honour. If that happens to be a nation then it’s beneficial to that nation and if a person, the same.

    However in every society there’s a faith of some sort and every person is left to their own decision on that matter. That’s why I’m not worried.

    It is not about honoring god, it is about honoring our traditions and heritage, if you don’t like it then find another culture to live with or do i need to quote General Napier.

    Please do…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Is the future of Christian culture purely in the hands of government lawmakers or is it up to the individual people that make up that culture to continue it?

    I really think organizing a service, reading a story to your kids, praising good values, and organizing family outings are things we are going to need to do for ourselves without demanding government legislation if our culture is to prosper.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. James (1,338 comments) says:

    James

    “So as long as your rights are protected then thats cool?

    You don’t give a fuck about the rights of those who will be forced to work just as long as you can enjoy your coffee in the sun with all the other trendy fuck wits.”

    My rights are their rights Bruv….no one is being forced ( physical coercion) to work)….they choose to do so.A lack of choices is NOT a lack of liberty….theres no such thing as a right to employment choices on your terms…..not when you CHOOSE to work for someone else.

    “While I am at it, when did so many of you lose the ability to think for yourself?, you have become no better than the pinkos who cheer on command for Labour.”

    That is an exact discription of YOUR stance on this issue you thug…..its you wanting to use force to violate the rights of others, not me or DPF.

    It is now a case of ‘if John Key says so it must be a good idea”, you continue to stick your brain in a jar and cheer on command, so many of you are just too fucking stupid to see you are being played like a fool, in so many ways the Nat’s are no different to Labour.

    Believe me they want a change to Easter trading laws and they will get it, they know it can only be done over time and by stealth hence the input of DPF into this.

    You can shop for 361.5 days a year, that is enough for anybody I would have thought.”

    What you think is of no concern to me and others who value our freedom and aren’t going to let you and the rest of the Christo-SS dictate whart we can do with it.

    I take it you will not be showing your face on ANZAC day out of shame for your fascist views that spit on the memory of our dead soldiers…?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “I really think organizing a service, reading a story to your kids, praising good values, and organizing family outings are things we are going to need to do for ourselves without demanding government legislation if our culture is to prosper.”

    Who’s demanding govt legislation, Sonny?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. James (1,338 comments) says:

    Reid:”So you’re saying the right to trade anytime is an inalienable right like freedom of religion, freedom of association, etc?”

    Yes….Human rights are absolutes.The right to free trade is contained within the over arching rights to liberty and property.If you have the latter rights you must logically and morally have the former one too.A natural individual right means you don’t need anyone elses permission to act on it……you have complete moral sanction to do it inspite of the wishes of all others.Rights as discribed are the language through which liberty is spoken…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. slijmbal (1,133 comments) says:

    JC

    it’s not that complicated – it’s a supply and demand problem – a doubling of income is of less importance when everyone has the same doubling. So some costs will increase in line with earnings, particularly those that are “fixed” eg land and therefore property and a significant cost.

    However, you didn’t cover the significantly greater material wealth that everybody, even the relatively poor have. I am careful to use the relative and not the absolute definition of poverty as under the absolute definition, few in NZ satisfy the absolute poverty measure as it’s more appropriate for the likes of Africa. TV, telephone, car and the other “necessities” of life are the norm and not the exception and that includes people on benefits. From statistics I’ve seen the relative %age of income required to purchase the basics required for survival has dropped significantly over 50 years. The one exception being housing (purchase that is). But remember, outside of NZ, purchasing a house in the 50s was immensely difficult (NZ had a a relatively high standard of living then).

    So yes, I would suggest one could obtain the same standard of living as someone in 1950 in something less than 40 hours a week, people just want more.

    There are indications from some research that relative wealth/lack of wealth and relative power become much more important once one is sure that there will be food on the table, heat and roof in and on the house and reasonable health treatment is (almost) guaranteed. That appears to have become the driver for many people’s ambition rather than the basics. The research on the UK civil service indicates that this may not be as dumb as it sounds as the more senior one is, less concerned about surety of income and the greater control one has of one’s own destiny then the healthier, happier, longer lived and lot’s of other important “ers” one is. This researched was executed over a long period of time and with tens of thousands of employees.

    So, it’s partially a choice and not enforced if you want to live in a 1950 lifestyle. I think the implication of your post is that it was enforced in some form or fashion.

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

    “The fact is that what motivates the defenders of this idiot law is that they are using the law to force me to live my life according to their religious dogma.”

    Coming from a damn fool watermelon, that is a statement that has to take the cake for arrogance, ignorance and hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    We have legislation that restricts trading and working over Easter Reid, this is completely seperate from legislation that protects time off for workers. It was increased under Labour (pay rates on Public Holidays went from 1xpay+day in lieu to 1.5xpay+day in lieu iirc)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “those who will be forced to work”

    Who are “they,” James? One would assume with the power of the Trade Unions to paralyse, they will force through an extra 2 statutory days so that even if the date changes, those in Retail will be adequately compensated.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Yes….Human rights are absolutes.The right to free trade is contained within the over arching rights to liberty and property.If you have the latter rights you must logically and morally have the former one too.A natural individual right means you don’t need anyone elses permission to act on it……you have complete moral sanction to do it inspite of the wishes of all others.Rights as discribed are the language through which liberty is spoken…

    I’m holding my hand over my heart and holding back the tears, James. However can you please explicate? Why is trade restriction on two days a year – heck let’s throw in all the restrictions – 4 days a year – an abrogation of human rights?

    Why? Precisely?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    I’d rather not have to quote Napier in what he had to say about Sati Reid, if i thought it was appropriate i would have done so but no doubt it would be taken out of context and i would break Jacobs -ve karma record.

    Having no edit button really sucks as well since i totally forgot to put in who i was responding too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    Sonny, you said

    “How do you get a boost form school holidays, all they do is change the pattern of spending, not the total money in the system.”

    So whats the deal with having the shops close a day.. it will change the pattern and people will spend their money tomorrow.

    “The only way school holidays could have a positive economic impact is if it affected productivity, but the labour market is oversupplied and has been limited in its flexibility to adjust prices for the oversupply.”

    im an importer/wholesaler.. my sales increase around school holidays. the shops i supply make more money during school holidays. i time the release of new products around school holidays.

    maybe im wrong though.. maybe the boost we get is a giant coincidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. slijmbal (1,133 comments) says:

    For those of you who say that ability to shop does not affect the amount spent when we have already a relatively high ability to shop when we like, then I’m sad to say that’s not true. The difference isn’t large but the supermarkets and their like measured it when holidays changed in different countries and it does make a difference.

    The perceived, but unproven rationale, is that people have different buying approaches when they have more time and that few people perceive the religious holiday as religious.

    Sorry to put facts in to what is an interesting slanging match 8)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. dave (985 comments) says:

    Any employees who work at my business will be fired if they do not want to work on Good Friday(90 day rule)

    Heh. If I had a business, any employees who work at my business will be fired if they wanted to work on Good Friday( 90 Day rule).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “So whats the deal with having the shops close a day.. it will change the pattern and people will spend their money tomorrow.”

    1. It’s goes against principles of freedom
    2. If all shops were open, I would possibly choose to close. But if some close, there is more opportunity for the ones that remain open. If I am forced to close, people will take their money to one of my competitors (in the food business I am in, probably the supermarket the day before so they cook at home)

    “im an importer/wholesaler.. my sales increase around school holidays. the shops i supply make more money during school holidays. i time the release of new products around school holidays.

    maybe im wrong though.. maybe the boost we get is a giant coincidence.”

    My sales also increase slightly in school holidays because I sell food near to residential areas. Others in the same trade as me operating right in the CBD decrease. What you are not acknowledging is the decrease in trade you get when school holidays finish. Those periods between holidays would be slightly busier without the spending that occurs during school holidays.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “For those of you who say that ability to shop does not affect the amount spent when we have already a relatively high ability to shop when we like, then I’m sad to say that’s not true. The difference isn’t large but the supermarkets and their like measured it when holidays changed in different countries and it does make a difference.”

    “The perceived, but unproven rationale, is that people have different buying approaches when they have more time and that few people perceive the religious holiday as religious.”

    “Sorry to put facts in to what is an interesting slanging match”

    It’s not just selling also, it’s working. During my time at work I might achieve something that increases productivity. A business that is run the same as another but operates for 95% of the time as the other will produce 95% of what the other produces. If the hardware store was open I might be able to spend my time at home building something that improves my quality of life in the future.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    “What you are not acknowledging is the decrease in trade you get when school holidays finish. Those periods between holidays would be slightly busier without the spending that occurs during school holidays.”

    no im acknowledging an increase in trade during school holidays. people change their spending habits during that time.

    closing shops for a day goes against the principles of freedom? haha maybe you should talk to the UN.

    funny how its always employers saying “my guys want to work public holidays”

    i know 2 girls.. both aged 21.. they are beyond stoked that they have today off, both work in retail. they couldnt give a rats ass about time and a half. they would rather have more fun. a good example for some of you people. its not all about the cash!

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

    Sonny Blount (59) Vote: 2 1 Says:

    April 10th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
    Reid,

    I wasn’t talking about religion, a lot of Indians and Chinese celebrate on those occasions for the same reasons as us, its traditional to have a party then, not because they’re genuinely scared of what their gods might do if they don’t.

    The god resides in the “party”. Gods are kept alive by recognising holidays/social customs. Doesn’t matter whether you are christian, hindu or zulu, if you remove the social part of the god you kill that part off. At the fat end of the metaphorical wedge you get psychological de/evolution, at the thin end you lose ritual knowledge.

    “The point I am making is that the logic of “whats good for my family is good for your family” is exactly the same kind of thinking that gave us s59 and government approved food choices and light bulbs.”

    S59 possibly, lightbulbs, no. We’re talking about an attempt to change culture via legislation. Getting arrested for smacking may effect an existing culture, changing lightbulbs won’t. Also the argument here is one of religion as the motivator of change. The motivator for S59 and lightbulbs was not religion but politics. Even if green politics does get somewhat close to a religion, it has no god and no mode of spiritual transcendence).

    You should also bear in mind that by claiming that the right to trade is more important than relgious concerns, or an existing culture, you occupy the exact same stance as your opponent. There is no way to win this argument – for either side – not using these techniques. The only truth here is that one group of people want the other group to do as they say. Wow, never heard of that before. History shows there is no evidence that either way will make life any better of worse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “funny how its always employers saying “my guys want to work public holidays””

    Funny how people with left wing sentiments always claim to understand and protect workers, when their ideas impoverish them.

    As a business owner I made a decision when I entered my business that I was willing to put my future in the hands of my employees, I have a far bigger commitment and investment in their success than any liberal fool. It is my job to provide them with the resources they require to be successful. I work with them everyday, unlike the pollys and union reps who claim to speak for them. And I can tell you that most of them didn’t vote left in the last election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Goodgod,

    Your post was entirely dumb, start to finish.

    “The god resides in the “party”. Gods are kept alive by recognising holidays/social customs. Doesn’t matter whether you are christian, hindu or zulu, if you remove the social part of the god you kill that part off. At the fat end of the metaphorical wedge you get psychological de/evolution, at the thin end you lose ritual knowledge.”

    ‘God’ resides in anything you want it to, and working (which always involves trading at some point) is one of those places.

    “S59 possibly, lightbulbs, no. We’re talking about an attempt to change culture via legislation. Getting arrested for smacking may effect an existing culture, changing lightbulbs won’t. Also the argument here is one of religion as the motivator of change. The motivator for S59 and lightbulbs was not religion but politics. Even if green politics does get somewhat close to a religion, it has no god and no mode of spiritual transcendence).”

    WTF?! You’re not going to achieve anything defining the lines between, religion, culture, and politics. Some artist in Wellington managed to convince someone on the council that lightbulbs are several hundred thousand dollars worth of culture.

    “You should also bear in mind that by claiming that the right to trade is more important than relgious concerns, or an existing culture, you occupy the exact same stance as your opponent. There is no way to win this argument – for either side – not using these techniques. The only truth here is that one group of people want the other group to do as they say. Wow, never heard of that before. History shows there is no evidence that either way will make life any better of worse.”

    I’m not claiming my right to trade is more important than religious concerns, they can coexist perfectly well. It does not impinge on anothers right to religious freedom.

    The point is the restrictions mentioned do not require the restrictions to be in place for the persons advocating them to make their own preferred choices.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “i know 2 girls.. both aged 21.. they are beyond stoked that they have today off, both work in retail. they couldnt give a rats ass about time and a half. they would rather have more fun. a good example for some of you people. its not all about the cash!”

    Good for them. That is a perfectly fine decision. I bet I can go to any student hostel and find someone willing to make coffee for 8 hours for $250+.

    I have 12 staff who have volunteered to work on Monday or Friday and 2 who have chosen not to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    sonny – they wouldnt have been given a choice if the law was different. thats the point!

    and i hope your werent inferring that im a stinkin leftist!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    I am religious, as you know, but I know that those who argue for open shops won’t give two bits for any religious argument I might give, so…coming from a purely secular viewpoint….

    Basically the argument comes down to greed and materialism doesn’t it?

    That seems to be the main criteria used for making the decision for a shop to open or not.
    If all shops *had* to close then I don’t think anyone would be so up in a lather – a guy wouldn’t be losing money to his competitor because everyone would be closed. That’s the way it used to be on Sundays in this country, and we more than survived, even during the depression: so also did the general populace. I can’t remember ever hearing of anyone having starved from not having shops open on a Sunday.

    I’m also pretty sure that retailers will get more than a little extra from opening on Monday.

    I also think the fine for shops that open is wayyyy to low…$1000? That is nothing to them, they need a deterrent.
    Make the fine $20,000.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    oh FFS, Edwards is a sanctimonious boring old c*nt isn’t he?

    Getting his knickers in a twist because after gorging on fast food and cheap porn he is unable to hit the final leg of his indulgence trifeca, the annual whinge by grey bearded boomers about not being allowed into a garden centre to shuffle around, perhaps in practise for slipping the mortal coil, and buy a few bags of shit.

    I’m sorry but theres more to life than shopping and the majority of retail workers who have the long weekend off I am sure are grateful for the break in routine and the time to spend with friends and family.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. MikeE (555 comments) says:

    “Its not important to me that Christmas and usually Easter don’t coincide with the Latin dates. What is important iis that our Christian heritage is not airbrushed out of existence.”

    What is this “our” you speak of.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. James (1,338 comments) says:

    “those who will be forced to work”

    Who are “they,” James? One would assume with the power of the Trade Unions to paralyse, they will force through an extra 2 statutory days so that even if the date changes, those in Retail will be adequately compensated.”

    Thats not my line Reid…its Big Bruvs…..Im quoting him…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. James (1,338 comments) says:

    “I’m holding my hand over my heart and holding back the tears, James. However can you please explicate? Why is trade restriction on two days a year – heck let’s throw in all the restrictions – 4 days a year – an abrogation of human rights?

    Why? Precisely?”

    I’ve spelled it out more than once simple simon….its a violation of the right to liberty…..even a restriction of one day is still a restriction….and wrong and invalid.A violation is still a violation regardless of its duration…..is rape ok as long as its only a few seconds long….?Is murder fine as long as its over inside a minute rather than 3 or 4? Please enlighten us oh oracle of moral knowledge.

    Just hat gives the violator the right to restrict the rights of all others…?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. James (1,338 comments) says:

    sonny – they wouldnt have been given a choice if the law was different. thats the point!”

    Bullshit dime….they always had a choice…just not between the ideal fairy lala land options sudo leftists like you wish they had.

    By signing CONSENTUALLY up to the job they are in they CHOOSE to abide by the condictions set by their employer…you know…the poor cock who CREATED the damm job they earn PAYMENT from. They went in with their eyes open…..get it? If time off over Easter was an issue they shouldn’t have taken the damm job.Now…start whining like a socialist bitch about how they are “Forced” to work etc…….cry us a river.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Madeleine (230 comments) says:

    I am not sure I understand the need or the fact that people think it is appropriate to denigrate the beliefs of others in this manner. Can we not have a discussion as to the appropriateness of state mandated religious holidays without caricaturising and offending entire classes of people?

    David are you going to publish similarly insulting things about the queer community next time they celebrate some big event? What about writing some offensive slander about Sir Ed Hillary and those who loved him on the anniversary of his death? You could post something chauvinistic about women on suffrage day? If it is not appropriate in these instances, if you can picture the wrongness of doing the things I just listed then why is it ok to speak about Christians and what is important to them this way?

    Quite frankly I would like to dialogue with you on the Easter trading issue. I myself am not sure what I think being both somewhat libertarian in my views on the role of the state and a Christian who would prefer to not work or require others to do so on days such as Good Friday, Easter Sunday and Christmas. I would relish the opportunity to bounce my thoughts around with someone who was clear on where they stood so as to hone my own thoughts better and come to a reasoned position on the matter but given the tone you have set here and the inane, knee-jerk bigotry inherent in this thread I can tell there is no point attempting a reasoned exchange of ideas on the subject here.

    If anyone wants to discuss it with me and help me find some clarity, please do pop over to MandM. We have a Good Friday post so if you have a view on Easter trading and can explain your reasons for it, just put it there.

    [DPF: My views on Easter trading were posted on Wednesday. You seem to confuse my views, with my quoting Dr Edwards. Having said that I don't think his views in any way denigrate either.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Madeleine (230 comments) says:

    Mike E what is the date?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    When I was a kid and used to stop off at the corner dairy with my dad, to grab a pint of milk….I used to think how idiotic it was that half the goods on the dairy shelves were draped in cloth and could not be sold during the weekend. I’ve since been in business for 30-odd years and I still view ANY restrictive trade law with contempt. For 30-odd years I’ve ignored them. The only day I choose to close, is Anzac day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    Sonny

    “If all shops were open, I would possibly choose to close.”

    And in one sentence we see the real reason behind the drive to change the Easter trading hours.

    The choice would be the shop owners, is anybody really suggesting that if the employer decided that the shop or business decided to open that staff would have a choice in the matter? anybody who says that staff will not be forced to work is either stupid or a liar.

    [DPF: You have made repeated assertions that every employer in NZ would turn into a crazy despot that would break the law, and force people to work illegally. Now you can believe this, like all your other fantasies. But can you point to any evidence to back up this assertion? Hundreds of bars and cafes were open today. Are you saying they were all forced? Did you speak to any staff? I did - asked them why they were working on GF. They said they wanted to earn the extra money]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    Paul

    “The only day I choose to close, is Anzac day”

    So you are happy to deprive your staff of the change to earn money on Anzac day but not Easter or Christmas?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    BB. My business, my rules.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    I am amazed at the passion shown by some many of those who laughingly call themselves right wingers in this thread.

    We on the right are supposed to be about freedom and choice, yet so many are happy to force others to work so they can celebrate their own selfish freedom and choice, forcing people to work for YOUR benefit is at best centrist (and selfish) and at worst socialist.

    It is all about three and a half days people, if you get your nickers in a twist about that then you have no right to call yourself a champion of personal choice.

    [DPF: You come close to blatant lying. Your irational behaviour on this topic is only matched by your total ignorance of the law, and retail employees. You are the person arguing that you should decide on behalf of all retail employees and employers if their shops can open, and if they choose to work. Others are arguing that you should not get to decide on behalf of everyone else, but they each make their own decisions]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    DPF

    “You have made repeated assertions that every employer in NZ would turn into a crazy despot”

    You quite rightly bristled when I misquoted you, for that I did apologise, I would bloody well appreciate it if you would show me the same consideration, after all I am only playing by YOUR rules.

    I have NEVER said that “every employer” would turn into a crazy despot and for you to keep making that assertion leads me to think that you are not being entirely open about the true reason behind your support for a change in Easter trading legalisation.

    [DPF: You said "The choice would be the shop owners, is anybody really suggesting that if the employer decided that the shop or business decided to open that staff would have a choice in the matter? anybody who says that staff will not be forced to work is either stupid or a liar.". You did not qualify this by saying a few shops would do this. Or a small minority of shops. You said that is the business wanted to open, the staff will be forced despite the law. Now I accept this is your view of the world, but can you provide any facts to back this up?

    As I said, in Wellington alone there were scores and scores of shops, cafes, bars, movie theatres, fast food outlets, restaurants all open. I bet you did not speak to a single of those staff members you have elected yourself God and sole decision maker for, and asked them if they felt forced to work today?

    The irony with this law, is that the exemptions are so wide, that it was almost like a normal day in Wellington. Only a few clothes stores were closed it seemed. People have voted with their feet]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    It irks me to the bone, that there is prevailing notion in this country, that most workers are not only dumb and stupid, but are used and abused. It is my experience, that nothing could be further from the truth. The majority of employers are good people and reconignise that their staff are their greatest assets. Most employer’s will bend over backwards and go way beyond the ‘law’ to help their staff, in time of need. Sure, there are a few bad employers out there, but most have a habit of not been in business for long.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    DPF

    Lets be honest here, you are also being economical with the truth, you seem to suggest that the NZ working environment is all sweetness and light, where bosses and workers happily go about their business with the best intentions of and for each other, you also seem to be suggesting that there is a massive movement to do away with the repressive rules that force people to have a holiday when they do not want it……clearly that is NOT the case.

    And please, I will ask you again to stop putting words in my mouth, I want the status quo David, I do not want to FORCE anybody to do anything, the only ones wanting to force people are the ones who want to change the Eaters trading legislation.

    Where you DO come close to “blatant lying” is the suggestion that all workers would have a choice, you and I both know that would not be the case.

    Look, if there was a way to make working at Easter, Anzac Day and Christmas truly optional then I would agree with you DPF, however I just do not see anyway that can be achieved.

    [DPF: First of all you have shown a total ignorance of the status quo you defend. In almost every post you have made, you have shown you do not understand the law. What possesses someone to defend a law they do not understand, I do not know. It is the worst sort of unthinking conservatism.

    I have not said it is all sweetness and light. But we have masses of employment laws, and unions, labour inspectors, the ERA and courts to protect those rights. My proposal which is to give all workers the right not to work over Easter would enhance those rights as one could have a clear educational campaign that lets people know it is their choice. You reject any changes to the status quo - mainly because you do not understand it. As I said tens of thousands of Kiwis happily worked today in bars and cafes and shops. I just see no logic in a law that allows them all to work, but bans other employees from earning money because they work for New World instead of Four Square. Or because they live in Rotorua instead of Taupo.

    I suspect you have never employed someone. I have. I have employed 100s and 100s of young Kiwis. The vast vast majority of employers are paranoid about not breaking the law and go overboard to make sure they do not. If the law says you can not force people to work over Easter, then the vast majority would respect that. If they can't get enough staff to work, they'll offer more money - if they think it will be worth opening.

    Incidentially I have run a business where we have over 100 staff and a requirement to have 45 and exactly 45 work most nights. And guess what - there is no requirement for staff to work on any particular day. No staff member is ever rostered on for a day against their will. Rosters are published and staff volunteer for every shift we have. So when you try and lecture me on how employers would force staff to work against their will - well this is how I know you don't know what you are talking about. I've actually run businesses and been an employer. Have you? As in one where your own money is at risk?

    And once again I ask you have you ever actually talked to a retail worker? You know the ones you want to force your world view on?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Let’s breathe the fresh air of freedom.

    Agree entirely. Emphatically. Without exception.

    If only the Left could apply such a fundamental and glorious principle more widely.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Big Bruv

    David, I do not want to FORCE anybody to do anything, the only ones wanting to force people are the ones who want to change the Eaters trading legislation.

    Sorry, 100% wrong. I was forcibly prevented from trading by law. I wanted to, I imagine my supermarket’s profit-seeking owners and its wage-receiving employees wanted to, but the law said we couldn’t trade.

    I’m sorry, but you’ve got it exactly backwards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    We on the right are supposed to be about freedom and choice, yet so many are happy to force others to work so they can celebrate their own selfish freedom and choice, forcing people to work for YOUR benefit is at best centrist (and selfish) and at worst socialist.

    What on earth convinces you that any force is required to get someone to work on a public holiday? Don’t they get 1.5 times the pay and a day in lieu?

    And if force is required to make someone work on Good Friday in this relatively atheistic country, presumably force is going on year round. Which, by the way, is against the law.

    So be consistent. If you’re going to have a law that bans forcing workers into working one day of the year, and your goal is to stop forced labour, then you’re arguing for a ban on work every day of the year. You haven’t explained why employers shuld limit ruling with an iron fist to Good Friday, you’re saying force is bad and it happens. If it happens on Good Friday, it must be happening every day of the year. So what – ban all work?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    ben

    Did the world stop turning?, will that supermarket go broke because you cannot trade for three and a half days a year?

    Of course not, the reality is that most people had the day off and most enjoyed themselves, DPF certainly seemed to have a great day.

    And guess what, the best thing about the Easter break is that most staff will come back refreshed and hopefully far more productive.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Expat

    I’m sorry but theres more to life than shopping and the majority of retail workers who have the long weekend off I am sure are grateful for the break in routine and the time to spend with friends and family.

    Speak. For. Yourself. Not me. I want to work when I want to work. I really absolutely do not expect to have some third party I never met and who does not know me go and include me in such vast generalisations as you just made. Actually, some us do not want to take this particular day off, thanks very much. It isn’t to the taste of everyone to have this particular day off.

    If you’re going to insist that it is good and proper for the state to dictate that on this day nobody (except in Queenstown but not Wanaka, Taupo but not Rotorua, etc etc etc) then be consistent and apply it year round.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    big bruv

    This is not an argument about having a day off. Nobody is arguing for less holidays. It would almost certainly have been a nicer day off if I was given the right to take it on a day that suited me – e.g. as part of a wider holiday. And actually it would have been a better day if my local supermarket was open.

    Sorry, but actually I wanted to stock the pantry today and couldn’t. May sound trivial, but my day would have been better if I could have. That’s me.

    Others are $100 or $200 or $500 out of pocket because they couldn’t work today when they wanted to.

    Now answer the question: why is it that if one day of foregone (allegedly) forced labour is good that that should not be usefully extended to the entire year? If labour is only forced on Good Friday – why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    big bruv

    Nobody is arguing the world would stop turning. Kill the straw man, thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Fletch, its not about greed or materialism. Its about whether a minority should have the right to impose their values on everybody else. I absolutely respect your right 100% and without question to believe that shops trade out of greed and/or materialism on Good Friday and any other day of the year. I absolutely respect your right to not trade or open your shop of be a consumer on this day.

    I just wish you would choose to respect my right to disagree with you, and the right of shop keepers and employees and others to disagree with you. They do you no harm. They are there, or want to be there, if you choose to visit them. They do so for their opwn reasons, perhaps profit or because they like the work or need the wages or, as customers, feel like doing some gardening on the weekend. Whatever.

    Why can’t you accept that others should have the right to exercise their opinion and values on this day rather than be beholden to yours?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Gerinimo75 (9 comments) says:

    Sonny, you seem to be claiming to pay your workers $250+ for making coffee for * hours. You pay your workers $31.25 per hour. What the hell do you charge for your coffee???? Or have you included the time+1/2 plus the day in lieu?

    And just to throw a brick through the “christian” window, Jesus was not crucified on a Friday, nor did He rise on a Sunday. You are following pagan traditions with a “christian”veneer. As is Sunday, and Xmas! And trading should be decided by the trader, without coercing the worker. Observance of any specific holy day should be up to the individual and his/her employer, and perhaps be entered in the employment contract. And that may be the hard part.

    Big bruv, you language is of the sewer, and I guess that is where you rightly belong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    I’m sure there is a facebook group out there for you Ben.

    Most people do appreciate the weekend off to spend in quiet relaxation rather than spending time at work or shopping and drinking overpriced crappy lattes. And that is my opinion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Expat

    You’re 100% entitled to that opinion. And no doubt you’re right. Those people will be the ones relaxing at weekends and not spending time at work or shopping and drinking overpriced crappy lattes.

    So explain to me how it helps to have the people who want to work today and rest some other day, or shop, or drink latte prevented from doing so. What value in denying them what they want and forcing them to conform to your values.

    Furthermore, if there is value in forcing everyone to relax on this day regardless of their circumstances, does it not follow that forcing everybody to take tomorrow or next Monday or the first Tuesday of every month off would also be good? If not, why not?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Madeleine (230 comments) says:

    David I was not confusing your views with Dr Edwards; you separated his and your own clearly. However, you did state that you agreed with his statements entirely; you wrote: “I am sure there are many areas where I disagree with Dr Edwards, but this is not one of them,” so I took it you meant to agree with everything he wrote and some of what he wrote was offensive and your own comments added to that.

    specifically:

    So somehow or other we have come to the position that stuffing your face with hamburgers, pizza or KFC, eating and drinking up large in a restaurant, going to see No Country for Old Men (R16 Graphic Violence) at the flicks, or watching a rented porno, all constitute serving God, while buying plants or tools to tend your garden on Good Friday constitutes serving Mammon. Though it’s no longer sinful on Easter Sunday.

    Praise be to such a liberal God. …

    … Either ban the lot and make us all wear sackcloth and ashes for two days, or give every trader and every potential customer the right to make up their own mind on what they’ll do at Easter. I’m for the latter. Let’s open the doors. Let’s breathe the fresh air of freedom. Let’s, for heaven’s sake, grow up!

    I am sure there are many areas where I disagree with Dr Edwards, but this is not
    one of them.

    You may not view this and the rest of what Dr Edwards wrote as denigrating my beliefs, however, I found these comments derogatory and mocking. You are not a Christian so why say “Praise be to such a liberal God” if you don’t mean anything other than to be offensive?

    Christians do not believe that the actions referred to by Dr Edwards constitute serving God. No Christian believes that forcing people by law to not work on Christian holidays constitutes service to God either. Those Christians who support restrictions on trade on such days being imposed by law are not stupid, they know that non-Christians are not using the day to worship God, they don’t have any expectation that by continuing with the law non-Christians forced to take the day off might come to faith as a result, they are not anti-freedom or childish, they simply hold to a different political view about the role of the state than you and I do.

    As for the historically ignorant charge I levelled, you published Dr Edwards statements with no correction and said you agreed with them. Sackcloth and ashes is a Jewish practice mentioned in the Old Testament related to mourning. It is not a Christian practice related to Easter.

    When I wrote the comment you replied to, I referred to the tone you set in your post and the resulting comments in this thread. Now I know that you did not make the most offensive comments above and I don’t for a second expect you to delete them – I allow all offensive comments to remain on my site as if people are stupid enough to make ill informed, knee-jerk comments on my blog then they can expect their flawed reasoning to be shot to pieces publicly, but what I try to avoid doing is setting a tone that invites them by making un-argued for offensive comments myself.

    I am all for vigorous debate and I regularly criticise viewpoints on my own blog but I argue for my positions and I try to avoid slamming a viewpoint on the basis it is just obvious or that it is popular and acceptable to do so amongst my readers. Contrary views are welcome on my blog, I just prefer comments that bring the issues out and that are well reasoned, as this is more conducive to informed discussion and debate. So I try to set the tone by not mocking other beliefs (mounting a reasoned case for their stupidity is different) and making or publishing assertions without supporting arguments and I was critical of you for not doing the same as I know you are more than capable of doing so e.g.

    In the first place, religious belief has no legitimate role to play in lawmaking. When and whether shops stay open must be solely a matter of industrial law and not of religious observance. Holy days and holidays must not be regarded as synonymous.

    This is an assertion with no supporting argument. I dispute the assertion that the state and the public square must hold to secular premises. I do not believe that the secular position is any more neutral than the Christian one and we provide plenty of supported arguments for these positions on our blog.

    I have no issue with the fact that you or Dr Edwards do not share my beliefs. I have no issue with your desire to work or run a business on days I view as sacred. I also have no issue with you stating why you think my beliefs are flawed and if you wanted to write entire posts on what you think is wrong with Christianity I would have no issue with that; it is just that there is a way to do so that is conducive to rational discussion and a way that is simply offensive and I felt with this post and some of the others on your front page currently, you went with the latter.

    Given our history, I would like to clarify that I did not mean to imply that I felt I couldn’t discuss my undecidedness around this issue with you, I meant the tone created in this thread was off-putting. I am sure if you and I dialogued in another setting perhaps via email or over coffee we could happily have a civilised discussion that brought out the issues. I also did not mean to imply I think you incapable of a respectful discussion on our differences of belief, we have certainly managed it in other forums over the years and I have never found you personally offensive or difficult to dialogue with or like one of those liberals who froths at the mouth if they have to endure the presence of a Christian – you are most certainly not like that and I have appreciated the discussions I have had with you. I simply wanted to state my perception as to how this thread came across; there are Christians expressing views about you and your blog on other blogs and they are taking your words far more harshly than I have because they have taken offence at what you have written here. I know you a little better than they do so I was pretty sure you didn’t set out to be offensive; however, sometimes we are unaware of how our words are offensive to others unless a brave friend speaks up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Madeleine, I’m nearly certain David’s “praise be” comment was a comment on the complete mismatch between what the law allows on Good Friday and Christian ideals. It was an attack on the law and recognition that, as you say, Christians do not believe that the actions referred to by Dr Edwards constitute serving God.

    In fact this entire Good Friday debate has little to do with Christianity per se. If you look at the arguments, it is around workers rights and collective versus the individual and family values. This debate would be going on if it were Christians insisting everyone take Good Friday off or Muslims insisting on everyone fasting for 40 days once a year or Athiests insisting everybody bow before Mammon (or whatever it is they do). Christianity is incidental here, I think.

    …This is an assertion with no supporting argument.

    Well there are volumes and volumes of argument for why church and state are usefully separated, even if Dr Edwards didn’t manage to squeeze any of it into his column. It is a very old idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Dazzaman (1,114 comments) says:

    Madeleine

    You are not a Christian so why say “Praise be to such a liberal God” if you don’t mean anything other than to be offensive?

    Because Farrar is just like Edwards, a mocker of the Lord.

    I can’t believe that Edwards is getting any sort of kudos on this site, his arguments hold little water and are just another bitter rant about Christianity.

    Edwards
    In the first place, religious belief has no legitimate role to play in lawmaking. When and whether shops stay open must be solely a matter of industrial law and not of religious observance. Holy days and holidays must not be regarded as synonymous.

    Farrar
    And Easter Sunday is not a public holiday. It is purely a religious day.

    Who is Edwards to say that religious belief has no role to play in lawmaking? Does he not know any history? The 10 Commandments/Justinian code/Magna Carta/American Constitution, just to name a few!
    Through long observance, the Easter Holy days and every other holiday ARE synonymous and not purely religious days! It’s called tradition!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “Sonny, you seem to be claiming to pay your workers $250+ for making coffee for * hours. You pay your workers $31.25 per hour. What the hell do you charge for your coffee???? Or have you included the time+1/2 plus the day in lieu?”

    8 hours @ $12.50 = $100. Time and a half = $150. Full days pay for not working the following Friday = $100. $100 + $150 = $250.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    Heres a quick scenario.

    2 employees are applying for a managers job within a company. they are given the chance to “volunteer” to work Good Friday. one is religious and the other isn’t.

    tell me the person that didnt “volunteer” wouldnt be disadvantaged when they were selecting the new manager.

    if you’re business is going to suffer dire consequences because you cant trade for 2 days over easter… then id suggest your business was fucked anyway.

    as for the day in lieu, who manages to take 4 weeks holiday a year?? not i!

    the motorways were blocked yesterday.. thousands of people leaving auckland for a long weekend.. loving life.. i suspect not too many of them were saying “fuck i wish i could work tomorrow, i really do! screw 4 days at the beach with my family and friends! i wanna serve coffee to assholes all day”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,786 comments) says:

    In the UK I can happily go shopping on Good Friday. All the shops are open.

    New Zealand is behind the times, as usual.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,786 comments) says:

    expat says on April 10th, 2009 at 7:41 pm:

    oh FFS, Edwards is a sanctimonious boring old c*nt isn’t he?

    YES

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    Dime

    Have you noticed that most who are keen on 365 day shopping keep using the term “I”, its all about what THEY want to do on their Easter break.

    Fuck everybody else’s holiday, they want to go shopping when THEY feel like it.

    Well for 361.5 days a year I totally agree with them, as it happens for the other 3.5 I do not.

    Sadly it seems the modern National party supporter is nothing more than a cheer leader.

    [DPF: Actually you keep arguing to take away the rights of everyone else. I keep arguing for them to have rights. Personally the law change affects me not at all. I had a great Good Friday in Cuba Mall]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    Dime,

    “if you’re business is going to suffer dire consequences because you cant trade for 2 days over easter… then id suggest your business was fucked anyway.”

    Now you sound like bloody Helen Clark, “Any business that can’t afford to give the government an extra 1% really needs to look at itself”

    Yes business can survive all sorts of anti business policies, we’ve been hanging on for the last 9 years.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “Heres a quick scenario.

    2 employees are applying for a managers job within a company. they are given the chance to “volunteer” to work Good Friday. one is religious and the other isn’t.

    tell me the person that didnt “volunteer” wouldnt be disadvantaged when they were selecting the new manager.”

    The most rational position for the business is to not have the manager working public holidays as they are they incur the most additional cost, you try to staff with the lowest paid who can do the job well.

    Another scenario:

    An employee is applying for a managers job with 2 companies, one company requires them to work Good Fridayh and the other doesn’t.

    Tell me that the company that required staff to work wouldn’t be disadvantaged when the employee is making their choice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “The most rational position for the business is to not have the manager working public holidays as they are they incur the most additional cost, you try to staff with the lowest paid who can do the job well.”

    This is the rational logic, but I actually use Public Holidays to reward my best staff, as they are the favoured shifts of the year for staff to work (there are staff who want to work them that miss out).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    DPF

    “Actually you keep arguing to take away the rights of everyone else.”

    No I do not DPF, unlike you I am not arguing to take away anything, I am arguing for the status quo.

    [DPF: The status quo you don't understand? Okay let me say then you wish to maintain the denial of rights to employees. You also do not wish to extend the right to refuse work to Easter Saturday, as I wish to do. Also you don't wish to extend the right to refuse work on Easter Sunday to all non essential industries, as I do. Your status quo gives cafe staff no protection from being forced to work on Easter Sunday - my proposal would]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    The god resides in the “party”. Gods are kept alive by recognising holidays/social customs. Doesn’t matter whether you are christian, hindu or zulu, if you remove the social part of the god you kill that part off. At the fat end of the metaphorical wedge you get psychological de/evolution, at the thin end you lose ritual knowledge.

    You could not be more wrong, gg, if you are saying that God is a mere creation of the human mind.

    All religious belief uses the concept of transcendence. Transcendence is a concept whereby something is at the same time part of and also separate to a particular body. This is how God is at the same part of us and separate to us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Scott (1,614 comments) says:

    A really interesting discussion. It shows to me a couple of things — the half-heartedness of many New Zealanders. You just cannot abide any restriction on your individual freedom to do what you like. And secondly you just cannot abide any Christian influence in the public square.

    Many of us are just arguing for the status quo (and DPF lets not split hairs about what shops are allowed to open etc) and retaining of our heritage. But no, Liberals will not tolerate any restrictions whatsoever.

    It is my honest opinion that many of you think too highly of themselves. You live in a world that you did not create, in bodies that you did not design and a culture that you have had so far little influence in shaping. You are not God. Please do not expect the world to conform to your every wish.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. Scott (1,614 comments) says:

    On a more positive note I think that liberalism has run its course. This notion of individual rights has gone way too far. It seems that society is not possible when everyone is demanding they can do their own thing without any reference to community or the greater good.

    That’s why I think Christianity and some aspects of Conservative philosophy would be beneficial to our nation. Now Christianity is not necessarily Conservative, I am not arguing that. Christianity is actually quite radical in many respects.

    However conservatism believes that society is organic and interrelated. Therefore what I do has an effect on my neighbour. Christianity takes it further and speaks of love for our neighbour. So in this case if I argue that everyone should have the right to work on Good Friday that affects society in ways that we may not always understand. It would tend to make society more secular and diminish Christianity I would think.

    More positively if we go to church on Good Friday and Easter Sunday then our neighbour notices that. We send a good message of Christ’s love for sinners. So I would suggest the greater good is to uphold our Christian traditions that have made our civilisation great. And consider the uplifting message of Easter Sunday. You can have new life in Christ now and eternal life in the future. It’s a good message. It would be such a shame to see it lost to the almighty dollar. Don’t you think?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    I’ve spelled it out more than once simple simon….its a violation of the right to liberty…..even a restriction of one day is still a restriction….and wrong and invalid.A violation is still a violation regardless of its duration…..is rape ok as long as its only a few seconds long….?Is murder fine as long as its over inside a minute rather than 3 or 4? Please enlighten us oh oracle of moral knowledge. – James, 9.03

    Well, maybe you’ve hit the crux of the matter there. It’s not so much that you want to shop on the Friday, it’s the fact that you consider it a violation of your liberty not to be able to. There are lots of laws I don’t agree with (the anti-smacking law comes to mind), but I’m expected to obey them.

    What is your definition of Liberty? Being able to do whatever you want, irregardless of the law? And where do you draw the line? My definition of liberty might include me not paying taxes. Someone else’s definition (to use your example) might be to be able to rape anyone they want to. He might consider it a violation of his liberty not to be able to have whomever he wants. All laws are restrictions in one way or another.

    That is a fairly drastic example, but still…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    ps,. as regards ‘separation of Church and State’, if you look at the meaning and history of the phrase, it means exactly the opposite of what people think it does. You can read about the whole history of the phrase HERE, or my little snippet below –

    Since this was Jefferson’s view concerning religious expression, in his short and polite reply to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802, he assured them that they need not fear; that the free exercise of religion would never be interfered with by the federal government. As he explained:

    Gentlemen, – The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association give me the highest satisfaction. . . . Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association assurances of my high respect and esteem. [9]

    Jefferson’s reference to “natural rights” invoked an important legal phrase which was part of the rhetoric of that day and which reaffirmed his belief that religious liberties were inalienable rights. While the phrase “natural rights” communicated much to people then, to most citizens today those words mean little.

    By definition, “natural rights” included “that which the Books of the Law and the Gospel do contain.” [10] That is, “natural rights” incorporated what God Himself had guaranteed to man in the Scriptures. Thus, when Jefferson assured the Baptists that by following their “natural rights” they would violate no social duty, he was affirming to them that the free exercise of religion was their inalienable God-given right and therefore was protected from federal regulation or interference.

    So clearly did Jefferson understand the Source of America’s inalienable rights that he even doubted whether America could survive if we ever lost that knowledge. He queried:

    And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? [11]

    Jefferson believed that God, not government, was the Author and Source of our rights and that the government, therefore, was to be prevented from interference with those rights. Very simply, the “fence” of the Webster letter and the “wall” of the Danbury letter were not to limit religious activities in public; rather they were to limit the power of the government to prohibit or interfere with those expressions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    DPF

    “[DPF: The status quo you don't understand? Okay let me say then you wish to maintain the denial of rights to employees. You also do not wish to extend the right to refuse work to Easter Saturday, as I wish to do. Also you don't wish to extend the right to refuse work on Easter Sunday to all non essential industries, as I do. Your status quo gives cafe staff no protection from being forced to work on Easter Sunday - my proposal would]”

    You may well have missed my comment last night, if what you propose WAS workable then I would be in total agreement with you.
    However, we both know that is exactly what was said by the govt at the time when seven day trading was first introduced, the reality is that within two to three years we would lose our Easter holiday, you have already admitted that many no longer have the entire four days off, I do not want to see any further erosion of that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Brian (Shadowfoot) (78 comments) says:

    Dime,

    Imagine being able to have a four day weekend and not spending it stuck in traffic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “What is your definition of Liberty? Being able to do whatever you want, irregardless of the law? And where do you draw the line? My definition of liberty might include me not paying taxes.”

    And the consequence should be, to not have access to any taxpayer provided services.

    “Someone else’s definition (to use your example) might be to be able to rape anyone they want to. He might consider it a violation of his liberty not to be able to have whomever he wants. All laws are restrictions in one way or another.”

    Your liberty only extends as far as it do not restrict another persons liberty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Big bruv

    Nobody is arguing that there should be less holidays for workers and their families. This is about the freedom to choose when. Kill the straw man, thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Fuck everybody else’s holiday, they want to go shopping when THEY feel like it.

    Again, Big bruv, nobody is arguing that workers should have less holidays. Surely you can understand that for some workers taking April 10 off may be much less valuable than having the freedom to take that holiday on another day, e.g. using it as part of a long holiday. Having the state force them to use up a day off on that particular day is unhelpful for those workers. For others, it is fine. They will be the ones, generally (true, not always), who will take Good Friday off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Big Bruv

    Here’s the true stupidity of your argument. Let’s imagine workers really are forced to work on Good Friday against their will. Then, and only then, do you get moral equivalence with the status quo.

    Status Quo: workers are FORCED to take the day off, for some and perhaps many against their will.

    Imaginary Big Bruv world: and perhaps many workers are FORCED to work Good Friday for 1.5 times pay plus day in lieu

    Either way, you have coercion – and that’s repugnant. Either way.

    Now allow Easter trading. Some workers will opt in, some will opt out, and yes some few will no doubt be needed to work when they would rather not. They will be paid 2.5 times their wage for doing so. Nobody has fewer holidays. Workers gain the freedom to take a holiday at a time that suits them and not the collective. Everybody wins. And that is the solution that minimises coercion.

    What’s the problem?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Big Bruv

    Still waiting for an answer to my earlier question:

    Why is it that if one day of forced holiday to prevent (allegedly) forced labour is good that that should not be usefully extended to the entire year? If the state usefully forces everyone on holiday one day a year, shouldn’t it be a great idea one or two days a week in the other 52 weeks of the year? If not, why not?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. ben (2,385 comments) says:

    Fletch, nice quote. That is exactly my understanding of the purpose of the establishment clause and separation of church and state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. James (1,338 comments) says:

    Fletch: “Well, maybe you’ve hit the crux of the matter there. It’s not so much that you want to shop on the Friday, it’s the fact that you consider it a violation of your liberty not to be able to. There are lots of laws I don’t agree with (the anti-smacking law comes to mind), but I’m expected to obey them.”

    Thats aprtly the trouble …we have laws that are wrong and flat out co9ntradict the human rights that law is specifically set up to protect.Laws that violate rights…like the Easter trading ones etc have no moral standing and should be resisted and repealed.Good law is created to protect pre existing natural rights….the ones we all have thanks to nature creating us as species man.

    “What is your definition of Liberty? Being able to do whatever you want, irregardless of the law?”

    See above…if that law itself violatres my rights then yes I can try and indeed should ignore it. ”

    “And where do you draw the line?”

    Where the next persons nose begins.All human beings have the exact same rights….Life,liberty,property,pursue happiness…they are absolutes specific to man as our nature as man demands.Rights are moral sanctions to freedom of action in a social context…meaning we can do as we please within the bounds of those rights without needing the permission of anyone else to do so.The only obligation we are under is to respect those same rights in regard to everyone else because they are as equallly human as us and therefore have the same need to have their rights respected.

    Genuine human rights do not contradict…only false ones with real ones.

    “My definition of liberty might include me not paying taxes. Someone else’s definition (to use your example) might be to be able to rape anyone they want to. He might consider it a violation of his liberty not to be able to have whomever he wants. All laws are restrictions in one way or another.”

    But you have mixed your examples.In regard to tax I agree…its a violation of your right to liberty and property to have tax extorted from you by force…its wrong and always has been.This is different to paying for State services which you should do if you want the benefits of those but thats a whole different matter.

    Rape is a violation of an unconsenting other so its a rights breach and therefore like murder,theft, etc cannot be a ‘right”.That would require a conflict between the rights of two people and thats a contradiction and thats immpossible…ojective reality doesn’t allow contradictions within it.There no such things as rights to rape,steal or murder….because what happens to the rights of the victims?

    All laws should be restrictions on actions that violate rights…nothing else.if they are then they must be removed and replaced with good rights protecting law.

    That is a fairly drastic example, but still…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. James (1,338 comments) says:

    “Jefferson believed that God, not government, was the Author and Source of our rights and that the government, therefore, was to be prevented from interference with those rights. Very simply, the “fence” of the Webster letter and the “wall” of the Danbury letter were not to limit religious activities in public; rather they were to limit the power of the government to prohibit or interfere with those expressions.”

    But the God Jefferson referred to was NOT the God of Christianity…which Jefferson didn’t belive in.He like many of the other founders,Washington, etc were at best deists…..belivers in some sort of a creator akin to nature itself that set things up and left us alone after that.Indeed it was the custom of the day to use “God” as we would use “nature” to describe the same thing…..rather than a specific referance to the Christian “God”.

    The founders were quite explicit in stating that religion had no business in the constitution or any part of the goverment of the US…..it was not so much from Government prohibition and interferance with religion that they drew a line between church and state but rather from Government PROMOTION and IMPOSITION of religion on unbeliving others.They acted to protect people FROM state imposed religion…..the religious right of the day knew this and were vicious opponents of Jefferson and the Goddless constitution….they knew that they were being specifically deied the power of the State to push their beliefs on the people.

    Indeed early America was not a Christian country by any means…in the 1850′s less than 2% of the population attended Church.The myth of the US as Gods country is just that ….a myth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “The myth of the US as Gods country is just that ….a myth.”

    I see.

    How do you explain this then?

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

    You could not be more wrong, gg, if you are saying that God is a mere creation of the human mind.

    No you’ve misunderstood. Another word for “party” could be “fellowship” or even “church”. I’d quote religious verses, but It wouldn’t help to focus the argument on what’s important.

    Our country was formed on general Christian principles, whether the whoring sailor was breaking one of the christian god’s rules or not, he was a product of a christian england, and so it goes, right up until the present day. We do and should celebrate or acknowledge Christian heritage festivals such as christmas and easter because not only do they provide a gateway into our founding religion, should someone choose to take it, they provide a gateway into our collective past. The path intot he past illustrates how people assembled themselves into groups and lived their culture.

    On the other hand, we now have an alternate culture wanting control – 7 day 365 day a year shopping. This will be enforced by law, but allow a limited range of choice in participation. But here’s where it differs – it does not provide a gateway into a cultural past or illustrate how or why people assembled. It is not an expression of the collective, it is individual.

    Now usually as a good right wing disciple that shouldn’t worry me, I mean who would talk of the collective except a brain adled lefty, right?

    But there is more to rights and culture than what I want at any given time, what I can make in the market, what I can do for myself. There is a social part to everyone and a social history, it must be expressed and acknowledged. It’s counter productive to live in the past every minute and every day of year, but with a bit of life experience, most would agree that access to a solid unified culture has brought them through tough times. When the average boy becomes a man we are kidding ourselves if we leave it up to McDonalds to help him through. Ronald cannot answer his questions; tell him where his people reside, where they came from and what they believed. He doesn’t know why the boy is the way he is and what role he has within society.

    The gateway offered by a liberal commercial culture leads to base human values as default. It asks us to fracture and then if we choose to we can find the pieces to reform ourselves into unity – but not say what or where those pieces are. The somewhat warped, but none the less christian, values wound into our existing culture offers the average joe the opportunity, should he chose, to search for unity and provides the basic legends/myths for him to begin the journey.

    The Argument that their should be no church within the state is silly. It is already in the state, within the moral basis underlying our laws. We’re being adolescent to demand the removal of our past to deny it existed to satisfy our latest feminist or liberal fads.

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

    Sonny Blount (69) Vote: 2 1 Says:

    April 10th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
    Goodgod,

    Your post was entirely dumb, start to finish.

    Because you disagreed with it.

    Are you the open minded pro-choice employer you claim to be? I can just imagine you saying to your employee, “Your request to have easter off is entirely dumb from start to finish.”

    Try not to be such a silly little hypocrite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Madeleine (230 comments) says:

    Hi James,

    Its Matt here for some reason I can’t log in under my own account so I have used my wifes.

    I guess I should not be suprised to see you still peddling this line despite my repeated refutations over the years.

    Two comments.

    First your comments re the declaration of independence being Deistic where deism is defined as “belief in some sort of a creator akin to nature itself that set things up and left us alone after that” are demonstrably false. One needs only to read the text of the declaration itself. The declaration of independence refers to God four times. Once it talks of “…a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence….” suggesting a belief in divine providence. Divine providence is incompatible with deism as you define it. Similar it refers to God as “supreme judge of the world” again incompatible with deism as you define it. Moreover it does not equate God with nature it states “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” suggesting God is separate from nature, moreover the reference to “laws of nature” was used at the time to refer to the law of God as is evident from its use in Locke and Blackstone. The declaration also states that this God is a “creator” and “endowed men with inalienable rights” this also contradicts deism because God must have done this when mankind was created which was latter than the physical universe. (incidently the argument about inalienable rights being endowed by God was also common in the political writings of theists such as John Locke who uses it in his second Treatise)

    So the declaration refers to a God who is not nature, created the natural world, laws down laws which confer rights on human beings, exercises providence and will judge people for their actions. This is not deism.

    Second, contrary to what you say the constitution only forbad the federal government ( it explicitly states “Congress”) from passing any laws respecting the establishment of religion. The word “establishment of religion” was a word used for the then common practice of having state churches. In plain english of the day the constitution states only that the federal government shall pass no law either for or against the existence a state church, it was a matter left to the states to decide for themselves. In fact at the time of the founding many states had established churches and continued to do so for some time latter. It was only until the 14th amendment post civil war that people began arguing that the 2nd amendment applied to states. The founding fathers were dead by then.

    This is all laid down well by Stephen Smith in his various articles. His page is available here, http://www.sandiego.edu/law/academics/faculty/bio.php?id=731

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    “Because you disagreed with it.”

    Actually because I think you’re a bit thick.

    As you display again:

    “Are you the open minded pro-choice employer you claim to be? I can just imagine you saying to your employee, “Your request to have easter off is entirely dumb from start to finish.”

    Try not to be such a silly little hypocrite.”

    To be open minded is to allow and express contradictory opinions. If I think my employees are being an idiot I’ll tell them, and I don’t mind them telling me the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. James (1,338 comments) says:

    Matt……One time ,last time…..I don’t wish to talk with you or your wife.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. big bruv (12,327 comments) says:

    DPF

    How on earth did I miss this little gem of yours.

    “First of all you have shown a total ignorance of the status quo you defend. In almost every post you have made, you have shown you do not understand the law. What possesses someone to defend a law they do not understand, I do not know. It is the worst sort of unthinking conservatism”

    Really?, wanting things to stay as they are is showing an ignorance of the law? hell David, one would think that McCully is using you to run a National party prospective policy up the pole just like Klark used to do with other sectors of the media.

    “I suspect you have never employed someone.”

    Wrong, and there are one or two on this site that can prove you are wrong but hey, don’t let that get in the way of your hidden agenda.

    This whole thread has got right out of hand David, you seem to have rather a vested interest in shutting down debate or making sure that only your view (or perhaps the line that you have been fed by Neville Key’s people) is the one given prominence, it does make me wonder just how neutral this blog has become.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    Matt……One time ,last time…..I don’t wish to talk with you or your wife

    What a pratt you must be to express yourself like that to someone you don’t know.

    Hardly advances the debate now does it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. James (1,338 comments) says:

    ‘What a pratt you must be to express yourself like that to someone you don’t know. ”

    I do”know” Matt and Madds Andrei….in the sense that we are old sparring partners and I want nothing to do with them….french kissing roadkill holds more appeal.For backstory ask DPF.

    Anyway….whats it to do with you girlyman?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. James (1,338 comments) says:

    In regards to the claim that the DOI referenced God…Where in any of that was there one reference to Jesus or Jehovah?There is zero mention of a Christian god in the text. They actually went out of their way not to mention Jesus or Jehovah. There are pretty hard core deists who have a totally uninvolved god, but the deists like the Unitarians believed in a benevolent providence who was not Jesus. They thought Jesus was a good man and a philosopher with good morality but not god in the flesh, not a messiah, not born of a virgin, not resurrected from the dead, that there was no trinity, no hell, etc. This theology which is clearly not orthodox Christianity in any sense was fairly widespread at the time. John Adams embraced it. Jefferson is debatable but probably a more hard core deist than this sort of soft deism.

    Certainly if the Declaration invoked Jesus as God and Savior they would have a case. But Jefferson, who authored the Declaration was rather adamant that Jesus was not divine so when he pens the word “providence” he was not referring to Christ. Also note the semantics Matt plays by saying the Declaration “refers to God four times” instead of clear, unambiguous references to God. The closest it comes is to refer to “nature’s God” not the God of nature. Nature’s God is a strange, very unchristian term. The rest of the time we get words like Creator, Providence and Supreme Judge. Words that fit well with the Unitarians and which Deists were relatively happy with but which were most unorthodox and certainly not the language of orthodox Christianity at that time, or at any time since then. You will find a lot of discussions on theology and the Founders here at http://www.positiveliberty.com.

    And why is Jesus not mentioned since the central doctrine of Christian theology is that Jesus was god in the flesh. If these men were such hard core Christians, as to found a Christian country, why does this founding document fail to mention this directly? Based on what the Declaration says, and with only that before you, an unbiased reader would have no idea which deity or god they are referring to. Would a Christian document be that unclear about invoking Christ?…I think not.

    Christians have been trying to patch Christ into the DOI since the early days….but facts are facts and the most glaring one is that the founders did not place Christ into the foundations of the US.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. chiz (1,095 comments) says:

    Madeleine:You may not view this and the rest of what Dr Edwards wrote as denigrating my beliefs, however, I found these comments derogatory and mocking.

    Dr Edwards was not claiming that these were christian beliefs or practices. He was being sarcastic and so was DPF. You seriously need to improve your reading comprehension skills.

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

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.