More on Chris Carter
Before I get into this substance of this, I want to say a couple of things. The first is that I have known Chris Carter for around 15 years, think he has a great sense of humour and has been an effective MP. In fact it isn’t a great secret that I was hoping he would beat Brian Neeson when they both stood for Waipareira in 1996 as I found Neeson just far too conservative for me (and note Neeson in 2002 broke his written pledge to not stand against a National candidate by standing as an Independent in 2002 when he failed to be reselected).
Also it drives me crazy that some people are unable to comment on any issue about a gay MP, without making some dig about his sexual orientation. People really need to get over it. And Chris has had a longer relationship with his partner than most married couples, let alone divorced ones.
Now I blogged on Sunday:
I’ve been musing about whether to post on this topic, because I think Chris Carter was acting with good motives in flying to Samoa, but nevertheless I do question the appropriateness of it.
I don’t think it is the job of the Opposition Foreign Affairs Spokesperson to fly into foreign disasters, any more than it is the job of the Opposition Police Spokesperson to fly into fatal crime scenes, or the Opposition Health Spokesperson to fly into quarantine areas.
Three times I stressed I was not questioning Chris’s motives in going to Samoa, just his judgement on appropriateness. And I still stand by that. I think the motives were honourable.
I got flak from Russell Brown at Public Address and The Standard for my post. The Standard said (and Russell agreed):
In the immediate aftermath of the disaster, Winne Laban headed to Samoa to assist her family there. Carter went as her support person, the two are close I understand. He did not go there to be Labour Foreign Affairs spokesperson.
Now I don’t know anyone at all who thinks or has said Winnie going there was inappropriate. And going as a support person for Winnie would be entirely uncontroversial. One could quibble whether it is a good use of parliamentary funding to have an MP go as a support person, rather than say a family member, but I don’t think that is an issue.
This has not been disaster tourism by Carter
I have never used the term disaster tourism, and would not. In fact the blogger I recall using the term is No Right Term who used the label against John Key.
But sadly for The Standard and Russell, Chris Carter himself shoots down their defence f him that he was there solely as Winnie’s support person. Chris blogged:
What a great posting from Winnie. I am so glad she agreed to go with me to Samoa. She was not only a wonderful travelling companion, but her understanding of the appropriate cultural approach and her Samoan language skills meant we could engage with those affected by this terrible natural disaster in the most sensitive ways.
This makes it very clear Chris was going regardless of Winnie going. Later on he says Winnie asked him to go, but that be referring to the specific flight they caught.
It was clear to us that Winnie as Labour’s spokesperson for Pacific Island Affairs, and me as our Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, needed to be there, on the ground, supporting the victims and listening to their plight.
And here Chris makes very clear he was there not just as Winnie’s support person, but as the Foreign Affairs Spokesperson.
And with respect I disagree that rushing into a foreign disaster should be the job of the opposition foreign affairs spokesperson, just as I don’t expect the opposition health spokesperson to rush to medical emergencies.
It was important for Samoans and holidaying Kiwis to know that the Labour Party cared about the disaster and was quick off the mark to demonstrate its concern.
And here Chris says it was about showing the Labour Party cared. Now by his own words that raises the issue of appropriateness. Should the Greens have flown over also to show they cared? I think what was needed is to show New Zealand cared, regardless of political affiliation. And that is the job of the Government – whether that be National or Labour at the time.
It is an important role of the Opposition in a Parliamentary democracy to challenge, push and where appropriate support the actions of the government of the day. It is a legitimate role for Opposition MPs to provide a different voice and often alternatives to government policy or action, whether it be in domestic affairs such as Education, Health, Housing or Welfare, or dealing with issues concerning Employers, Workers, Unions, in International Relations/Foreign Affairs, and even in disaster relief.
That’s our job!
It was immediately obvious to us that what Samoa urgently needed was doctors, nurses, immediate food, fresh water supplies and medical equipment.
Now I absolutely agree Opposition MPs should and must hold the Government to account. But I do not accept that means it is appropriate for the foreign affairs spokesperson to fly into a foreign disaster, any more than you expect the opposition Police spokesperson to fly to the scene of an armed siege so they can comment on whether or not they think the Government or Police handled the siege well.
An Opposition spokesperson can critique the Government’s response to a foreign disaster by reports from the dozens of media at the scene, by talking to non-media on the ground, by asking MFAT (through the Minister) for a briefing etc etc. I’ve never before known an opposition spokesperson to assert they need to fly to the scene. And as I said in my original blog, Helen Clark would I am sure have ferociously denounced a National MP doing the same.
So if Chr ris had gone purely to support Winnie, I would have no criticism. But The Standard clearly invented that as a defence, to have Chris himself contradict it. And I think it is legitimate to have a debate on whether that is the correct role of an opposition spokesperson. Again, I have never criticised the good motives in going, but it is fair to question judgement.
Now Chris also made the TV3 news last night about the fact the published figures showing his spending on international travel over six months to be $83,000 was wrong, and in fact it was $131,000.
Now many will condemn him on that lavel of spending, but I do think people should not rush to judgement until all the facts are known.
I’ve had friends travel with Ministers in the past, and they get back absolutely knackered. One mate(ess) got back from a trip to UK and Netherlands for a week, and apologised for no souvenirs. She had worked from 7 am to 10 pm from when they land to when they took off apart from a two hour break one afternoon which she spent sleeping.
Many Ministers (and staff) do have punishing schedules on their trips. I suggest that the fairest thing would be for the itineraries for the travel in question to be released, so people can judge the value for the $131,000. Duncan Garner blogs that he has asked the Cabinet Office for the travel reports but for some reason this will take at least another week.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
DPF – IMO you are entirely too charitable towards Carter.
He plays the sexual-orientation card when it suits him, and has racked up absurd sums traveling abroad to exotic locations mostly eschewing cattle class.
If he attracts public venom it’s because he’s asked for it.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
DPF: “In fact the blogger I recall using the term is No Right Term who used the label against John Key.”
Actually it was your cheerleading alter ego, WhaleOil, who seems most prolific in his use of the term “disaster tourism” regarding Carter.
http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/2009/10/06/confusing-signals-from-disaster-tourists/
October 7th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
bet ya those trips wouldnt have cost 130k if the money was coming out of his pocket.
he spent 5k a week ffs
October 7th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
If Carter is going to be consistent then surely by now he will be on hand to help the Police search for the missing two year-old in his very own Electorate, and that he will be in attendance to offer Labour Party support to the distressed family of the child.
Oh, but that won’t involve international travel at our expense will it? And he would probably have to stay overnight in his home and buy his own dinner, without reimbursement.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
@ ernesto.
At least get your facts correct. No Right Turn posted it several days before even WhaleOil. Seems like you are the cheerleader.
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2009/10/disaster-tourism.html
October 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
DPF “The first is that I have known Chris Carter for around 15 years, think he has a great sense of humour”
to continually blow that kind of taxpayer money without any conscience whatsoever he would have to have – (In fact he has me in stitches every time I pay my hard earned taxes – what else can I do?)
October 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
I guess, by implication, the Labour Party doesn’t care as much about New Zealand taxpayers who almost certainly funded this trip (given Chris Carter’s reference to his role as Labour’s foreign affairs spokesman).
October 7th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Come on David – Carter brigns up the fact that he is gay as a defence against criticism. He plays that game whenever it suits him. Just another “victim” card that I hope people don’t buy.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Another question – Since he was only there as a Tax Payer funded “support person”:
Carter blogged at http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2009/10/01/shocked-by-the-devastation-in-samoa/
“Samoa’s Prime Minister has requested an urgent meeting to brief us on the situation at 3.30pm today. We’ve already had an informal discussion and been told that shelter and food are important priorities. We’ll be looking to report back to the NZ Government after our meeting.”
Why the heck does the NZ Government need a opposition MP play ‘tourist in the middle’ – Was he there at the request of the NZ Government?
Was the Prime Minister of Samoa not actually talking to the NZ Government? Im sure he was already.
Sadly – I think this is an extremely poor taste holiday for Mr Carter.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Is there any precedent for this behaviour?
What about the earthquake victims in Indonesia and the typhoon victims in the Phillipines and Vietnam? Doesn’t labour care about them?
October 7th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Chris Carter has indeed been in a long term relationship with his partner. An interesting exercise is to take the age of Carters partner and subtract the amount of time Chris says the relationship has been going on. By my calculations this equals jail time for Chris on historical counts of statutory rape.
[DPF: Off topic 10 demerits]
October 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Many Ministers (and staff) do have punishing schedules on their trips. I suggest that the fairest thing would be for the itineraries for the travel in question to be released, so people can judge the value for the $131,000.
That’s a good start. It’s easy to jump in and condemn without having any idea about what things realistically cost and what the return on the costs could be – but that may not be simple.
My partner and I will probably spend $20k on a budget-ish three week trip next year, it’s not hard to go through a pile of dosh.
Sure, if it is revealed that Carter flew off to beaches and casinos then there is a good reason to grizzle and talk about troughs and snouts. But what if he (maybe with the help of his partner) managed to assist with securing say $100m worth of trade? Or any number of revenue enhancing or cost reducing things? A hundred k or two may be money reasonably well spent.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Next time they have an earthquake in Iran Chris and Peter should go over to help. They could show that they really care and save taxpayers money on the return fare as they still have the death sentence for homosexuality in that enlightened land.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Pete George,
He was education minister + our kids are dumber than ever = nil return on travel investment
October 7th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
What about the earthquake victims in Indonesia and the typhoon victims in the Phillipines and Vietnam? Doesn’t labour care about them?
steady on…one junket at a time..Im sure Quiss and Pete will be winging their way to the those disaster zones a-sap…maybe Quiss should invest in one of those new fandangle jet packs for himself and his husband..errr wife….
October 7th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
The last time so many Labour MP’s went to Samoa in such numbers was to check the tiling job at Taito Phil’s!
October 7th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“He was education minister + our kids are dumber than ever = nil return on travel investment”
How much business do we get from international education?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Mr Farrer: your caveats (you like the man, a mate of yours was tired on a ministerial trip, ‘now many will condemn him’ -something of a crib from Mark Anthony, I think, etc) offer you little protection. You set this hare running, knowing full well that the homophobic in your menagerie will have a field day, as they have done (some of them clearly need long-term counselling, by the tone of their comments) and continuing a beat-up about what: a shadow minister has done his job, which you seem to admit? I for one am quite happy to take Mr Carter’s explanation at face value, without recourse to any explanation about Ms Laban. As for his spending, it is public knowledge. Is a cent of it in any way questionable in terms of expenditure guidelines or prudential requirements? I think not.
[DPF: What warped logic. You seem to think because Chris is gay I should never criticise him, because some commenters are homophobic. Not that's bigotry]
October 7th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Nice try but I cant imagine he did much pimping of our education facilities at the international “Just tell the thick kids they are winners as well” conference.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
And just on cue, the “homophobic” card is pulled out by a lefty!
What a surprise Mr Winter.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Look, the guy has a penchant for travel.
Nothing wrong with that.
Just do it out of your own pocket please rather than mine.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
So what does the Education system of Peru have that needed out Minister of Education, his partner and a ministry official to go over there to see in action in order to apply over here?
Or did he go over there in his capacity as minister of ethnic affairs in order to better understand the New Zealand’s substantial Peruvian community?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
@ Robert Winter – “As for his spending, it is public knowledge.” Actually it wasnt.
He defended the figure of about 80k travel when it was raised (being that it was such a large number) – he “forgot” to mention the other 50k in travel that has just being discovered by TV3 investigating.
He mis-led and should be held accountable – and should at least be able to justify.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Mr WInter, I don’t think Mr Carter can have it both ways. Either he was there in a private capacity accompanying Mrs Laban (in which case he should have held off on the press releases and the self-serving blog posts telling everybody how charitable he had been), or he was there as opposition foreign affairs spokesman.
Mr Carter seems to have a very muddled view as to what the purpose of his trip was.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
@ Tim “muddled view” – of course there is no Muddled view of who paid for this jaunt – yet again its the poor ‘ol taxpayer.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Robert Winters seems quite offended that anyone would question Chris Carter. I personally find homosexuals having major positions in running a country wrong because they decided to climb in the sack with another man. I don’t trust their decision making processes. Homophobic?? I am sure Mr Winter would think so, but when someone is in the position of power I would want to trust them.
[DPF: And once upon a time people said women should not hold positions running the country ... and non whites ... personally I think it in insane to generalise about hundreds of millions of people and take people as individuals]
October 7th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
jackp
Its only homophobic if you push back…or something like that
October 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Chris Carter has no idea why he is there. If he really cared he would have taken a wheelbarrow and a shovel.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
FFS – I just got a month ban at Red Alert for asking about Chris Carters Air NZ stimulus package!
October 7th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
R Winter: “I for one am quite happy to take Mr Carter’s explanation at face value, without recourse to any explanation about Ms Laban. As for his spending, it is public knowledge. Is a cent of it in any way questionable in terms of expenditure guidelines or prudential requirements? I think not.”
You forgot to add you believe Philip Field is guilty of nothing more than being too helpful (oh, and that we’re clearly racist for thinking otherwise). What other foolishness are you prepared to believe simply because it comes from a Labour MP?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
What does Chris Carter’s partner do?
Does he work?
How many days off work would he have had to tag along with Chris?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
@ Mr Farrer: But, Mr Farrer, you chose to raise the issue of sexual preference in your original posting, again, I imagine, doing a Mark Anthony imitation, which has produced the inevitable effect. You could have simply stuck to the issue, which would have been appropriate. The blogger do protest too much.
[DPF: Hmmn so in your bizarre little world, me telling people not to focus on the fact his partner is a bloke, is actually encouraging them to do so? No reasoning with some people but I suggest you look at the huge number of demerits I have handed out for people who have needlessly introduced sexual orientation into a thread]
October 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Lol, I saw that Patrick. Trevor must be having a bad day. I guess it’s all minds to the spin-wheel in the wake of TPF’s sentence and Chris Columbus’ extra travel expenses. I can imagine how he must feel, seeing Carter send his blog updates with him and Winnie smiling in the sun while poor old Trev has to figure out how to play down his travelling show.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“Its only homophobic if you push back”
I though it was “You’re only GAY if you push back”
October 7th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“Does he work?” Very hard. Head down……….
October 7th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Lipo, he’s a head master.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
nnnnnnnnn…..still resisting the urge
October 7th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
hang in there RightNow. It is best left to the imagination. Give that man a DB
October 7th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
i love these quotes too
“I’ve had friends travel with Ministers in the past, and they get back absolutely knackered. One mate(ess) got back from a trip to UK and Netherlands for a week, and apologised for no souvenirs. She had worked from 7 am to 10 pm from when they land to when they took off apart from a two hour break one afternoon which she spent sleeping.
Many Ministers (and staff) do have punishing schedules on their trips. I suggest that the fairest thing would be for the itineraries for the travel in question to be released, so people can judge the value for the $131,000″
Mate, in two weeks, I arrive in Hong Kong on a Tuesday morning at 7am. I got straight to a factory in china and am there all day. work dinner that night. next day is a conference and a dinner, thurs is a factory visit, same for Friday.. leave Friday night to come home.
Bet ya if Carter did the same trip, it would cost 5 times as much.
I hate how people justify MP’s expenses with – “they work hard”. We all work hard!!!!!
The difference is, we don’t piss peoples money back in their faces.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
It seems that some people just never learn or simply don’t care. Liarbore got tossed out of office partly because they were seen as bloated pigs that new no bounds when it came to sucking on the public tit. Shit don’t these MP’s realise that their actions are not seen in the best of lights to the taxpaying public, both right and left. One has to wonder just how clever Carter is when his actions are held up to the light. Either the man is thick or he has no wish to remain in public office. The voters don’t forget despite what many politicians might like to believe.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
“next day is a conference and a dinner”
That’s not work. Other than the work of trying to stay awake after a hard night before. Or maybe conferences are different nowadays (haven’t been to one in a while)
October 7th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
“I think the motives were honourable.”
Bollocks. He went so himself and Labour could get one up over the govt and look good to all the Samoan voters back here.
You are far too kind Farrar. It is almost as if you do not want to challenge his motives because he is gay.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
It is a shame that there are some here that will hide behind the homophobia defence. In this thread I cannot find any homophobic remarks.
Not once has Chris Carter been labled a poo pusher, or a back door bandit, or a chocolate cowboy or a shirt lifter, or a flamer, or a rider on the hersheys highway, or an uphill garder, or a pillow biter, or a chutney feret,or a butt pirate, or an Irish creamer.
So I would appreciate it if people could stop labeling the commenters of Kiwiblog as homophobes.
[DPF: 30 demerits]
October 7th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
“The first is that I have known Chris Carter for around 15 years, think he has a great sense of humour..”
DPF, you are a Wellington insider and for that very reason you get along with everyone. Good on you for being in excellent speaking terms with politicians from all camps.
However, that doesn’t hide the fact that Carter has exploited the system to his own (and espouse’s) benefit. It is obscene to spend that amount in a few months, to say the least.
Let’s call a spade a spade: Carter is an unashamed publicity seeker, a diva looking for an aria to sing but always at other’s expense.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
jackp 3:35 pm,
I agree Jack.
For those of us that view homosexuality as immoral, we find it hard to accept that a homosexual MP ascribes to the same moral values as we might. It really is that simple. And therefore any moral judgements they make are likely to be seriously tainted. In my opinion Carter’s ‘value system’ is on display for all to see. And the fact that he sees no problem with racking up $131,000 in travel is indicative of his ‘value system’ at work.
Of course, next someone will be proposing that because a paedofiles is a good bloke, and has had a stable relationship with his current ‘partner’ for an extended period of time, he therefore will make a good politician. Thin end of the wedge and all that.
[DPF: and 30 demerits for comparing homosexuals to paodophiles]
October 7th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
@ jackp and Kris K I realise debating with you will be as fruitful as banging my head against a wall but you both state as fact that homosexuality is a choice, where all the evidence I am aware of (as well as a lot of anecdotal evidence from a large number of gay friends) is that there is no choice at all. It’s just the way you are.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Manalo, surely you mean a diva without a voice, looking for an aria?
His is quite an achievement. At an annualised rate he is chewing up over a quarter of a million dollars a year on airline luxury, champers, stilton, nooky and fine hotels. They say distance makes the heart fonder and, by hell, he sure has done some distance.
He makes Jonothan Hunt look like an amateur.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
[DPF: and 30 demerits for comparing homosexuals to paodophiles]
I’m afraid DPF that no matter how much you may dislike it, or disagree with it, there are many here that view both ‘homosexuality’ and ‘paedophilia’ as sexual perversions. That is our opinion. And as long as we live in a free society I will continue to voice my opinion in this regard.
It wasn’t that long ago where this country viewed them as being on the same continuum. And many of us were not convinced just because the socialists changed the law against the wishes of the people back in 1986. Of course bestiality is also a sexual perversion, but let’s not go THERE!
[DPF: You can consider them what you like, but one is a crime involving children and the other is between consenting adults]
October 7th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
kiwigreg – its not some government type conference. its a distributor conference, will be busy as hell. conference in the morning and then sitting in a showroom all afternon buying crap for early next year.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
DPF, One doesn’t need to consider homosexuality to be a matter of choice for a question mark to be flown over the judgement of people exhibiting the trait.
I’m sure there are many genetic defects that predispose an impact on the mental acuity of the sufferer.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
DPF – With the greatest of respect, I believe that’s unfair. I don’t think Kris made any such comparison. Society has normalised homosexual lifestyles where once they were abhorred. Today we abhor pedophilia, and what Kris was alluding to was in his view that the same normalisation, complete with the same justifications, would eventually happen for pedophiliac lifestyles. As disgusted as we may all feel that is, there is historical evidence of society making that progression.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
I have to say I agree with you getstaffed. Look at the other side of it – It used to be legal to smack your children – The fact its now illegal wont change many minds
October 7th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I agree with David Farrar at what a shame it is so many chaps on here cannot comment on Mr Carter without mentioning his being gay; and as for that comments about paedophilia, well, gosh, how silly.
This may sound rather strange (Carter being the darkest of dark horses and all that)…but I think his publicity seeking and constant travel is simply part of a leadership bid in 2011.
As for Carter/Laben – one of them ‘misspoke’ (to use Hilary Clinton’s excuse) and these things happen; they had both had a busy day.
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
October 7th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Sorry DPF,
But that ‘consenting adult’ crap doesn’t wash with many of us.
Many of us see this kind of reasoning as why society is in the mess that it is.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
DPF – you need to get a grip on yoruself.
As far as I am concerned, Carter was the first to raise the gay issue. He was the one who wailed on that the only reason people where questioning his travel ex’s was because he was gay.
Bullshit. The reason people asked was because:
1. The Exs were VERY hig,
2. It did seem that he had used his position to take holidays on tha tax payer.
AND from my point of view, the fact that hes a poof and took his queer mate along doesnt help his situation.
Now – obviously HE is sensitive about being gay otherwise why did he raise it? Does he think that its un-natural? Does he worry about the embarrassment that it causes his family? etc. If he had no worries – why did he raise it?
As far as Im concerned, he raised it – so its open season.
Now – he had little or no reason to take the disaster tourism approach and run off to samoa.
October 7th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
with all the points he is picking up, Le Grande will be Le Gone soon .. keep it going son, good to read.
So Patrick got a month ban from Redalert for asking a question .. why do the have the site if they are not prepared to engage.
Someone mentioned that Red(not so)alert will take over from this site soon .. HOW, everyone will be banned soon except for the Std lot.
October 7th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
“why society is in the mess that it is.”
That nails it for me, other than that I’ll shut my gob, as the demerit marker is working OT. Only joking David
October 7th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
FFS – I just got a month ban at Red Alert for asking about Chris Carters Air NZ stimulus package!
join the club…Trev the muss..if you utter one word of the truth the tool hits the ban button…he’s got serious issues
October 7th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Chris Cash Carter is a piss-taking junket bunny.
I couldn’t care less about him being gay. He’s ripping us off and I hope the good people of Te Atatū give him a permanent holiday at the next election. Oh bugger – where is he on the Mixed Muppet Parliament list?
And he’s done a great disservice to gay people by resorting to the “it’s only because I’m gay” crap to deflect eyes from his blatant rorting.
Hell, I’m starting to sounds like RedBaiter
October 7th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Not quite malcolm a tad more rabidity is required yet but good progress this year much is expected of you.
October 7th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
“But that ‘consenting adult’ crap doesn’t wash with many of us.”
Well, maybe it should. Do you accept that adults who don’t believe in God shouldn’t be executed any more? Or are you intolerant of anyone who holds different views or is different sexually?
Trying to suggest acceptance of homosexuals will lead to acceptance of pedophiles makes about as much sense as suggesting acceptance of smacking of kids will lead to an acceptance of child abuse.
October 7th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Pete – I disagree.
- 50 years ago society viewed sex out of marriage as abhorrent. That has changed.
- 30 years ago society viewed homosexuality as abhorrent. That has changed
- Today we view pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia as abhorrent. That will change.
Or are you saying that you will stand up and fight to stop such change because your personal moral code [today] says it knows better that post-modern societies creeping morality?
No Pete, it’s fine to be outraged at the suggestion of these things becoming commonplace, but remember you’re only behaving the same way as NZers did 50 years ago about sex outside wedlock.
Can I suggest any further discussion on this jumps over to General Debate. We’re skating close the demerit wand of our kindly host.
October 7th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
“- 50 years ago society viewed sex out of marriage as abhorrent. That has changed.
- 30 years ago society viewed homosexuality as abhorrent. That has changed’
Thank God the peak of my sexual activities happened between 40 and 20 years ago!
October 7th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
“50 years ago society viewed sex out of marriage as abhorrent.”
Not really, it was frowned upon but happened often.
Slavery is now viewed as abhorrent.
Beating one’s wife is now frowned upon by most of society.
Babies aren’t taken off mothers any more.
People aren’t executed any more.
Should these all be reversed?
Just because some things change, for better or worse, doesn’t mean everything will become accepted. Some things will remain abhorrent for the majority.
Tolerance of non harmful things has generally improved, some people haven’t caught up with that one yet.
October 7th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Hey – there are two types of tolerance…………
1. Tolerance of behaviour that will get better – eg: tolerance of someone learning to drive – they will stop running into things sooner or later.
2. Acceptance of lower standards. eg: accepting customs that are OK in other societies – female circumcision is an extreme example. Or beating the shit out of other people as is normal in pacific island groups. Tolerance of this stuff is nothing but accepting lower standards.
Tolerating queers is either:
accepting something that will get better, or
accepting lower standards.
Take your pick.
October 7th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Carter and his partner are jetsetting freeloading queers.
Until this shit is sorted out by a government with some balls i will continue to arrange my affairs so that my place of residence for tax purposes is Australia.
The Aussies don’t tolerate this shit, they are real men. Wake up Kiwi blokes.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
David, I am amazed how someone who has a very high general intelligence can be so illogical because of religion or ideology. I have known a very intelligent professional person who has very fundamentalist religious viewpoints.
Many libertarians are similar – highly intelligent but quite illogical when their beliefs are challenged. If a woman says that men are more likely to offend sexually against children than women are they considered sexist? They are not because it is true. Having said that does not mean all or even most men are likely to offend against children.
There is no doubt that Maori physically abuse children at a rate disproportionate to their numbers in the population. However, it should be clear that vast majority do not. However, that does not stop a few bloggers making extremely racist generalisations. I have commented on a number occasions but they have never been warned and I have never seen anyone get a demerit point for the most racist anti-Maori comment.
Like it or not homosexuals sexual offend at a rate greatly disproportionate to their numbers in the population. I wish it was not the case but it is. Again the majority of homosexuals do not offend against underage boys. However, enough do that it is putting minors at risk to deny reality.
If homosexuals want to do what they do to each other or even in groups I do not have a problem. However, when they want scream homophobia every time someone points out facts I am happy to accept the label.
I do not think homosexual should adopt children. One should be able to be debate rationally with out being labelled as a homosexual..
What are the rules? Is it okay to rubbish Maori on the basis of statistic but homosexuals are off limits?
October 7th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Quite frankly, the degeneration of this debate into the merits or otherwise of Homosexuality is somewhat pathetic.
The question at hand is the suitability of the travel of Chris Carter and Winnie Laban to Samoa in the wake of the recent tsunami.
The fact that they are both in opposition, and do not represent the government, and subsequently have no power to do anything but show solidarity when what the people of Samoa need is Food, shelter, clothing and re-investment in infrastructure does raise the question about what their actual motives are. There may be good reasons as to why they are there on the ground, especially in the case of Winnie Laban, and to be honest, I had not known that she was there until today, but the fact remains that they cannot do anything in an official capacity.
The fact that Carter is Gay has nothing to do with the matter and the attention given to that set of circumstances would only serve to give some credence to Carters opinion that the reason he is singled out is because of his sexuality. While that very fact might give him a higher profile than would otherwise be the case, we all should put that aside and focus on the efficacy of his actions, which to my mind is precisely zip. In fact it could be argued that the resources needed to accommodate and feed him could have been better used in helping those directly affected.
The fact that they went over to Samoa to show them that Labour cared just goes to prove that they are there for the political opportunity that this devastation offers and the media should call them on it.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
@ Mr Farrer: My ‘bizarre little world’? ‘Warped’? In the context of much of the substance of this thread?
October 7th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Chris Carter has just admitted to blatant opportunism. It is of absolutely no help to anyone that the opposition Minister is running around finding out that Somoans need aid. It *may* have given some comfort to Somoans but given he cannot actually speak for the government the practicality of his visit is around zero.
Few can quibble with McCully going in my view. Sure, it is a political exercise but no doubt officials also went and did some serious work on the ground. Key’s visit was probably more symbolic and possibly political given he was on holiday when the disaster struck but again only the most anti-Key will quibble with that but Carter’s trip stinks however it is spun.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
I feel compelled to point out that prior to Robert Winter claiming this thread had descended into homophobia (“the homophobic in your menagerie will have a field day” ) there had only been one silly comment that earned the big cheese demerit points. Winter started a little feeding frenzy and keeps popping up every now and again to stir it up again.
October 7th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Johnboy – you mean to say you only lasted twenty years? Good God man, were you a Canterbury University student? Are you a Labour voter?
Hell, I’d expect any decent stud to have a useful life of at least fifty years. Fifteen to sixty five. After that you can expect to have you throat cut and be hung up in a tree for dog tucker.
October 7th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
I’m not so sure this deserves condemnation given the unprecedented seriousness of this particular event.
All help counts. What could he do? Maybe nothing. But did he hurt?
What really is wrong with an opposition MP with portfolio responsibility touring a disaster area in a close-neighbour nation?
West Auckland has a few relevant constituents, not a lot, but a few; but he’s never said that’s why he did it and I’m not suggesting either that this is why, but it’s a factor.
Has he yet tried to big-note it to his personal or to Liarbore’s domestic political advantage? Let’s wait and see. If he does, he’s scum and deserves immediate and utter condemnation. But it hasn’t happened yet.
Apart from the fact he spent your and my money going there, what’s the problem? D’ya think that the average Speaker’s Tour adds any more or less value either to us or to the recipient nations?
I don’t really approve of the precedent, in that, now it’s established, sooner or later, somebody’s going to attempt use tragedy to gain political advantage. When and not if they do, that person should be crucified.
Meanwhile, I quite like the fact that the govt of the day is kept in mind that their actions both here and overseas are being watched. Keeps them on their toes.
October 7th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Simple question. Did we pay for this prick to impose himself on the good people of Samoa? Did they deserve him and did he make a difference? If so, and I doubt it, what was the benefit to the New Zealand taxpayer? Keep in mind the guy is an opposition member of no consquence nor influence, and we no doubt paid for the trip (gotta keep those airpoints dollars up).
October 7th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
“Beating one’s wife is now frowned upon by most of society.”
The usual cowardly slander of good people. What an utterly repugnant arsehole you are.
October 8th, 2009 at 4:30 am
Apart from the fact he spent your and my money going there, what’s the problem?
…that is the fucking problem !! I dont pay big taxes so that a ( possible demerits ) can fuck off on a whim at my expense with his ( possible demerits ) holding hands together mincing around a disaster zone. And the ( definite demerits ) in opposition. This sort of shit has to stop. Again , another reason I voted national ..hoping the new broom would sweep clean 9 years of piggery, theft and corruption…but no..same ole same…nothing is done about it…( definite demerits )
October 8th, 2009 at 6:34 am
“The usual cowardly slander of good people.”
Huh? Beating wives used to be legal, and either accepted or ignored as “family business”. Now it is illegal and I’d guess that most of society don’t approve of it. How is stating that slander of good people? Are you suggesting wife beaters were good people? And that frowning on wife beating is being a repugnant arsehole?
Why don’t you say what your view on wife beating is RB? Or are you just sticking with your cowardly slander? Because once again it looks like you accuse what you appear to be doing yourself. But maybe I am reading you wrong, maybe you aren’t a repugnant arsehole. Maybe you frown on wife beating yourself. And maybe you frown on the abuse of homosexuals too.
October 8th, 2009 at 7:06 am
ete george, how did a thread about a wasteful member of parliament twist around to wife beating?
What a strange fellow you are.
October 8th, 2009 at 7:12 am
It was suggested that acceptance of homosexuality (of the MP) was a sign of all morals declining, so I suggested wife beating was a clear example of improving morals – or I thought so, some seem to disagree. I don’t know if they think wife beating is ok, or if they don’t like flaws of their general argument being pointed out.
October 8th, 2009 at 7:13 am
..yes..for reasons of consistency demerits should be awarded to george for being off topic I would have thought…
October 8th, 2009 at 7:16 am
I don’t see anyone supporting wife beating on this thread and as for morals one only has to look at the Klark regime for the ultimate example in corruption. Our country is a twisted mess no wonder Chris Carter does more air miles than the albatross.
October 8th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Starboard, the morals argument was brought up (by others) in relation to the blatant attacks on Carter because of his sexuality. Wife beating was suggested amongst other things as examples of improving morals. Then RB seemed to prove declining morals (by example) with his post, he singled out wife beating. So for reasons of consistency shouldn’t you be recommending him for demerits?
What do you make of RB’s post then d4j? And the -ve karmas on my posts?
October 8th, 2009 at 7:21 am
Give the albatross demerits. Love to chat ete george but must fly.
October 8th, 2009 at 7:48 am
@ Kris K 5:26 pm: [DPF: and 30 demerits for comparing homosexuals to paodophiles]
Just as well David Garrett doesn’t comment here then!
Or maybe he does???
October 8th, 2009 at 8:02 am
Does anybody know when DPF joined the thought police?
October 8th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Le Grande Fromage, I haven’t laughed that hard in a long time with regard to one of your comments above. Wow, I had tears in my eyes. I never heard those expressions before. Those are classics.
October 8th, 2009 at 9:15 am
David Farrar, how can you say you couldn’t predict all this homophobic crap on a post about Chris Carter? You whistle, the dogs come running. You have to take some responsibility for it, not all but some, and if people think you are doing it on purpose, well, you don’t have to comment about anything do you? There are a number of things you don’t comment on – why cry crocodile tears over this?
Chris Carter goaded Murray McCully and the National Government into doing more on Samoa, and for that the people of Samoa are grateful. But apparently we are giving $2million in aid to Samoa. That’s not enough! So clearly more politics from the Opposition is needed on this. Why don’t you comment about that David?
I actually quite agree with a lot of the points you make in your posts! But I do wonder why you think the dog whistle doesn’t work, just because its too high pitched for you to hear.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Kiwirights, What do you call homophobic crap? Below is a wish list of Tim Barnett and Chris Carter. As long as scum like them want diddle with children’s minds they can expect strong protest. Please note when I say scum I am not referring to all homosexuals just those who what diddle with children. I do not care whether they are diddling with their diddles or diddling with their minds. Another word for it is grooming. They protested for the right to sodomise each other. They have that right. They can leave parents to raise their children their own values. Parents do not want their children raised with the sick values of Carter and Barnett.
Also note Kiwirights, I put my name to my post.
My top ten would be as follows. They are in no particular order, and a number are on track to happen by the next General Election:
- recognition of our relationships, offering the same rights that marriage confers. (I am currently working on a civil union model)
- access to marriage, as an additional option to 1
- expansion of the Human Rights Act grounds to cover discrimination against transgender and intersex people
- comprehensive action to make all our school environments safe for young people coming out as queer That should include access to counselling, protection from discrimination by staff or fellow students and inclusion of relevant studies in the curriculum
- ongoing and effective training for front line public servants and in all public sector workplaces on awareness of the needs of queer staff and members of the public who they may be in contact with. Areas such as local government, judges and the police are of particular importance
- establishment of a sensible policy on funding of gender reassignment surgery recognition in law of the existence and absolute unacceptability of homophobia (and other forms of hate) as a motivating factor in some criminal acts
- access for New Zealanders with HIV to the most effective treatments available
- the development of a strong and diverse queer voluntary sector and a national lobby to create and defend equal rights
- the development of queer voices (similar to Rainbow Labour) in other political parties, and indeed in all sorts of workplaces and agencies, to define and protect our rights, and be an insistent voice for our needs.
And I am assuming that express, and the other media which inform, excite (and sometimes infuriate) us will continue to thrive!
October 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Kris K, you put very well. It is a moral issue. Perhaps a better example would be to accept transvestites as taxpayer funded motivational speaker. Now it isn’t right for us to judge but if a man walked into a theatre dressed as a woman with the intent of motivating me, I would want to slap myself to wake up from this nightmare. How could a transvestite motivate???? When I heard this I hoped it was just a rumor. I didn’t bother checking it out because I was frightened it might be true.
October 8th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
jackp 2:32 pm,
Jack, I really do feel it IS our right to judge; in fact I believe it is our responsibility to do so.
If we do not call people on their moral values; their lifestyles if we regard these as immoral, then we place future generations at greater risk of having no moral compass; of society having increasingly no moral fabric. In fact, I believe we’re essentially there already. Most kids these days have little real sense of right and wrong, and certainly nothing approaching the values that you and I grew up with.
As a Christian when I am confronted with sin, I’m going to call it. And I believe homosexuals, especially homosexual MPs, are one of the greatest blights on modern society.
[And DPF, if you're going to give me demerits for stating my beliefs, then you just fire away]
October 8th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Kris, I am a Christian and the stronger my beliefs, the less tolerant I am of homosexuality, the state issuing condoms and abortions without parental consent. I would never had made a statement as I have without the fear of hurting the pc’ers but since my faith has grown, I can see the overall picture a lot better. When teachers are complaining about unruly kids but no one in schools or government know what to do when the answer is obvious, it is time to speak up.
October 8th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
jackp 4:10 pm,
Yeah, I did feel you were ‘just being nice’ to the PC brigade, and that we’re on the same page.
It just annoys me when (some, not you) ‘Christians’ say “judge not lest ye be judged”, and thereby essentially rule themselves (and others) out of speaking against sin. I think they confuse judging the individual with judging that person’s sin.
I guess I don’t concern myself a whole lot with keeping the PC brigade happy, that’s all.
Keep up the good fight brother.