This entry was posted
on Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 at 8:10 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
I wonder which on of their properties these great contributors to society will spend Christmas at. Taxpayer money for fencing a swimming pool, buying new tyres for 2007 car, and getting car out of pound! Sheeeesh.
Thirteen of the 20 highest-paid beneficiaries and almost one-third of those who get more than $1000 a week from the state are looking after the children of other people.
The highest paid is a single person on the East Coast, who gets $1720 a week
…how rude is this !!..and then you have the harris scum in christchurch who get a grand plus a week off winz !!.. been on a benefit since 1984 !!…and 3 of his scum children are on benefits !!..unbelieveable…these are the dirt bags this government needs to drag kicking and screaming into line…it cannot go on and it needs to be fixed NOW !!!
And we all pay for this scum to live a life of luxury.
A radical reform of the welfare state is needed. The government must impose time limits on benefits to force the able-body bludgers to seek employment.
The system should assist only the infirm, the elderly, and those in real need.
So the Gummint and Infratil have just about closed the deal on buying Shells assets….
If any of these plonkers decides to call it Kiwifuel or any other adaptation of the Kiwibollocks name, I shall never set foot in the place. Have some imagination you idiots.
I’m surprised about the level of detail “leaked” on this, I doubt if it has been done by the book. But if any beneficiary deserves to be made an example of then the Harris family are prime candidates.
Very creative “special needs grants” from WINZ that include fencing the swimming pool and fitting new tires on the 2007 Chrysler.
The husband has been on a WINZ benefit for 25 unbroken years, either unemployment or (as now) on the sickness benefit – addicted to cannabis. It almost goes without saying that he has been suffering from “stress and anxiety” over being work-tested.
It’s time for an abrupt end to this kind of “Choose Your Lifestyle” perpetual welfarism. It is robbing good people financially. It is sowing the seeds of crime and a fatal breakdown in the rule of law. It is condemning innocent children to a lifetime of ghetto existence. It is simply wrong at every level.
And for some 50 years the long-term sponsor of this policy abomination has been the Government of New Zealand, whatever its political hue at any time.
Since then the family has been transferred to a special “remote monitoring” unit. The unit deals with Work and Income clients deemed too dangerous for face-to-face meetings with staff.
..how fucked is that ! ” deals with clients too dangerous for face to face meetings” !!!!!!!…talk about the tail wagging the dog….these pricks need to be beaten into submission and stripped of all benefit entitlements , thrown into the street and made to beg for the rest of their bludging lifes.
” But if any beneficiary deserves to be made an example of then the Harris family are prime candidates. ”
What crap. You applaud these kind of political crimes because it keeps the left wing government models you support in power. Welfarism is all about votes for socialism.
The real reason it has to go is that it is a deliberate perversion of the democratic process. The Harris family should not have the vote and neither should anyone else who receives any kind of welfare.
I’m surprised about the level of detail “leaked” on this, I doubt if it has been done by the book. But if any beneficiary deserves to be made an example of then the Harris family are prime candidates.
I gave you a thumbs up on your statement, but wonder if you would be so keen to see this guy made an example of if he were not a neo-nazi type but more tangata whenua. All welfare bludgers like this guy should be immediately denied any benefits at all.
What I don’t understand is the report mentions properties?
How come they bought other properties whilst on the benefit?
Also a poster mentioned 25 yrs unbroken benefit, how is that so and properties?
What is it about the rules that allows that?
What a fucking joke!
New tyres on the 2007 Chrysler..
And to think of all the small business owners and sole traders out there doing it hard, being made redundant, closing down their businesses…. and this piece of shit can just opt out of the system and receive more than the average wage.. because the poor dear is addicted to an illegal drug.
Cancel his benefit for life, make the piece of scum work for a living. Shame it will never happen though
Wonder who the no=hopers were that approved all these special grants.
I’ve got a right mind to go into the local winz and ask for a grant, because I need a new plasma TV. If I tell them I’m addicted to cannabis you reckon itll make this easier?
Wreck – given the Harris family’s (read: gang) reputation as White Power thugs, I am sure that there are standover tactics involved, and doubtless WINZ staffers have been intimidated into making favourable decisions. Whoever has decided to put this information into the public domain deserves both a medal and around-the-clock protection from the DPS!
Get your head out of the sand- a politician’s sexual preferences (nowadays) have an effect on their political direction, and the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push a homosexual agenda while in parliament.
“I’ve got a right mind to go into the local winz and ask for a grant, because I need a new plasma TV. If I tell them I’m addicted to cannabis you reckon itll make this easier?”
No but if you’re Maori and you go to the Upper Hutt office, that will make a big difference. If you’re Pakeha, forget about it.
Redbaiter – ah, hell, it’s not even worth answering your crap. The usual deceit and lies.
Brian – why do you think I would be selective in criticising someone who is a professional rorter? Have you ever seen me trying to defend anything like that from any minority group? Why do you think I would be a defender of tangata whenua?
Special needs grants are easy. I used to flat with a woman who worked in the Palmerston North winz office back in the 80s (although I guess it was just Soc welfare then) who used to authorise them for her friends.
I don’t get it red; don’t the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push ANY agenda? Why do you get so lathered up about a gay politician being concerned about gay rights? Where are your concerns about an ex-businessman pushing pro-business agenda, a Christian politician pushing a pro-religion agenda, a male politician pushing a pro-male agenda?
Oh, that’s right, none of those examples are queer.
Anyway, there is something deeply wrong with a welfare system that allows a single family to stay on it for 25 years and end up with more material assets than decent, hardworking wage earners. Quite sickening, really.
“It seems obvious from reading the article that the family must be making money through some kind of illicit gang activity, like drug dealing etc”
What’s interesting nickb, is that it used to be that although income tax is payable on all income from any activity whether illegal or not, the stringent privacy laws applicable to IRD staff meant that they were (and maybe still are) not allowed to inform the Police or WINZ. So a drug dealer was fine so long as s/he declared the income.
There was the information sharing legislation that went through a decade or so back which may have changed things – let’s hope so.
“Redbaiter – ah, hell, it’s not even worth answering your crap. The usual deceit and lies.”
It is not deceit and lies. The left deliberately attack independence and cultivate a welfare mentality because its a strategy that provides them with more political power. You know that, and you endorse it as a strategy.
Your concern with the subject issue is perhaps genuine, but only because you see it as a means by which the voters may be outraged enough to start to rebel against your welfarist policies.
I think the point of confusion is that I have nothing against homosexuality. It’s got nothing to do with me, and hurts no-one. Any culture that thinks it is under threat by allowing gay couples to have legal protection is a culture weak to its core. Man up (hah!) and live your life, instead of getting all hot and bothered by the actions of a harmless minority.
last week it was abillboard, this week it is human lives being erased by Christians.
Critics have called the Anti Homosexuality Bill due to come before “Purpose Driven” Uganda’s parliament in early 2010 a “kill the gays bill.” As detailed in a new report from a religious right watchdog group, networks tied [1, 2,3] to Rick Warren’s mentor and doctoral dissertation advisor have played a major role in organizing and inspiring Ugandan legislators who have spearheaded the legislation, which would mandate the death penalty for homosexual acts.
Homosexuality is already legally a crime in Uganda that can lead to lifetime prison sentences, but the new bill would require the death penalty for something termed “aggravated homosexuality” and might even lead to the execution of HIV positive Ugandan citizens. Rick Warren has refused to denounce the new bill.
As described in the report, Rick Warren’s Dissertation Advisor Leads Network Promoting Uganda Anti-Gay Bill, both Rick Warren and C. Peter Wagner have called on their followers to take dominion over the globe, and Rick Warren’s efforts in Uganda closely parallel those of his academic mentor Peter Wagner. Mainstream media has glossed over Rick Warren’s political extremism but, as shown in a video at the end of this post, in April 2005, before thousands of his church members assembled at California’s Anaheim Angels sport stadium, Rick Warren described a “stealth” program for global Christian dominion and encouraged his supporters to embrace the level of dedication shown by followers of Hitler, Lenin, and Mao. [see here for a partial transcript of Warren's April 17, 2005 speech at California's Anaheim Angels Stadium]
Right now, in the form of Grant Nicholson’s objections, its hurting Brian Neeson’s job prospects.
Do you think A) voters have a right to know if politician is going to allow his sexual orientation to effect his role as a Member of Parliament, and effect his decisions on appointments based on what the personal beliefs of the appointees may be?
Or B) do you just buy into Progressive propaganda that preaches that the sexual orientation of a politician is something voters do not need to know?
My quote was with regards to the “practice” of homosexuality, and not with regards the employment issue, so I’d prefer it if you didn’t try to invent an argument that hasn’t even happened yet.
That said, let’s start that argument now. It seems to me that you are of the opinion that we shouldn’t care about the past records of those appointed to the Human Rights Review Tribunal before appointing them? Because just reading the article now, it’s clear that the objections are based on past actions (voting records), rather than personal opinions (which I would agree are sort of beside the point if the person demonstrates the ability to do the job they are employed to do)
Plus, I think you are starting off with the questionable premise that being part of group means that it is impossible for you to think beyond that group and offer impartial judgments. By that rationale, you should be raising the same objections when anyone with a family tries to uphold family rights, or anyone with a job tries to uphold workers rights. And you seem happy enough to jump to the conclusion that the actions of an individual are representative of his group as a whole as well.
In other words, apart from the fact you really don’t like gays, I struggle to understand why this is such an important issue to you. In fact, your reasoning is a bit of a mess.
PS: I vote C: voters should look at what politicians ACTUALLY SAY AND DO before deciding to vote for them one way or the other, rather than taking an aspect of their personal life and making groundless assumptions based on it.
Example: Don Brash is (was?) married to an Asian, so of course he’s going to roll over for all the Asian countries right? Yep, much easier than actually paying attention to anything.
I see that a Ms Millie Elder (related to the ‘I’M SOOO GREAT ‘ Paul Holmes) is once again up before the beak on drugs chrges; possession, supply – the usual things that this young lady is becoming somewhat well known for.
She evidently seems totally unwilling to do anything to change her hitherto privileged lifestyle (‘My Step-daddy’s a TV personality’) and to live in the real world where you actually have to work for a living.
Inevitably, she will go through the usual performance, with the Judge being persuaded by an expensive lawyer and the fame of her stepfather, that she is just a ‘good girl who has made an unfortunate series of choices (again, and again, and again. . . ), and expect that she will once again be released back into society, mumbling the usual abject apologies which look good on the 6 O’clock TV news and be free to return (toally unrepentant) to the lifestyle she evidently is VERY accustomed-to, and so resume where she left off.
I wonder though, since she is very obviously unrepentant, unreformed and has no intention of changing her lifestyle, at what point the judge should say ‘enough is enough’ and actually consign the spoilt brat to a period of time inside?
4-5 years (or whatever the maximum is) would be about right I believe, with no right of appeal, the sentence being in direct proportion to the fact that she is unwilling to reform, with ‘Unwilling to reform’ meaning that until you do ms Elder, we are unwilling to let you return-to and becoma a member-of New Zealand society.
I personally would prefer that it is sooner rather than later, (though not holding my breath that a judge will actually put her away), but, given the wide variety of viewpoints this forum’s readers and contributers have on such things, would be interested in learning the opinion of others (sans personal attacks of course).
Agreed Komata – Ms Elder seems hell-bent on becoming New Zealand’s answer to Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan or Amy Winehouse. The only problem is that she seems to have no discernable talent …
Climate change scam across the Ditch – more scary economic distortion consequences of this rubbish. http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/wholesale-theft-in-the-name-of-carbon/#more-5561
This is absolutely astonishing, but is happening in a society very like ours. We should all be very wary about what is going on, and demand a much, much more convincing reason.
“How about this appointment for conflict of interest.”
Yes, outrageous, however people people tend to be a bit blaze about such events these days as it is generally accepted that the UN is a corrupt and cronyist bureaucracy. The only people interested in maintaining the farce that it is a legitimate world authority are those who profit personally or politically from maintaining the illusion.
The problem is that our political leaders, (John Key in particular) seem so amazingly unaware of the UN’s real standing. Why we keep electing such dumbarses to office is something that completely baffles me. I mean, who the hell is so bloody dumb that they do this-???
Redbaiter, most of the time you can’t even talk for yourself and sound rational, so making things up and pretending to talk for me show you for what you are. You haven’t fronted up yet, still a gutless wonder. Full of smear and fear, you haven’t got the balls to be honest. Or open.
Get your head out of the sand- a politician’s sexual preferences (nowadays) have an effect on their political direction, and the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push a homosexual agenda while in parliament.
Absolutely.
For those of us that view homosexuality as immoral; then knowing the sexual preference of MPs largely influences our understanding of how these same MPs will react in situations that require a strong moral base. If people are immoral in one area of their lives, then this affects other moral decisions thay make. I personally believe we should have NO homo MPs in Parliament. I also believe homosexuality should be ‘re-criminalised’.
Another example of where we should have someone with the highest moral integrity is the position of Chief Censor. Of course this position is occupied by the openly queer Bill Hastings. Can one think of a greater conflict of interests when considering what is and isn’t morally appropriate viewing than having a morally bankrupt individual making such decisions on behalf of the nation?
Maybe having a queer PM would be worse. Anyone know of a country which has had one of these *cough* recently?
Of course Hastings was appointed after being recommended by the Clark-led Labour government back in 1999.
No surprises there.
Get your head out of the sand- a politician’s sexual preferences (nowadays) have an effect on their political direction, and the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push a homosexual agenda while in parliament.
@Kris
For those of us that view homosexuality as immoral; then knowing the sexual preference of MPs largely influences our understanding of how these same MPs will react in situations that require a strong moral base.
I agree that voters should be free to ask any questions they like of a politician. Nothing is off-limits. By the same token a politician is free not to answer or provide information which they consider personal and not relevant (except of course the usual business interests etc). Voting is a personal judgement and people should be free to make their judgement on whatever basis they see fit.
I don’t share Kris and Redbaiter’s pre-occupation with homosexuals. Personally I like to know if a politician is a god-botherer. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance.
Easy. Like I said, I don’t really give weight to the gay bit, but I give negative weight to the Christian bit. So all other things being equal I’d view a gay Christian politician in the same way as a Christian polli.
Of course there are lots of other things I consider. And they may out-weigh the religious deficit.
Do you give negative weighting to a politician who’s gay? If so, can I say you have a warped perspective?
I don’t share Kris and Redbaiter’s pre-occupation with homosexuals. Personally I like to know if a politician is a god-botherer. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance.
So on that basis I guess you won’t be encouraging your wife to run for parliament any time soon, Malcolm?
You say she’s a Christian, but why would you marry someone who you consider naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant?
I trust you haven’t chosen to have kids? I mean, having a parent with the traits you ascribe to Christians would condemn your kids to a pretty twisted view on life. Heck, they may even end up with some of the traits you show so much abhorence for. And imagine if they grew up to be a God-bothering MP – that would have to be your worst nightmare.
“I don’t share Kris and Redbaiter’s pre-occupation with homosexuals. Personally I like to know if a politician is a god-botherer. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance.”
I don’t share malcolm and Billy Borker’s pre-occupation with Christians. Personally I like to know if a politician is a shirt-lifter. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance. (Which is about as rational as malcolm’s initial statement i.e not very . .)
Kris, you’re putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say that a god-bothering MP is my worst nightmare. I said it’s one factor which I give negative weight to when evaluating politicians.
Of course there are many other factors I consider. So, for example, if Don Brash were to declare that he’s actually a polygamy practising Mormon and spends his hols digging for Joseph’s golden tablets, I’d still think he is the best PM that NZ never had.
Re my wife. I think you’re referring to the story about her recommending to me the Lee Strobel book (which she’d never actually read, but which I had). As far as I can tell she isn’t a Christian, however even if she was that would only be one factor. Yes I would see it as naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant. However she’s very smart and attractive in other ways, so as with everything in life you have to look at the whole picture. She’s a Fellow of Casualty Actuary Society of the US and has a degree on mathematics from top US university.
She’s from the mid-west and has very devout parents and a very over-bearing mother (IMHO). Her family don’t really do discussions and it’s not done to question the word of the mother. Consequently and like a lot of Americans she was raised in the church and did all the church things and can speak the lingo. That being said when I meet her she didn’t go to church, didn’t pray etc. But in the right circumstances, like many Americans, she can make all the right noises on this front. I was probably the first openly agnostic person she had ever meet and this was strange to her.
We do have two kids. Daughter 4.5 and son 1.5. No sign of political ambitions yet.
I am going to have my 2 cents worth on the Orewa College boiler explosion. The janitor was killed and the boiler serviceman seriously injured. Labour Dept. has decided to prosecute the College Board of Trustees.
I do not know the ‘small print’ of what happened but I do think that the Education Minister should make some inquiries. In particular what were the communications if any between the College and the Ministry regarding the boiler and how ‘responsive’ was the Ministry to any requests for financial or other assistance. I do wonder whether the Board and Principal are being set up as ‘fall guys’ while Ministry officials are ducking for cover. The Minister owes it to all good people who put their time and effort into being on boards to ensure they are not victims of cover-ups etc.
The Board and Principal are hardly boiler experts and have to rely on contractors to keep the boilers in good shape and if they acted reasonably on recommendations re repairs etc, they can hardly be held to moral blame. Under ‘Yesterday’s Schools’ a school could refer boiler problems to the Education Board or the Ministry of Works to sort.
I understand that some years back (during the 1990′s National Government), the ERO was gagged from mentioning shortcomings in their reports where the ball was in the Ministry’s court. As I understand it from what a prominent principal said some years ago, the view seemed to be if there was a health and safety issue which a Board could not deal with, then the school discharged its responsibility with respect to it. Possibly the Ministry pen pushers do not see it that way and are quite content for Boards and Principals to be caught between a rock and a hard place.
I don’t share malcolm and Billy Borker’s pre-occupation with Christians. Personally I like to know if a politician is a shirt-lifter. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance. (Which is about as rational as malcolm’s initial statement i.e not very . .)
Good for you Angus. That was exactly my point – we should be free to judge politicians by whatever criteria we like. You like to know about their sexual preferences and I like to know whether they’ve been fooled, by what I consider to be the longest-running, most transparent and patently absurd con, ever conceived.
“Do you give negative weighting to a politician who’s gay?”
No.
Interesting. Do you consider it a sin to be actively gay?
“Yes I would see [a Christian] as naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant.”
Really? That’s precisely what I think about non-Christians, malcolm. Not that I rub it in, that would be most un-Christian.
I know . I should again emphasis that the “naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant” is just one facet of the person, in one of many dimensions. People are complex. I have friends who are religious. It’s possible to over-come the religious deficit in my weighing system.
“I consider to be the longest-running, most transparent and patently absurd con, ever conceived.”
malcolm, ever noticed that when people die, their ideas die with them. The most towering figures of any age quickly turn into dust in the wind. Why even giant humans like Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin, JFK, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Einstein, Edison, Tesla, JP Morgan, Strauss eventually all fade and disappear as will also all those alive today. You could go back further and say the same about Da Vinci, Newton, Ptolemy, Curie, Twain, they are all the same.
The one strand that’s lasted throughout is that from G-d.
peterwn – I share your concerns. It’s no secret that school are underfunded, and large capital items are usually put to the back of the queue. I hope the BOT chair is instructing his/her team to marshall all ministry correspondence there may have been on this matter, although I can hardly see Ministry be stupid enough to try to shift any blame if there’s a good audit trail.
malcolm, ever noticed that when people die, their ideas die with them. The most towering figures of any age quickly turn into dust in the wind. Why even giant humans like Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin, JFK, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Einstein, Edison, Tesla, JP Morgan, Strauss eventually all fade and disappear..
Their ideas didn’t turn to dust. We have technology, memories and most importantly, the printed word. E.g. Tesla’s ideas and inventions are in operation in every power station, every substation, every transmission line and every house in the country. 24/7.
The one strand that’s lasted throughout is that from G-d. A wise man might ponder why that is.
Sure, people have believed in various gods etc since the beginning. That doesn’t actually say much for the idea. For probably 99.99% of the time that humans have been around, they believed the world was flat. The longevity of an idea isn’t a good measure of it’s worth.
I don’t know malcolm in that I haven’t ever addressed that question.
That may sound odd but I haven’t ever had to address that issue in myself and I concentrate my conviction and my sense of right and wrong toward myself and not toward others. [Political commentary aside, of course ]
It’s impossible to interpret the Bible as anything but disapproving of homosexual behaviour.
So if I were gay, I’d think I’d probably be a non-practising gay but saying that and doing it are two quite very different things and it’s one of those things I think where you don’t actually know where you’d lie unless you were actually in that position.
Fortunately, since I’m not gay, I haven’t needed to confront that particular dilemma in my own Christian journey and I feel and pray for those who do and have.
Einstein, Edison, Tesla, Strauss, Da Vinci, Newton, Curie etc…..their ideas all died with them? What planet are you on?
and
Their ideas didn’t turn to dust. We have technology, memories and most importantly, the printed word. E.g. Tesla’s ideas and inventions are in operation in every power station, every substation, every transmission line and every house in the country. 24/7.
Dear oh dear, you don’t get it, do you.
The laws of the universe (and duh, go ahead and tell me about Tesla), were uncovered by those people, not created by them. Name something else that was created out of nothing and remains nothing tangible yet is practised in real works (i.e. turned tangible) by billions every day from the time of Christ to now.
If that’s not something special, tell me what is.
What d’ya think motivates the Christmas dinners all the Mission Groups are offering, as a tiny example? How come they’ll be here next year, and they’ve been here since we remember. Something out of nothing. For thousands of years, across the world. A daily miracle under your noses and you don’t even notice.
This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog.
Why don’t you Devil Dodgers give it a rest or fuck off to a church chat room?
I mean this is not the place to push your wheelbarrow of self centered shit.
Now, for the rest of us, how about the best beaches/places and which Politicians are there for a nice chat from both sides of the spectrum?
Who catches the most fish? What beers/wines are being tasted and do they share? Cans or bottles? Wine corked or screwtop?
Christmas is a Christian celebration time but also a deserved holiday time for the years’ work. So all of you who force your belief can stick it where the Global Warming Sun don’t shine.
“This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog. Why don’t you Devil Dodgers give it a rest or fuck off to a church chat room?”
Steve (771), it’s a momentary phase. I agree it’s been quite popular on GD over the last few months, it didn’t used to be and perhaps that state will again come to pass as these things do. Meanwhile, why don’t you just relax and enjoy it.
You may not have noticed, but the only reason you actually GET a holiday over the December-January period in New Zealand is because the time was put aside by our Christian forebears in honour of their Lord.
In Britain (and Europe-generally) they had celebrated the event of his birth on December 25th – the European winter, while having hoildays in the middle of the year during the Northern Summer. With our Summer and December coinciding, the holiday-period was merely relocated to accomodate the seasonal change . However, it should be noted that such holidays are not a hallmark of any of the other faiths, though no doubt you are aware of that.
In view of your very evident antipathy to the Christian faith, which has given you the holiday which you are so obviously looking forward to, are you so hypocriitcal as to continue to go away on said holiday despite your comments, or can we reasonably expect you to shortly announce to the assembled readers of Kiwiblog that you are actually not going to have a holiday (which word incidently, is a contraction of HOLY-Day and has its origins in Mediaeval Christianity and CHRISTMAS celebrations) because you do not wish to be a hypocrit by taking pleasure from the actions of a belief system for which you have absolutely no time (and have said as much publicly).
It’s a small point but if your convictions are really as you outlined in your 1957 posting, I really don’t see that you have much of a choice, so. . . ?
The laws of the universe (and duh, go ahead and tell me about Tesla), were uncovered by those people, not created by them.
Re-read what you wrote. If we missed the point you were trying to make, then perhaps you didn’t make it very well.
Name something else that was created out of nothing and remains nothing tangible yet is practised in real works (i.e. turned tangible) by billions every day from the time of Christ to now.
You mean an enduring idea which causes people to do good things? OK, lots of other and mutually exclusive religions, for starters. Lots of ideas in our culture, e.g: It’s good to help people. It’s not worth helping people who harm you. It’s desirable to live a materially better life than your parents and it’s admirable to work hard at achieving this aim. You shouldn’t ‘waste’ your life on pleasure-seeking. Lots of ideas. Religion is just an idea, nothing more, nothing less.
What d’ya think motivates the Christmas dinners all the Mission Groups are offering, as a tiny example? How come they’ll be here next year, and they’ve been here since we remember. Something out of nothing. For thousands of years, across the world.
Different reasons for different people. E.g: They like helping people. They think they should because their religion suggests it’s a virtuous thing to do. They want to convert people to their religion by showing them how virtuous it is. They feel guilty that they have so much while others have so little. Lots of reasons.
A daily miracle under your noses and you don’t even notice.
Or just good people doing good things. No God required.
If it wasn’t for your Christian faith, do you think you’d be incapable of doing anything altruistic?
I think that people have the right to believe what they like; I just find it sad that people like reid, in their defensive clamour to justify their beliefs, see nothing wrong with trying to discredit and downplay real, actual human achievement. How do you get any pleasure out of life if you look at someone like Einstein and think “Eh, he didn’t actually do anything…”?
And that is why I can never buy into religion personally; it is deeply misanthropic deep down. We are all the lambs of God who should be grovelling for his eternal good grace? No thanks. I’d rather turn on some Sonic Youth real loud, marvel at their endless energy and inventiveness, have a conversation with my wife and appreciate her intelligence and quick wit, enjoy a great dinner at the hands of a talented chef, a refreshing beer brewed based on generations of curiosity, experimentation and hard work….and NOT diminish all that human endeavour as meaningless without something “bigger” and “better”.
@Komata
@reid
and others.
It just seems that in General Debate, any General Topic gets bent and twisted into something religious.
Now my car had a tyre sort of blow out and go flat really quick 2 days ago.
Was that divine intervention that stopped me having a major accident?
Oh,had enough cant be bothered with devil dodgers (excuse makers)
Red Rag is blogger of the year??
Well that “Spud” seems to run the sideshow, then Trev sucks up and bans.
This is a joke huh? Red Alert? FFS 90% of comments are deleted
In view of your very evident antipathy to the Christian faith, which has given you the holiday which you are so obviously looking forward to, are you so hypocriitcal as to continue to go away on said holiday despite your comments, or can we reasonably expect you to shortly announce to the assembled readers of Kiwiblog that you are actually not going to have a holiday (which word incidently, is a contraction of HOLY-Day and has its origins in Mediaeval Christianity and CHRISTMAS celebrations) because you do not wish to be a hypocrit by taking pleasure from the actions of a belief system for which you have absolutely no time (and have said as much publicly).
LOL. We should only take Christmas holidays if we’re Christians?
Should we only take Labour Day if we’re in a union?
… Waitangi Day if we’re Maori or English?
… ANZAC Day if we fought in WWI?
… Queen’s Birthday if we’re monarchists?
… New Years Day if we’re Catholics?
Anyway, Christmas has origins well beyond when it was appropriated by the Christians. What’s with Santa Claus, christmas trees, yule logs etc?
Steve’s comments about the (delightful euphemism) Devil Dodgers spamming up General debate are spot on.
And, Reid; don’t call me agnostic or atheistic. I am so religious that I backed Resurrection in the Easter Handicap!
Komata, Christmas is actually borrowed from the pagan Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the unconquered sun). They had festivals and holidays before JC was born. Most of the Christian holidays are adapted from pagan festivals that occurred about the same time of year. It is no co-incidence that Christmas is so close to the shortest day in the Northern Hemisphere where winter festivals would take place largely because they couldn’t do much agricultural work in mid-winter.
The actual establishment of 25th December as Christmas didn’t happen until at least the 4th Century, possibly as late as the 9th Century.
Anyway, Christmas has origins well beyond when it was appropriated by the Christians. What’s with Santa Claus
‘Santa Claus’ is another was of saying ‘Saint Nicholas’ a Christian Saint and Bishop of Myra
His feast day also occurs around this time.
The tradition of Saint Nicholas Day, usually on 6 December, is a festival for children in many countries in Europe related to surviving legends of the saint, and particularly his reputation as a bringer of gifts. The American Santa Claus, as well as the Anglo-Canadian and British Father Christmas, derive from these legends. “Santa Claus” is itself derived from the Dutch Sinterklaas.
As far as Christians contributing to threads on here regarding matters of faith: personally I don’t go out of my way, but if someone makes a comment on something religious or puts down my faith, then yes I am going to respond (not all the time, but sometimes the statements made are so way out I feel the need to correct them).
Looking back at this thread we’re on now I can see that the ‘discussion’ was started by Transmogrifier and mynameisjack – they are the first ones to mention the word ‘Christian’ in a way such as to inflame on the board.
So Steve, if you want to blame someone for starting a religious discussion, blame your buddies.
and NOT diminish all that human endeavour as meaningless without something “bigger” and “better”.
and can understand
their defensive clamour to justify their beliefs, see nothing wrong with trying to discredit and downplay real, actual human achievement. How do you get any pleasure out of life if you look at someone like Einstein and think “Eh, he didn’t actually do anything…
I must admit most of the time I don’t think about
marvel at their endless energy and inventiveness, have a conversation with my wife and appreciate her intelligence and quick wit, enjoy a great dinner at the hands of a talented chef, a refreshing beer brewed based on generations of curiosity, experimentation and hard work…
in real time but after the fact.
Thanks for the thoughts. Life is half full if you want it that way and it is beautiful. It is people that make the journey worthwhile for me.
This is also processed through my appreciation and gratefulness for what I have and hold. I choose not to divorce that from whom I recognise as owing it all too.
I don’t think that GD gets overtaken by the “devil dodgers” starting it mainly but by their responding to the inflamers.
One could say “ignore the children” but to do that gives over the space and emboldens them. Which is the case with children
If DPF was fair he would treat both sides as he does anyone biffing Homosexuals. But he isn’t so the dance carryies on to the detriment of all.
I personally would love to see GD free of inflaming and responding as I love the dialogue and have learnt so much about so many things and people but I see no end to it unless the enflamers whomever they are stop.
Malcolm Sure, people have believed in various gods etc since the beginning. That doesn’t actually say much for the idea.
For probably 99.99% of the time that humans have been around, they believed the world was flat. The longevity of an idea isn’t a good measure of it’s worth.
1. It shows that people are connected on some plane even in their own interest and unlike your 2nd point it seems to be 99% at times, one way or another.
2. Interesting point but also used incorrectly by many people generally, my understanding was that in Galileo times the society believed the earth was a sphere as a general rule.
Fletch – I suggest you read again. Your scanning skills would receive a Not Achieved. I used the word Christian once in a list of non-disparaging analogies with red’s issue:
“I don’t get it red; don’t the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push ANY agenda? Why do you get so lathered up about a gay politician being concerned about gay rights? Where are your concerns about an ex-businessman pushing pro-business agenda, a Christian politician pushing a pro-religion agenda, a male politician pushing a pro-male agenda?”
I guess you were hoping no-one would bother to actually check and just take you at your word and blame me for everything
This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog.
Why don’t you Devil Dodgers give it a rest or fuck off to a church chat room?
I mean this is not the place to push your wheelbarrow of self centered shit.
I agree, except my proiviso is that both sides take their arguements to another forum. Of course, that would reduce DPF’s comments count considerably so I suspect that they will stay a feature of most threads.
Religious arguments can become futile and boring, but the fact is rightly or not religion has an influence on many topics – morals, sexuality, smacking, billboards on religion etc etc.
I think it’s weird that religious people try and portray climate change as a religious crusade though. They are trying to encumber people they oppose with the weaknesses of their own godly argument.
Pete George (2875) Says:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:18 am
Redbaiter, most of the time you can’t even talk for yourself and sound rational, so making things up and pretending to talk for me show you for what you are. You haven’t fronted up yet, still a gutless wonder. Full of smear and fear, you haven’t got the balls to be honest. Or open.
The reality is that people are more polorised than ever before.
Homosexuality to people of faith is a character issue and is both viewed and treated as such by them not matter what the law might say.
The societal/secular acceptance of something because it is legal leads to conflict when the two sides on an issue confront and has been the case, people of faith are attacked in all realms (work,home,play) that they exist in, both to shut them down and punish them by both the offenders and their supporters.
Moving on to a parallel point if I may?
Interestingly this is the one driving factor of the jihadis (apart from the need to have Sharia over all the globe) is that the west (read secular) is polluting the earth and the people of the earth as a consequence and Sharia is needed to bring honour to the prophet and Allah. (ignoring the sodomy and abuse in the madrassas of course).
If you honestly read the Koran, the Islamists are merely more devout than the Jews were supposed to be to Yahweh.
I do not think Churchianity per se operates like that, otherwise there wouldn’t be people and parishes calling themselves christians (who attack the faith) if there were.
Similarly, the polluting is viewed as “but ordinary life” to secular people who consider themselves to be rational sane human beings.
Now this I would be happy to talk to on a separate thread or not (without flaming people) as the issues of morals and character are well worth discussing
But they are with us 24/7 and our worldview is too so the dance goes on.
Good question.
My short answer – not sure as I was a shit before.
long answer – let me think about it.
It’s an interesting question, Mike. Not mine of course – it’s a well-known response to the oft made claim by Christians that their morals come from the Bible.
2. Interesting point but also used incorrectly by many people generally, my understanding was that in Galileo times the society believed the earth was a sphere as a general rule.
Yeah the 99.99% was just a guess. It’s almost certainly much higher. Homo-sapiens have been around for a very long time (>500,000 years) so most of what we consider as modern knowledge has occurred in the last blip of our time.
I’ve just been reading “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond so this point was in my mind. An excellent book BTW.
This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog.
GD is what it is. A free-for-all. If you want to change the subject, then change the subject.
Why does religion pops up so often? There seems to be a high proportion of Christians amongst the regular posters for starters. Also it’s one of the few topics where a lot of people have some first-hand knowledge (unlike the second most popular GD topic). And frankly it’s interesting and you can have a-good-old-fashioned argument.
Funny coincidence Mike. I’m reading Collapse at the moment.
Guns, Germs and Steel is the better of the two I think (but I’m only half-way through Collapse) and they have it at Wellington Central Library (it took 2 renewals for me to get through it).
A Short History of Progress (Ronald Wright) is also very good and very short.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 am
I wonder which on of their properties these great contributors to society will spend Christmas at. Taxpayer money for fencing a swimming pool, buying new tyres for 2007 car, and getting car out of pound! Sheeeesh.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3184336/Couple-on-benefits-since-1984
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:30 am
Thirteen of the 20 highest-paid beneficiaries and almost one-third of those who get more than $1000 a week from the state are looking after the children of other people.
The highest paid is a single person on the East Coast, who gets $1720 a week
…how rude is this !!..and then you have the harris scum in christchurch who get a grand plus a week off winz !!.. been on a benefit since 1984 !!…and 3 of his scum children are on benefits !!..unbelieveable…these are the dirt bags this government needs to drag kicking and screaming into line…it cannot go on and it needs to be fixed NOW !!!
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:30 am
“Recent efforts to cancel Darryl Harris’ sickness benefit failed after he obtained a medical opinion stating he was addicted to cannabis.”
Kinda blows Phillip Ure’s claims that cannabis isn’t harmful out of the water, doesn’t it
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:36 am
And we all pay for this scum to live a life of luxury.
A radical reform of the welfare state is needed. The government must impose time limits on benefits to force the able-body bludgers to seek employment.
The system should assist only the infirm, the elderly, and those in real need.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:39 am
So the Gummint and Infratil have just about closed the deal on buying Shells assets….
If any of these plonkers decides to call it Kiwifuel or any other adaptation of the Kiwibollocks name, I shall never set foot in the place. Have some imagination you idiots.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:45 am
I’m surprised about the level of detail “leaked” on this, I doubt if it has been done by the book. But if any beneficiary deserves to be made an example of then the Harris family are prime candidates.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:47 am
Very creative “special needs grants” from WINZ that include fencing the swimming pool and fitting new tires on the 2007 Chrysler.
The husband has been on a WINZ benefit for 25 unbroken years, either unemployment or (as now) on the sickness benefit – addicted to cannabis. It almost goes without saying that he has been suffering from “stress and anxiety” over being work-tested.
It’s time for an abrupt end to this kind of “Choose Your Lifestyle” perpetual welfarism. It is robbing good people financially. It is sowing the seeds of crime and a fatal breakdown in the rule of law. It is condemning innocent children to a lifetime of ghetto existence. It is simply wrong at every level.
And for some 50 years the long-term sponsor of this policy abomination has been the Government of New Zealand, whatever its political hue at any time.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:47 am
Since then the family has been transferred to a special “remote monitoring” unit. The unit deals with Work and Income clients deemed too dangerous for face-to-face meetings with staff.
..how fucked is that ! ” deals with clients too dangerous for face to face meetings” !!!!!!!…talk about the tail wagging the dog….these pricks need to be beaten into submission and stripped of all benefit entitlements , thrown into the street and made to beg for the rest of their bludging lifes.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:56 am
” But if any beneficiary deserves to be made an example of then the Harris family are prime candidates. ”
What crap. You applaud these kind of political crimes because it keeps the left wing government models you support in power. Welfarism is all about votes for socialism.
The real reason it has to go is that it is a deliberate perversion of the democratic process. The Harris family should not have the vote and neither should anyone else who receives any kind of welfare.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:56 am
I gave you a thumbs up on your statement, but wonder if you would be so keen to see this guy made an example of if he were not a neo-nazi type but more tangata whenua. All welfare bludgers like this guy should be immediately denied any benefits at all.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:03 am
What I don’t understand is the report mentions properties?
How come they bought other properties whilst on the benefit?
Also a poster mentioned 25 yrs unbroken benefit, how is that so and properties?
What is it about the rules that allows that?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:09 am
Harris appears to enjoy special government protection.
If I made any of these outrageous claims they would rightly be denied.
It does seem unusual. I wonder if there are some standover tactics going on?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:19 am
…heads need to roll over this…someone at Winz hasnt been doin their job properly…
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:19 am
What a fucking joke!
New tyres on the 2007 Chrysler..
And to think of all the small business owners and sole traders out there doing it hard, being made redundant, closing down their businesses…. and this piece of shit can just opt out of the system and receive more than the average wage.. because the poor dear is addicted to an illegal drug.
Cancel his benefit for life, make the piece of scum work for a living. Shame it will never happen though
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:22 am
Agreed starboaqrd.
Wonder who the no=hopers were that approved all these special grants.
I’ve got a right mind to go into the local winz and ask for a grant, because I need a new plasma TV. If I tell them I’m addicted to cannabis you reckon itll make this easier?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 am
If the Harris’s have been on benefits all their lives how could they afford a 2007 Chrysler and several properties?
Tax audit, anyone?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
Wreck – given the Harris family’s (read: gang) reputation as White Power thugs, I am sure that there are standover tactics involved, and doubtless WINZ staffers have been intimidated into making favourable decisions. Whoever has decided to put this information into the public domain deserves both a medal and around-the-clock protection from the DPS!
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
For the “I don’t give a damn about any politician’s sexual preferences because it doesn’t effect how they do their job ” crowd-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10616912
Get your head out of the sand- a politician’s sexual preferences (nowadays) have an effect on their political direction, and the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push a homosexual agenda while in parliament.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 am
“I’ve got a right mind to go into the local winz and ask for a grant, because I need a new plasma TV. If I tell them I’m addicted to cannabis you reckon itll make this easier?”
No but if you’re Maori and you go to the Upper Hutt office, that will make a big difference. If you’re Pakeha, forget about it.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:35 am
“If the Harris’s have been on benefits all their lives how could they afford a 2007 Chrysler and several properties?
Tax audit, anyone? ”
Exactly reid, it is shameful and disgraceful the authorities have not caught up with this yet.
It seems obvious from reading the article that the family must be making money through some kind of illicit gang activity, like drug dealing etc
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Redbaiter – ah, hell, it’s not even worth answering your crap. The usual deceit and lies.
Brian – why do you think I would be selective in criticising someone who is a professional rorter? Have you ever seen me trying to defend anything like that from any minority group? Why do you think I would be a defender of tangata whenua?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:37 am
How about this appointment for conflict of interest.
Goodness me!
In case you haven’t seen it. Dynamite!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6847227/Questions-over-business-deals- of-UN-climate-change-guru-Dr-Rajendra-Pachauri.html
Another hero with feet of clay?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:44 am
Special needs grants are easy. I used to flat with a woman who worked in the Palmerston North winz office back in the 80s (although I guess it was just Soc welfare then) who used to authorise them for her friends.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:47 am
How about a tax payer holiday somewhere with the girlfriend or with the partner? All expenses paid including extras…
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
I don’t get it red; don’t the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push ANY agenda? Why do you get so lathered up about a gay politician being concerned about gay rights? Where are your concerns about an ex-businessman pushing pro-business agenda, a Christian politician pushing a pro-religion agenda, a male politician pushing a pro-male agenda?
Oh, that’s right, none of those examples are queer.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:54 am
Anyway, there is something deeply wrong with a welfare system that allows a single family to stay on it for 25 years and end up with more material assets than decent, hardworking wage earners. Quite sickening, really.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:55 am
“I don’t get it red;”
Neither do I. From your tone, you seem to be against my argument, but your rationale supports it.
Confusing.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:59 am
“It seems obvious from reading the article that the family must be making money through some kind of illicit gang activity, like drug dealing etc”
What’s interesting nickb, is that it used to be that although income tax is payable on all income from any activity whether illegal or not, the stringent privacy laws applicable to IRD staff meant that they were (and maybe still are) not allowed to inform the Police or WINZ. So a drug dealer was fine so long as s/he declared the income.
There was the information sharing legislation that went through a decade or so back which may have changed things – let’s hope so.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:01 am
“Redbaiter – ah, hell, it’s not even worth answering your crap. The usual deceit and lies.”
It is not deceit and lies. The left deliberately attack independence and cultivate a welfare mentality because its a strategy that provides them with more political power. You know that, and you endorse it as a strategy.
Your concern with the subject issue is perhaps genuine, but only because you see it as a means by which the voters may be outraged enough to start to rebel against your welfarist policies.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:02 am
I think the point of confusion is that I have nothing against homosexuality. It’s got nothing to do with me, and hurts no-one. Any culture that thinks it is under threat by allowing gay couples to have legal protection is a culture weak to its core. Man up (hah!) and live your life, instead of getting all hot and bothered by the actions of a harmless minority.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:06 am
last week it was abillboard, this week it is human lives being erased by Christians.
Critics have called the Anti Homosexuality Bill due to come before “Purpose Driven” Uganda’s parliament in early 2010 a “kill the gays bill.” As detailed in a new report from a religious right watchdog group, networks tied [1, 2,3] to Rick Warren’s mentor and doctoral dissertation advisor have played a major role in organizing and inspiring Ugandan legislators who have spearheaded the legislation, which would mandate the death penalty for homosexual acts.
Homosexuality is already legally a crime in Uganda that can lead to lifetime prison sentences, but the new bill would require the death penalty for something termed “aggravated homosexuality” and might even lead to the execution of HIV positive Ugandan citizens. Rick Warren has refused to denounce the new bill.
As described in the report, Rick Warren’s Dissertation Advisor Leads Network Promoting Uganda Anti-Gay Bill, both Rick Warren and C. Peter Wagner have called on their followers to take dominion over the globe, and Rick Warren’s efforts in Uganda closely parallel those of his academic mentor Peter Wagner. Mainstream media has glossed over Rick Warren’s political extremism but, as shown in a video at the end of this post, in April 2005, before thousands of his church members assembled at California’s Anaheim Angels sport stadium, Rick Warren described a “stealth” program for global Christian dominion and encouraged his supporters to embrace the level of dedication shown by followers of Hitler, Lenin, and Mao. [see here for a partial transcript of Warren's April 17, 2005 speech at California's Anaheim Angels Stadium]
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144403/uganda's_%22kill_the_gays%22_bill_tied_to_rick_warren_mentor/
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:11 am
” It’s nothing to do with me, and hurts no-one.”
Right now, in the form of Grant Nicholson’s objections, its hurting Brian Neeson’s job prospects.
Do you think A) voters have a right to know if politician is going to allow his sexual orientation to effect his role as a Member of Parliament, and effect his decisions on appointments based on what the personal beliefs of the appointees may be?
Or B) do you just buy into Progressive propaganda that preaches that the sexual orientation of a politician is something voters do not need to know?
Answer the question- A or B?
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 am
My quote was with regards to the “practice” of homosexuality, and not with regards the employment issue, so I’d prefer it if you didn’t try to invent an argument that hasn’t even happened yet.
That said, let’s start that argument now. It seems to me that you are of the opinion that we shouldn’t care about the past records of those appointed to the Human Rights Review Tribunal before appointing them? Because just reading the article now, it’s clear that the objections are based on past actions (voting records), rather than personal opinions (which I would agree are sort of beside the point if the person demonstrates the ability to do the job they are employed to do)
Plus, I think you are starting off with the questionable premise that being part of group means that it is impossible for you to think beyond that group and offer impartial judgments. By that rationale, you should be raising the same objections when anyone with a family tries to uphold family rights, or anyone with a job tries to uphold workers rights. And you seem happy enough to jump to the conclusion that the actions of an individual are representative of his group as a whole as well.
In other words, apart from the fact you really don’t like gays, I struggle to understand why this is such an important issue to you. In fact, your reasoning is a bit of a mess.
PS: I vote C: voters should look at what politicians ACTUALLY SAY AND DO before deciding to vote for them one way or the other, rather than taking an aspect of their personal life and making groundless assumptions based on it.
Example: Don Brash is (was?) married to an Asian, so of course he’s going to roll over for all the Asian countries right? Yep, much easier than actually paying attention to anything.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:30 am
To change the subject ever so slightly:
I see that a Ms Millie Elder (related to the ‘I’M SOOO GREAT ‘ Paul Holmes) is once again up before the beak on drugs chrges; possession, supply – the usual things that this young lady is becoming somewhat well known for.
She evidently seems totally unwilling to do anything to change her hitherto privileged lifestyle (‘My Step-daddy’s a TV personality’) and to live in the real world where you actually have to work for a living.
Inevitably, she will go through the usual performance, with the Judge being persuaded by an expensive lawyer and the fame of her stepfather, that she is just a ‘good girl who has made an unfortunate series of choices (again, and again, and again. . . ), and expect that she will once again be released back into society, mumbling the usual abject apologies which look good on the 6 O’clock TV news and be free to return (toally unrepentant) to the lifestyle she evidently is VERY accustomed-to, and so resume where she left off.
I wonder though, since she is very obviously unrepentant, unreformed and has no intention of changing her lifestyle, at what point the judge should say ‘enough is enough’ and actually consign the spoilt brat to a period of time inside?
4-5 years (or whatever the maximum is) would be about right I believe, with no right of appeal, the sentence being in direct proportion to the fact that she is unwilling to reform, with ‘Unwilling to reform’ meaning that until you do ms Elder, we are unwilling to let you return-to and becoma a member-of New Zealand society.
I personally would prefer that it is sooner rather than later, (though not holding my breath that a judge will actually put her away), but, given the wide variety of viewpoints this forum’s readers and contributers have on such things, would be interested in learning the opinion of others (sans personal attacks of course).
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:42 am
“My quote was… blah blah blah..”
Answer the question. A or B?
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:50 am
Agreed Komata – Ms Elder seems hell-bent on becoming New Zealand’s answer to Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan or Amy Winehouse. The only problem is that she seems to have no discernable talent …
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 am
Climate change scam across the Ditch – more scary economic distortion consequences of this rubbish.
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/wholesale-theft-in-the-name-of-carbon/#more-5561
This is absolutely astonishing, but is happening in a society very like ours. We should all be very wary about what is going on, and demand a much, much more convincing reason.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:58 am
“How about this appointment for conflict of interest.”
Yes, outrageous, however people people tend to be a bit blaze about such events these days as it is generally accepted that the UN is a corrupt and cronyist bureaucracy. The only people interested in maintaining the farce that it is a legitimate world authority are those who profit personally or politically from maintaining the illusion.
The problem is that our political leaders, (John Key in particular) seem so amazingly unaware of the UN’s real standing. Why we keep electing such dumbarses to office is something that completely baffles me. I mean, who the hell is so bloody dumb that they do this-???
http://nzconservative.blogspot.com/2009/12/nz-is-huge-john-key-said-so.html
And should someone so ignorant be our PM, and who the hell elected him to leadership of the Nationals?? Why is such a dumbarse so popular??
What chance is there of getting Key to act rationally on the UN or AGW when he displays such gross political ignorance?
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:15 am
So do you reckon that Lucy Lawless still thinks the money that they offered John Key to go to Copenhagen was well spent?
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:18 am
Redbaiter, most of the time you can’t even talk for yourself and sound rational, so making things up and pretending to talk for me show you for what you are. You haven’t fronted up yet, still a gutless wonder. Full of smear and fear, you haven’t got the balls to be honest. Or open.
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:22 am
Awww you don’t like me Pete.
I’m so shattered.
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 am
Have you got the balls to front up Red? Or will you just carry on accusing others of the things that you do?
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:40 am
Zzzzzz zzzzz zzzzz snore…
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:56 am
As expected, remains anonymouse. On the same level at Kiwiblog as Harris is at WINZ.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
red: I answered with C, because I didn’t find either A nor B to be representative of how I feel on the matter. Sorry.
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Redbaiter 9:25 am,
Absolutely.
For those of us that view homosexuality as immoral; then knowing the sexual preference of MPs largely influences our understanding of how these same MPs will react in situations that require a strong moral base. If people are immoral in one area of their lives, then this affects other moral decisions thay make. I personally believe we should have NO homo MPs in Parliament. I also believe homosexuality should be ‘re-criminalised’.
Another example of where we should have someone with the highest moral integrity is the position of Chief Censor. Of course this position is occupied by the openly queer Bill Hastings. Can one think of a greater conflict of interests when considering what is and isn’t morally appropriate viewing than having a morally bankrupt individual making such decisions on behalf of the nation?
Maybe having a queer PM would be worse. Anyone know of a country which has had one of these *cough* recently?
Of course Hastings was appointed after being recommended by the Clark-led Labour government back in 1999.
No surprises there.
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:54 pm
It must be tough having to judge everyone day in, day out. Do you get overtime and holidays?
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Also, I find it interesting that you use the phrase “I personally believe”, when in actuality, it’s anything but, right? It’s nothing personal at all.
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Could anyone every imagine Clark doing this???
Have a peek…… damn good.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/3187190/John-Key-sings-Snoopys-Christmas
And blondies looking just fine
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Hewlett Packard are selling racist computers, and poor Desi bought one for Xmas.
Ya gotta laff!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4DT3tQqgRM
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:49 pm
@Redbaiter
@Kris
I agree that voters should be free to ask any questions they like of a politician. Nothing is off-limits. By the same token a politician is free not to answer or provide information which they consider personal and not relevant (except of course the usual business interests etc). Voting is a personal judgement and people should be free to make their judgement on whatever basis they see fit.
I don’t share Kris and Redbaiter’s pre-occupation with homosexuals. Personally I like to know if a politician is a god-botherer. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance.
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:53 pm
malcolm, what if someone was both gay and Christian?
Seriously, you have a rather warped perspective.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Easy. Like I said, I don’t really give weight to the gay bit, but I give negative weight to the Christian bit. So all other things being equal I’d view a gay Christian politician in the same way as a Christian polli.
Of course there are lots of other things I consider. And they may out-weigh the religious deficit.
Do you give negative weighting to a politician who’s gay? If so, can I say you have a warped perspective?
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
malcolm 5:49 pm,
So on that basis I guess you won’t be encouraging your wife to run for parliament any time soon, Malcolm?
You say she’s a Christian, but why would you marry someone who you consider naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant?
I trust you haven’t chosen to have kids? I mean, having a parent with the traits you ascribe to Christians would condemn your kids to a pretty twisted view on life. Heck, they may even end up with some of the traits you show so much abhorence for. And imagine if they grew up to be a God-bothering MP – that would have to be your worst nightmare.
Sometimes your thinking astounds me.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:21 pm
“I don’t share Kris and Redbaiter’s pre-occupation with homosexuals. Personally I like to know if a politician is a god-botherer. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance.”
I don’t share malcolm and Billy Borker’s pre-occupation with Christians. Personally I like to know if a politician is a shirt-lifter. They can be as intelligent and reasonable as you like, but they lose a lot of points in my book for that one spectacular display of naivety, self-delusion and wilful ignorance. (Which is about as rational as malcolm’s initial statement i.e not very . .)
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:29 pm
“Do you give negative weighting to a politician who’s gay?”
No.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Kris, you’re putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say that a god-bothering MP is my worst nightmare. I said it’s one factor which I give negative weight to when evaluating politicians.
Of course there are many other factors I consider. So, for example, if Don Brash were to declare that he’s actually a polygamy practising Mormon and spends his hols digging for Joseph’s golden tablets, I’d still think he is the best PM that NZ never had.
Re my wife. I think you’re referring to the story about her recommending to me the Lee Strobel book (which she’d never actually read, but which I had). As far as I can tell she isn’t a Christian, however even if she was that would only be one factor. Yes I would see it as naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant. However she’s very smart and attractive in other ways, so as with everything in life you have to look at the whole picture. She’s a Fellow of Casualty Actuary Society of the US and has a degree on mathematics from top US university.
She’s from the mid-west and has very devout parents and a very over-bearing mother (IMHO). Her family don’t really do discussions and it’s not done to question the word of the mother. Consequently and like a lot of Americans she was raised in the church and did all the church things and can speak the lingo. That being said when I meet her she didn’t go to church, didn’t pray etc. But in the right circumstances, like many Americans, she can make all the right noises on this front. I was probably the first openly agnostic person she had ever meet and this was strange to her.
We do have two kids. Daughter 4.5 and son 1.5. No sign of political ambitions yet.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:39 pm
I am going to have my 2 cents worth on the Orewa College boiler explosion. The janitor was killed and the boiler serviceman seriously injured. Labour Dept. has decided to prosecute the College Board of Trustees.
I do not know the ‘small print’ of what happened but I do think that the Education Minister should make some inquiries. In particular what were the communications if any between the College and the Ministry regarding the boiler and how ‘responsive’ was the Ministry to any requests for financial or other assistance. I do wonder whether the Board and Principal are being set up as ‘fall guys’ while Ministry officials are ducking for cover. The Minister owes it to all good people who put their time and effort into being on boards to ensure they are not victims of cover-ups etc.
The Board and Principal are hardly boiler experts and have to rely on contractors to keep the boilers in good shape and if they acted reasonably on recommendations re repairs etc, they can hardly be held to moral blame. Under ‘Yesterday’s Schools’ a school could refer boiler problems to the Education Board or the Ministry of Works to sort.
I understand that some years back (during the 1990′s National Government), the ERO was gagged from mentioning shortcomings in their reports where the ball was in the Ministry’s court. As I understand it from what a prominent principal said some years ago, the view seemed to be if there was a health and safety issue which a Board could not deal with, then the school discharged its responsibility with respect to it. Possibly the Ministry pen pushers do not see it that way and are quite content for Boards and Principals to be caught between a rock and a hard place.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
“Yes I would see [a Christian] as naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant.”
Really? That’s precisely what I think about non-Christians, malcolm. Not that I rub it in, that would be most un-Christian.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Good for you Angus. That was exactly my point – we should be free to judge politicians by whatever criteria we like. You like to know about their sexual preferences and I like to know whether they’ve been fooled, by what I consider to be the longest-running, most transparent and patently absurd con, ever conceived.
It’s different strokes for different people.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:00 pm
@Reid
Interesting. Do you consider it a sin to be actively gay?
I know
. I should again emphasis that the “naive, self-deluded and wilfully ignorant” is just one facet of the person, in one of many dimensions. People are complex. I have friends who are religious. It’s possible to over-come the religious deficit in my weighing system.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:11 pm
“I consider to be the longest-running, most transparent and patently absurd con, ever conceived.”
malcolm, ever noticed that when people die, their ideas die with them. The most towering figures of any age quickly turn into dust in the wind. Why even giant humans like Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin, JFK, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Einstein, Edison, Tesla, JP Morgan, Strauss eventually all fade and disappear as will also all those alive today. You could go back further and say the same about Da Vinci, Newton, Ptolemy, Curie, Twain, they are all the same.
The one strand that’s lasted throughout is that from G-d.
A wise man might ponder why that is.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:15 pm
peterwn – I share your concerns. It’s no secret that school are underfunded, and large capital items are usually put to the back of the queue. I hope the BOT chair is instructing his/her team to marshall all ministry correspondence there may have been on this matter, although I can hardly see Ministry be stupid enough to try to shift any blame if there’s a good audit trail.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Einstein, Edison, Tesla, Strauss, Da Vinci, Newton, Curie etc…..their ideas all died with them? What planet are you on?
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Their ideas didn’t turn to dust. We have technology, memories and most importantly, the printed word. E.g. Tesla’s ideas and inventions are in operation in every power station, every substation, every transmission line and every house in the country. 24/7.
Sure, people have believed in various gods etc since the beginning. That doesn’t actually say much for the idea. For probably 99.99% of the time that humans have been around, they believed the world was flat. The longevity of an idea isn’t a good measure of it’s worth.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:27 pm
“Do you consider it a sin to be actively gay?”
I don’t know malcolm in that I haven’t ever addressed that question.
That may sound odd but I haven’t ever had to address that issue in myself and I concentrate my conviction and my sense of right and wrong toward myself and not toward others. [Political commentary aside, of course
]
It’s impossible to interpret the Bible as anything but disapproving of homosexual behaviour.
So if I were gay, I’d think I’d probably be a non-practising gay but saying that and doing it are two quite very different things and it’s one of those things I think where you don’t actually know where you’d lie unless you were actually in that position.
Fortunately, since I’m not gay, I haven’t needed to confront that particular dilemma in my own Christian journey and I feel and pray for those who do and have.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:32 pm
and
Dear oh dear, you don’t get it, do you.
The laws of the universe (and duh, go ahead and tell me about Tesla), were uncovered by those people, not created by them. Name something else that was created out of nothing and remains nothing tangible yet is practised in real works (i.e. turned tangible) by billions every day from the time of Christ to now.
If that’s not something special, tell me what is.
What d’ya think motivates the Christmas dinners all the Mission Groups are offering, as a tiny example? How come they’ll be here next year, and they’ve been here since we remember. Something out of nothing. For thousands of years, across the world. A daily miracle under your noses and you don’t even notice.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:57 pm
This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog.
Why don’t you Devil Dodgers give it a rest or fuck off to a church chat room?
I mean this is not the place to push your wheelbarrow of self centered shit.
Now, for the rest of us, how about the best beaches/places and which Politicians are there for a nice chat from both sides of the spectrum?
Who catches the most fish? What beers/wines are being tasted and do they share? Cans or bottles? Wine corked or screwtop?
Christmas is a Christian celebration time but also a deserved holiday time for the years’ work. So all of you who force your belief can stick it where the Global Warming Sun don’t shine.
Merry Christmas to you all and your families.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
“This religious bullshit is getting a bit thick here on Kiwiblog. Why don’t you Devil Dodgers give it a rest or fuck off to a church chat room?”
Steve (771), it’s a momentary phase. I agree it’s been quite popular on GD over the last few months, it didn’t used to be and perhaps that state will again come to pass as these things do. Meanwhile, why don’t you just relax and enjoy it.
Reid (3576)
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Steve
You may not have noticed, but the only reason you actually GET a holiday over the December-January period in New Zealand is because the time was put aside by our Christian forebears in honour of their Lord.
In Britain (and Europe-generally) they had celebrated the event of his birth on December 25th – the European winter, while having hoildays in the middle of the year during the Northern Summer. With our Summer and December coinciding, the holiday-period was merely relocated to accomodate the seasonal change . However, it should be noted that such holidays are not a hallmark of any of the other faiths, though no doubt you are aware of that.
In view of your very evident antipathy to the Christian faith, which has given you the holiday which you are so obviously looking forward to, are you so hypocriitcal as to continue to go away on said holiday despite your comments, or can we reasonably expect you to shortly announce to the assembled readers of Kiwiblog that you are actually not going to have a holiday (which word incidently, is a contraction of HOLY-Day and has its origins in Mediaeval Christianity and CHRISTMAS celebrations) because you do not wish to be a hypocrit by taking pleasure from the actions of a belief system for which you have absolutely no time (and have said as much publicly).
It’s a small point but if your convictions are really as you outlined in your 1957 posting, I really don’t see that you have much of a choice, so. . . ?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:20 pm
@Reid
Re-read what you wrote. If we missed the point you were trying to make, then perhaps you didn’t make it very well.
You mean an enduring idea which causes people to do good things? OK, lots of other and mutually exclusive religions, for starters. Lots of ideas in our culture, e.g: It’s good to help people. It’s not worth helping people who harm you. It’s desirable to live a materially better life than your parents and it’s admirable to work hard at achieving this aim. You shouldn’t ‘waste’ your life on pleasure-seeking. Lots of ideas. Religion is just an idea, nothing more, nothing less.
Different reasons for different people. E.g: They like helping people. They think they should because their religion suggests it’s a virtuous thing to do. They want to convert people to their religion by showing them how virtuous it is. They feel guilty that they have so much while others have so little. Lots of reasons.
Or just good people doing good things. No God required.
If it wasn’t for your Christian faith, do you think you’d be incapable of doing anything altruistic?
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 pm
I think that people have the right to believe what they like; I just find it sad that people like reid, in their defensive clamour to justify their beliefs, see nothing wrong with trying to discredit and downplay real, actual human achievement. How do you get any pleasure out of life if you look at someone like Einstein and think “Eh, he didn’t actually do anything…”?
And that is why I can never buy into religion personally; it is deeply misanthropic deep down. We are all the lambs of God who should be grovelling for his eternal good grace? No thanks. I’d rather turn on some Sonic Youth real loud, marvel at their endless energy and inventiveness, have a conversation with my wife and appreciate her intelligence and quick wit, enjoy a great dinner at the hands of a talented chef, a refreshing beer brewed based on generations of curiosity, experimentation and hard work….and NOT diminish all that human endeavour as meaningless without something “bigger” and “better”.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Well said, Transmogrifier.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Transmogrifier,
Let’s see you enjoy that beer WHEN YOU’RE BURNING IN HELL! KIIIIAI!!!
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 pm
@Komata
@reid
and others.
It just seems that in General Debate, any General Topic gets bent and twisted into something religious.
Now my car had a tyre sort of blow out and go flat really quick 2 days ago.
Was that divine intervention that stopped me having a major accident?
Oh,had enough cant be bothered with devil dodgers (excuse makers)
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Red Rag is blogger of the year??
Well that “Spud” seems to run the sideshow, then Trev sucks up and bans.
This is a joke huh? Red Alert? FFS 90% of comments are deleted
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
@Komata
LOL. We should only take Christmas holidays if we’re Christians?
Should we only take Labour Day if we’re in a union?
… Waitangi Day if we’re Maori or English?
… ANZAC Day if we fought in WWI?
… Queen’s Birthday if we’re monarchists?
… New Years Day if we’re Catholics?
Anyway, Christmas has origins well beyond when it was appropriated by the Christians. What’s with Santa Claus, christmas trees, yule logs etc?
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Steve’s comments about the (delightful euphemism) Devil Dodgers spamming up General debate are spot on.
And, Reid; don’t call me agnostic or atheistic. I am so religious that I backed Resurrection in the Easter Handicap!
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Komata, Christmas is actually borrowed from the pagan Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the unconquered sun). They had festivals and holidays before JC was born. Most of the Christian holidays are adapted from pagan festivals that occurred about the same time of year. It is no co-incidence that Christmas is so close to the shortest day in the Northern Hemisphere where winter festivals would take place largely because they couldn’t do much agricultural work in mid-winter.
The actual establishment of 25th December as Christmas didn’t happen until at least the 4th Century, possibly as late as the 9th Century.
December 23rd, 2009 at 8:20 am
‘Santa Claus’ is another was of saying ‘Saint Nicholas’ a Christian Saint and Bishop of Myra
His feast day also occurs around this time.
December 23rd, 2009 at 8:36 am
As far as Christians contributing to threads on here regarding matters of faith: personally I don’t go out of my way, but if someone makes a comment on something religious or puts down my faith, then yes I am going to respond (not all the time, but sometimes the statements made are so way out I feel the need to correct them).
Looking back at this thread we’re on now I can see that the ‘discussion’ was started by Transmogrifier and mynameisjack – they are the first ones to mention the word ‘Christian’ in a way such as to inflame on the board.
So Steve, if you want to blame someone for starting a religious discussion, blame your buddies.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:05 am
Trans
I say a big amen to what you ended with.
and NOT diminish all that human endeavour as meaningless without something “bigger” and “better”.
and can understand
their defensive clamour to justify their beliefs, see nothing wrong with trying to discredit and downplay real, actual human achievement. How do you get any pleasure out of life if you look at someone like Einstein and think “Eh, he didn’t actually do anything…
I must admit most of the time I don’t think about
marvel at their endless energy and inventiveness, have a conversation with my wife and appreciate her intelligence and quick wit, enjoy a great dinner at the hands of a talented chef, a refreshing beer brewed based on generations of curiosity, experimentation and hard work…
in real time but after the fact.
Thanks for the thoughts. Life is half full if you want it that way and it is beautiful. It is people that make the journey worthwhile for me.
This is also processed through my appreciation and gratefulness for what I have and hold. I choose not to divorce that from whom I recognise as owing it all too.
I don’t think that GD gets overtaken by the “devil dodgers”
starting it mainly but by their responding to the inflamers.
One could say “ignore the children” but to do that gives over the space and emboldens them. Which is the case with children
If DPF was fair he would treat both sides as he does anyone biffing Homosexuals. But he isn’t so the dance carryies on to the detriment of all.
I personally would love to see GD free of inflaming and responding as I love the dialogue and have learnt so much about so many things and people but I see no end to it unless the enflamers whomever they are stop.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:10 am
Malcolm 9.20
Good question.
My short answer – not sure as I was a shit before.
long answer – let me think about it.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:16 am
Malcolm
Sure, people have believed in various gods etc since the beginning. That doesn’t actually say much for the idea.
For probably 99.99% of the time that humans have been around, they believed the world was flat. The longevity of an idea isn’t a good measure of it’s worth.
1. It shows that people are connected on some plane even in their own interest and unlike your 2nd point it seems to be 99% at times, one way or another.
2. Interesting point but also used incorrectly by many people generally, my understanding was that in Galileo times the society believed the earth was a sphere as a general rule.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:19 am
Fletch – I suggest you read again. Your scanning skills would receive a Not Achieved. I used the word Christian once in a list of non-disparaging analogies with red’s issue:
“I don’t get it red; don’t the voters have a right to know if a politician is going to push ANY agenda? Why do you get so lathered up about a gay politician being concerned about gay rights? Where are your concerns about an ex-businessman pushing pro-business agenda, a Christian politician pushing a pro-religion agenda, a male politician pushing a pro-male agenda?”
I guess you were hoping no-one would bother to actually check and just take you at your word and blame me for everything
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:20 am
I agree, except my proiviso is that both sides take their arguements to another forum. Of course, that would reduce DPF’s comments count considerably so I suspect that they will stay a feature of most threads.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:22 am
Religion > Climate change in terms of discussion potential
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:31 am
Religious arguments can become futile and boring, but the fact is rightly or not religion has an influence on many topics – morals, sexuality, smacking, billboards on religion etc etc.
I think it’s weird that religious people try and portray climate change as a religious crusade though. They are trying to encumber people they oppose with the weaknesses of their own godly argument.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Pete George (2875) Says:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:18 am
Redbaiter, most of the time you can’t even talk for yourself and sound rational, so making things up and pretending to talk for me show you for what you are. You haven’t fronted up yet, still a gutless wonder. Full of smear and fear, you haven’t got the balls to be honest. Or open.
The reality is that people are more polorised than ever before.
Homosexuality to people of faith is a character issue and is both viewed and treated as such by them not matter what the law might say.
The societal/secular acceptance of something because it is legal leads to conflict when the two sides on an issue confront and has been the case, people of faith are attacked in all realms (work,home,play) that they exist in, both to shut them down and punish them by both the offenders and their supporters.
Moving on to a parallel point if I may?
Interestingly this is the one driving factor of the jihadis (apart from the need to have Sharia over all the globe) is that the west (read secular) is polluting the earth and the people of the earth as a consequence and Sharia is needed to bring honour to the prophet and Allah. (ignoring the sodomy and abuse in the madrassas of course).
If you honestly read the Koran, the Islamists are merely more devout than the Jews were supposed to be to Yahweh.
I do not think Churchianity per se operates like that, otherwise there wouldn’t be people and parishes calling themselves christians (who attack the faith) if there were.
Similarly, the polluting is viewed as “but ordinary life” to secular people who consider themselves to be rational sane human beings.
Now this I would be happy to talk to on a separate thread or not (without flaming people) as the issues of morals and character are well worth discussing
But they are with us 24/7 and our worldview is too so the dance goes on.
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:09 am
@MikeNZ
It’s an interesting question, Mike. Not mine of course – it’s a well-known response to the oft made claim by Christians that their morals come from the Bible.
Yeah the 99.99% was just a guess. It’s almost certainly much higher. Homo-sapiens have been around for a very long time (>500,000 years) so most of what we consider as modern knowledge has occurred in the last blip of our time.
I’ve just been reading “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond so this point was in my mind. An excellent book BTW.
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:33 am
GD is what it is. A free-for-all. If you want to change the subject, then change the subject.
Why does religion pops up so often? There seems to be a high proportion of Christians amongst the regular posters for starters. Also it’s one of the few topics where a lot of people have some first-hand knowledge (unlike the second most popular GD topic). And frankly it’s interesting and you can have a-good-old-fashioned argument.
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:45 am
No you can’t.
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:51 am
Malcolm
I have Collapse but haven’t read that one.
Christmas list already out, have to wait for Arty B’s
December 23rd, 2009 at 11:06 am
Funny coincidence Mike. I’m reading Collapse at the moment.
Guns, Germs and Steel is the better of the two I think (but I’m only half-way through Collapse) and they have it at Wellington Central Library (it took 2 renewals for me to get through it).
A Short History of Progress (Ronald Wright) is also very good and very short.