Family First rates the leaders
September 26th, 2011 at 3:00 pm by David FarrarFamily First say:
Family First NZ has released the results of a family issues questionnaire which has been sent to leaders of the main political parties. The results can be viewed on their new website www.valueyourvote.org.nz .
“The questionnaire finds out the party leaders’ views on issues ranging from marriage, abortion and income splitting to loan sharks, Easter trading laws, same-sex adoption, and broadcasting standards,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
I always find an election guide by Family First as very useful, but in reverse 
Let’s look at how they rate them:
- Colin Craig 90%
- Winston Peters 80%
- Don Brash 43%
- Peter Dunne 37%
- Hone Harwira 30%
- Russel Norman 25%
- Metiria Turei 23%
- Tariana Turia 19%
- John Key 17%
- Pita Sharples 14%
- Phil Goff 10%
Interesting that Key and Goff are two of the three at the bottom. Well done guys.
Of the 30 or so issues they rate leaders on, around the only ones I agree with Family First on are decriminalise non-abusive smacking, education parental choice, welfare vouchers where children are at risk and maybe an Independent CYF Complaints Authority.
I disagree on marriage, income splitting, abortion, sex education, surrogacy, stem cell research, same sex adoption, euthanasia, cannabis, brothels, prostitution, broadcasting standards, public nudity, billboards, alcohol purchase age, Easter trading laws, loans sharks, gaming machines and binding CIRs.
We’ve a very diverse lot in the VRWNLLWC!
Related posts:
- Family First rates the Leaders
- Family First and the Sex Party
- Family First on Don’s voting record
- Major party leaders all support same sex marriage
September 26th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
If they want me to be a criminal for giving my kids a smack on the bum then they won’t get my vote.
Vote:Sod them.
September 26th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
“Well done guys.”
Not really, thats sad. Liberalism is the cancer destroying the West.
That result is enough to make me reconsider my vote and think about voting ACT.
Ideally I would like to vote for NZF, as they are the closest thing to Tory Traditionalists avaliable, but I do not trust Winston, and I think they would just prop up Labour.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
“I always find an election guide by Family First as very useful, but in reverse”
With all due respect, that is the response one would expect from a 40+ childless social liberal.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Family First, NZ First…hmmm – a match made in heaven? The reality is that tiny far-out pressure groups like Family First have absolutely no influence on voters.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Well I’m 40+, been married for 25 years, have 4 teenage kids and I’d be even more (socially) liberal than DPF. Any list that favourably puts Winston Peters at number 2 is crap. Well done Key for coming 3rd last.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
“The reality is that tiny far-out pressure groups like Family First have absolutely no influence on voters.”
Actually Family First does have quite a bit of influence in many quarters. Not perhaps enough to sway an election, yet, but they are much more than a “far-out” group.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:29 pm
It concerns me that Brash ranks so highly on the list.
I hate the arrogance of people like McCoskrie who presumes to speak on behalf of all Christians on what God and Jesus Himself wants.
It says a lot about how pathetic Christianity is when instead of poverty, suffering and all the heartbreaking things in the world they seem to think that homosexuality is the biggest concern in the world. I’m surprised there wasn’t a question on teaching evolution in schools.
There’s the quote by Campolo:
“I have three things I’d like to say today. First, while you were sleeping last night, 30,000 kids died of starvation or diseases related to malnutrition. Second, most of you don’t give a shit. What’s worse is that you’re more upset with the fact that I said shit than the fact that 30,000 kids died last night.”
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Any list that includes the venal Peters, the whorish Dunne, and the thug Harawira ought to be crap.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Lee01 (924) Says:
September 26th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Actually Family First does have quite a bit of influence in many quarters. Not perhaps enough to sway an election, yet, but they are much more than a “far-out” group.
Lee01 is correct. It is actually scary how many people are dumb enough to attend Church every Sunday. I remember how retarded it was when in 2002 all the mega-Churches in New Zealand told their congregations to vote for United Future and how it was going to save lost souls if they got into power and then holding their hands in prayer for God to get them enough votes.
Pity God only has enough power to grant 8%. Your God is an 8% God.
Vote:
September 26th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
how can anyone be anything but socially liberal?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
“It says a lot about how pathetic Christianity is when instead of poverty, suffering and all the heartbreaking things in the world they seem to think that homosexuality is the biggest concern in the world. ”
Don’t be ignorant. Conservative Christians are far and away the biggest contributers to charities and overseas aid, and are far more likely to be doing something about tragedies like Somalia than atheists.
Concern for society must be about both poverty and morality. They affect each other.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Ridiculous I don’t believe I have ever heard a homily on Homosexuality – not ever!
Homosexuals flatter themselves that people are talking about them all the time – It’s a big who cares, it their bodies and souls they are putting in peril.
Where they meet Christian opposition is when they try and indoctrinate our children that their perversity is in some way both normal and admirable.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
“Ridiculous I don’t believe I have ever heard a homily on Homosexuality”
I go to a very conservative local church and I have only heard the subject brought up once in three years. I have heard dozens of sermons about the evils of extreme poverty and calls for us to give in response to a current crisis, like Somalia.
CW, as usual, is talking ignorant crap.
Family First is just one organisation. It provides an important counter-balance to the avalanche of liberal propaganda on social issues, but there are many conservative Christian organisations working in NZ that also advocate on behalf of the poor, such as World Vision and Tear Fund.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
“It’s a big who cares, it their bodies and souls they are putting in peril.” – you’re a freak show.
Judging by your mean spirited nature you should be more concerned with the shit youre indoctrinating your own kids with. Poor little buggas. Bet they leave home early.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
“Judging by your mean spirited nature you should be more concerned with the shit youre indoctrinating your own kids with.”
The truth? Decency? Moral virtue? Godly living?
Better than teaching them that having unprotected sodomy in a toilet is a valid lifestyle choice.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
In 2002 there was an attempted reverse takeover of UnitedFuture by a few fixed fundies. A rule of thumb I try to adhere to is that you can always tell crazies by the way they act, yep that’s right: ‘crazy’. They may talk the talk aka WP but stickability and teamwork: nil.
Vote:So the crazies in UnitedFuture dropped off and the dedicated and effective still there and are just that: dedicated and effective. UnitedFuture in 2011 is a completely different beast than UnitedFuture 2002. And that’s why Peter’s been punished on the list. His is a reasoned argument. FF seem to me to be more for rigid ideology.
And actually I do give a shit. I rang Childfund at 1am last night. To donate some money. Because I can’t stand that kids starve to death. That’s what keeps me awake at night. Not the loosening of the RMA or the interests of the unions.
September 26th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
“UnitedFuture in 2011 is a completely different beast than UnitedFuture 2002.”
Yes, now you have Muslims and bank robbers instead. Great leap forward.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Interesting that they rated Hone Harawira highly – do they disapprove of interracial marriage?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
“Better than teaching them that having unprotected sodomy in a toilet is a valid lifestyle choice.”
yea, cause thats what all gay people do.
thats like saying – i wont teach christian values because the KKK see themselves as christians and i dont want my kids dressing in sheets and burning crosses.
it baffles me how you think its ok to discriminate against an entire section of the community.
know this though – eventually someone in your family will be gay. hopefully one of your kids. gods way of saying “dude, lighten the fuck up”
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:07 pm
“it baffles me how you think its ok to discriminate against an entire section of the community.”
Because its wrong. And because the “gay rights” community is a threat to my freedom and the spiritual health of the West.
I’m not a liberal. I don’t give a rats ass about liberal notions of “freedom” or biased liberal notions of “non-descrimination”. They are a front for the attempted cultural Marxist assault on the Christian heritage of the West.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
because its wrong? hahaha get help.
I dont like the gay mafia. But you christians are just as bad. i used to defend you people, didnt think it was right everyone can take pot shots at you.. but now i couldnt care less. youre a bunch of judgemental mean fuckers
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Dime @ 4:02 – couldn’t agree more.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Whilst I disagree with DPF’s views, I’m not very pleased with the comments by some of the Christians posting here. As a believing Catholic Christian I attempt to engage with charity and genuine openness to discover truth. Low brow insults by frustrated (or worse unloving) Christians do not help the ongoing debates New Zealand needs to have.
I generally try not to take the bait of liberals who are generally poorly educated and poorly read in philosophy and history. Yes, they might have done a liberal arts degree in New Zealand in the last forty years. However, having done one myself, I’d hardly call it a liberal education.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
@dime
I’d hardly call Lee01 the best rep for “you Christians”. Go and read some of Benedict XVI’s letters. You won’t agree but you’ll find them interesting and engaging. Please note search weblogs for and accurate description – or outworking! – of the gospel.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
@ Lee01.
Pull your head in chap.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
Not judgmental, Dime.
Fundamentally if you want our society and culture to survive you need the family because that is where the people who will replace us will be nurtured.
If you have kids, you don’t want them to grow up to be prostitutes, you want them to grow up and raise their own families because that is where their long term happiness will be found.
And yet our modern culture is actively undermining this and teaching kids to aspire to pointless dead end hedonism.
We are committing cultural suicide it is so short sighted and selfish
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
East – I know all christians arent like Lee. Just seems to be the majority on political blogs are.
Im dating a good Catholic girl, ill get her to fill me in on how Pope Benedict rolled!
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
East Wellington Superhero at 4:19 pm
I agree.
dime at 4.25 pm
I don’t agree – it’s only the more openly self righteous intolerant ones who keep labeling themselves. Most Christians and non-Christians debating here manage to debate without parading their personal beliefs and denigrating others for theirs.
Most of us have far more in common than we often care to admit. Politically too – it’s just that the differences get the most attention.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
My heads spinning around. I can’t figure out whose side I am on in this thread. Usually the mantra -”The enemy of mine enemy is mine friend” works for me. I’ve either got a shit of a lot of friends on here or I’m about to walk into the line of enemy fire.
Vote:Yous guys have so much more in common than you realise. You’re absolutely convinced you’re right whether you call yourself liberal, or Christian. It appears some of you think: It’s the fault of the Liberals/gays/Christians/people who don’t like crap dropped in their backyard/Muslims. Feel free to add to the list. The truth is actually far simpler.
It is always the core rigid believers and faithful that cause the most trouble. It’s pure rigidity that causes problems. A number of you are not to me (and the wider public) anything other than :”I’m better than you and it’s your way of life that is the cause of my unhappiness”.
Rigidityville. Leads to Arrogance and Victimhood. IMHO
And it’s all being played out right in front of your eyes in Labour if you need an example.
And to be honest other than child poverty it was a wireless router that kept me awake in the dead of the night.
September 26th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
@Lee01 4:07 pm
Wrong! With no argument as to why. It is you who is a threat to the freedom of GLBT New Zealanders, not the other way around. No-one in suggesting homosexuality be compulsory, but you seem to be suggesting heterosexuality should be.
Just think about what you wrote.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
Monique, I’d recommend “The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy, no more, no less” (Rule 29, from Seven Habits for Highly Effective Pirates).
And, yes, Family First, a strangely insular, inward looking, narrow minded, group, with a whole bucketload of neuroses just trying to get out and express themselves in public.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
@Andrei 4:25 pm
If the sort of bigoted culture you espouse commits suicide, Andrei, I will have no regrets.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
I’m looking forward to a few more interest groups rating the political parties. How about ratings from the Automobile Association, Salvation Army, Boys’ Brigade, Coastguard, Federated Farmers, Maori Women’s Welfare League and the Olympic and Commonwealth Games Association?
And in my own electorate, I’ll be sure to be influenced by ratings from the Petone Rugby Club, Lower Hutt Soroptimists, Waimaire Croquet Club and the Hutt Art Society.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
@ Dime
Vote:With all due respect, asking a ‘cultural Catholic’ probably isn’t going to inform you about the Church’s teaching on controversial issues. Many Catholics – usually without any education whatsoever – simply reject teachings they don’t feel they like much. People are free to do, but when they do so the cease to be Catholic.
September 26th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Anyway team – this is just a weblog. Most normal folk are still working. Don’t take it too seriously.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
Family First have missed the big issues. I’d like them to survey party leaders to find out their positions on:
1. Witch burning.
2. Women being made to stay at home rather than working.
3. Banning contraception so families will be bigger.
4. Child rape. The leader of NZ’s last Christian party was a proponent and I want to know if it will be made compulsory or not.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
mikenmild>and the Hutt Art Society
There is art in the Hutt!? Or are you talking about a group of organised taggers.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
david
Vote:You are missing out on some of life’s treasures if you don’t visit Lower Hutt for its cultural attractions. Too many to list here…
September 26th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
mikenmild>You are missing out on some of life’s treasures if you don’t visit Lower Hutt for its cultural attractions.
I visited the Harvey Norman furniture shop a couple of years ago. And I popped in to Queensgate once when a friend needed to buy shoes in a hurry and we couldn’t find a shoe shop in Petone. So that is two visits in the last 22 years. I think that is a pretty good average considering you must be a good 10km away.
I’d visit more often if you laid on free witch burnings. Maybe Family First could organise them?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Bigotry is in the eye of the beholder Toad
The Green party for example is incredibly bigoted against cigarette smokers, for example, and has helped pass intrusive laws etc to punish them.
I don’t want morality legislated and the full force of the LAW applied to force people to conform to my notions of morality, unlike the AUTHORITARIAN Greens, Labour and sadly National to a lesser extent.
But I do want the freedom to call it like I see it with regards to morality and I do want policies that reinforce the traditional family unit not undermine it and cheapen it.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
davidp
Well, you have already seen the two premier cultural attractions, so don’t feel you need to return.
As for Family First, we do seem to have a lot of charismatic churches in the centre of town, so the witch burnings can’t be too far away.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
EWS,
“Pull your head in chap.”
I agree the way that I worded my views was not at all helpful. I just get frustrated by comments like this by CW “It is actually scary how many people are dumb enough to attend Church every Sunday. I remember how retarded it was when in 2002 all the mega-Churches in New Zealand told their congregations to vote for United Future”
Notice that hypocrites like Pete say nothing about comments like that, they only attack me. Thats what gets me pissed off, and why I sometimes post before I think.
Toad,
“It is you who is a threat to the freedom of GLBT New Zealanders, not the other way around. No-one in suggesting homosexuality be compulsory”
Try looking at what is happenning in Europe. In many European countries even suggesting that your opposed to homosexuality can get you arrested. So your not only wrong, but displaying the unthinking and uninformed knee jerk political correctness and cultural Marxism your party espouses.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:08 pm
“And yet our modern culture is actively undermining this and teaching kids to aspire to pointless dead end hedonism.
We are committing cultural suicide it is so short sighted and selfish”
Exactly.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Kiwigreg – “Well I’m 40+, been married for 25 years, have 4 teenage kids and I’d be even more (socially) liberal than DPF . . . ”
Really ? So if you discovered that one of those kids was a $10 a trick crack whore you’d be relaxed and sophisticated about it ? Completely at ease with her lifestyle choice?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
I get constantly called a liar by MNIJ. Where is Pete and others? I get called a retard by CW everytime he posts. Where is Pete and the others? Nowhere.
The liberals who post here are rank hypocrites. They whine about anyone who does not switch off their brain and submit to the dogma of gay rights by complaining about what I say and how I say it, but when its Christians who are constantly being abused in extreme terms, they are silent. So sorry Pete, but what a lot of self-serving wank.
Liberal “tolerance” is just a bullshit facade that only applies if you tow the liberal line.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Lee01
You really should stop the scatological references. Its a dead give away that we are getting up your nose.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
Griff,
Hard day. Getting to the end of the semester and have a lot of work on. Tired of the abuse from MNIJ and CW. Tired of the hypocrisy from Pete and others. Probably shouldn’t be posting.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
Lee01>In many European countries even suggesting that your opposed to homosexuality can get you arrested.
In which case you won’t have any problem naming a few of these arrested people.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
davidp,
“In which case you won’t have any problem naming a few of these arrested people.”
No problem.
“Swedish Pastor Sentenced to Month in Prison for Preaching Against Homosexuality”:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2004/jul/04070505
“Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin”:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7668448/Christian-preacher-arrested-for-saying-homosexuality-is-a-sin.html
http://www.christiantelegraph.com/issue9641.html
The next one was in the USA
Pastor Arrested For Preaching against Homosexualiy:
“The Rev. Joseph Jenkins was arrested today as he preached to his congregation of 500. As he said, ‘The Bible says it is a sin for a man to lie with a man!’ four federal undercover agents rose from their seats in the crowded church and handcuffed the pastor. He was later charged before a US Magistrate under the federal ‘Hate Crimes’ law.””
http://www.conservativetruth.org/archives/tombarrett/07-28-02.shtml
HATE CRIMES” LAWS USED AGAINST CHRISTIANS IN CANADA
http://www.wayoflife.org/files/706fe196bc5dd6068bb1a96eefc8b4be-109.html
Back to Britain
“Birmingham street preacher wins wrongful arrest case”:
“An autistic Christian street preacher who was handcuffed and arrested for speaking out against homosexuality”
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=13631
“Christian couple told: ‘You can’t foster if you think it’s wrong to be gay’”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-519311/Christian-couple-told-You-foster-think-wrong-gay.html#ixzz1Z2C30JIL
Now can people see why I am concerned?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
Davidp
Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:49 pm
Here’s my two cents. Just like criticising Israel shuoldn’t mean that you are anti-semitic, criticising some aspect of LBGT doesn’t necessarily make you a homophobe? Young people don’t get the fuss these days, and young LGBT readily criticise stuff in their own community they don’t like. It’s all good.
Mass is a peaceful way to get a sense of community, put a full stop on a week, and give thanks for being alive. I have no patience for people who automatically call religious people ‘retarded’. The older I get, the more I see that this world is a world is built on faith, and lacking in spirituality and ritual. That being said, I’m old school about religion; no patience either for evangelical hucksters/hypocrites/saps who want to give every rapist a hug and a cookie.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Lee, I’ve just read the last few posts – pull your head in. I don’t read everything, I don’t react to everything I read, and I’m not your mother. I have enough of my arguments to focus on without worrying about wiping your bum all the time.
You should be well aware that I promote decent debate and tolerance of varying beliefs. But if you want to be an arrogant knob you often get what you deserve. Don’t come whimpering to me and abuse me at the same time.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
“I don’t read everything, I don’t react to everything I read, and I’m not your mother. I have enough of my arguments to focus on without worrying about wiping your bum all the time. ”
Oh please, like I care if you do or don’t? What I object to is your double standards. You say I’m arrogant, I say your arrogant for insisting that I conform to your arbitrary and hypocritical double standards. I’m not complaining to you. I just want you to stop whining because I don’t conform your liberal pseudo-tolerance while you ignore others here who are truly abusive because they are towing the liberal line. Your a bullshit artist. Your only outraged about how and what people say when it suites you.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
Lee, I’m not asking you to conform to anything. If you post something I disagree with or object to I sometimes respond. That’s what happens here.
Your only outraged about how and what people say when it suites you.
And when I happen to read it, yep, things that involve me are of more interest to me. That’s not uncommon here.
I’ve dealt with a damn sight more abuse directed at me, and sometimes directed at others, than you any idea about. But I’m not responsible for defending everyone who get’s offended here.
And I’m not the one doing all the whining.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:04 pm
“But I’m not responsible for defending everyone who get’s offended here.”
No your not. So…don’t be so selective, it looks suspicious.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:13 pm
If you search back you’ll find times I’ve spoken up to stuff bb and MNIJ have posted. Mostly I skip their posts now, they don’t usually interest me, nor do they interact with me much.
Before you get too suspicious look at the whole situation.
I’m not going to go PC and make sure all my posts are properly balanced for all who might read them. I’ll be as selective as I like. It just happens that you are one of the most prolific extremists here at the moment. Note that I didn’t bother to comment on the “healed” hand, I didn’t see the point in getting into that sort of discussion. There’s a lot of things I choose to stay out of.
Fight your own battles here. Otherwise follow the guidelines and complain to DPF, it’s his blog with his rules.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:14 pm
Dime @ 4:02 – couldn’t agree more.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Thanks Lee…
1. Swedish pastor: Found not guilty at appeal. You could argue that he suffered to establish some case law, like the Urewera 17 or Bryla.
2. Cumbrian preacher. Sounds to me like a public order offence. I’m not convinced that you should have an absolute right to hector people in a public place. There is a Christian woman who occasionally gets carried away and starts shrieking loudly outside my office on Lambton Quay. It is quite audible four floors up through a closed window. If the police were to arrest her (and I’d thank god for that), then would you regard it as oppressing her right to her religious beliefs? What about if Nazis stood on the street shouting at black people?
3. American preacher. The only links I could find online are close copies of your one. I would have thought this was a pretty clear cut violation of both freedom of speech and freedom of religion. So how come none of the main stream media picked up on the story? It sounds like a myth to me.
4. Canadian HRCs. Everyone knows that these are nutty groups, but they’re nutty on all sorts of issues. You might as well argue they’re a danger to shopkeepers because they’ll fine a shopkeeper who arrests a shoplifter, which they have done.
5. Birmingham preacher with Aspergers. Found not guilty and awarded a payout.
6. Foster couple. Years ago an American told me, with a completely straight face, that if his son said he was gay then he “would kill him”. Is this a chance the fostering agency should take with the baby’s life? The orientation of the child isn’t something that can be predicted and the agency would be negligent (in my opinion) if this caused issues in the future. Even if the issues are of a lesser degree than murder.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:27 pm
I see everyone is taking their dogma for a walk this evening.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 7:38 pm
UpandComer @ 6:49 pm … now THATS a comment I can respect. Whether I agree with you or not, I can respect a view that is tolerantly, yet firmly and unambiguously stated.
Lee 1) @ 3:54 pm said that ” Better than teaching them that having unprotected sodomy in a toilet is a valid lifestyle choice”. Followed by 2) @4:07 pm by: “They are a front for the attempted cultural Marxist assault on the Christian heritage of the West.”.
Lee:
1) there’s plenty of hetero people who enjoy anal intercourse. That, my friend; is none of your business (nor mine). Neither is your blatant attack on homosexual relationships, that implies all such relationships are some sort of short term and easy transaction any more reasonable …the average Kiwi 20-something female may even do so on a Friday Night at Soul Bar in Akl. Of course, if you are a very, very conservative Christian you might still argue that only missionary sex for procreation is allowed and everything else is an abomination. And then perhaps, The Enlightenment has been lost on many. For further reference re: “The Enlightenment” you should try a 7th form (Year 13) Art History class at any of your local high schools … oh, sorry; education is very dangerous for fundamental christians, starts to make people question the clergy and related power structures.
2) “Christian Heritage of the West” LOL… Holy crap Batman (pun *definitely* intended) … where to start on that total annihilation of historical fact? Firstly, most biblical scholars will baldly state that believing in Jesus is NOT Western. In strict fact, it’s Middle Eastern … e.g. heard of that old clan called “the Jews” lately? Hint: they’re the only people referred to in the Bible as “God’s chosen ones”, since Jesus was described as a Jew from Galilee (central Middle East) how is that western? Moreover, you imply that Marxists must be responsible for this “assault” on the Christian Church … riiiiight … because its inconceivable that Libertarians or Anarchists or Atheists or Hindus or Muslims or … could do this.
Mate, I get you don’t like homosexuality. I don’t like your stance and I abhor your reasoning… but I do, at least understand it, and to most extents I support your right to free speech and free belief. Now, if you’re gonna come out in “public” and engage others in this type of conversation, can you ***please*** at least advance reasonable “arguments” or just be honest and say “because God said so”.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 8:18 pm
Unreasonable to expect politicians to have a formed conscience in 2011.
The structure that developed people is gone.
Before MMP, constituent MPs had a certain amount of accountability, but with MMP, that’s mostly out the door – and with it, the integrity of conscience voting.
List MPs owe their living to the party hierachy and will vote accordingly.
No surprises in this result, but make no mistale – the liberal experiment has failed. No one can convince me we are better off these days.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Interesting that the top three (as rated by Family First) aren’t even in parliament and the bottom three rank lower than the Greens. If Peter Dunne wasn’t in Parliament Family First would be throwing their support behind the Mana Party and Hone Harawira, right?
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
This is better than GD.
All about Family First and Politics, Bob will be so pleased.
Never Give in to the buggers Lee
pearls before swine”
REM – it’s the lurkers you are after.
Tomorrow’s another day
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Bob (The Bopper) McCoskrie and the Family Fist’s Greatest Hits, including “Fist and Shout” & “Fisting by the Pool”
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 8:45 pm
hahaha “everyone’s taking their dogma for a walk this evening . . .”
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
mikenmild (2,680) Says:
September 26th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Family First, NZ First…hmmm – a match made in heaven? The reality is that tiny far-out pressure groups like Family First have absolutely no influence on voters.
……..
Election results: East Coast Bays
10:39AM Sunday Nov 09, 2008
Candidate results: ADAMS, Paul Family Party 3275
, BRADFORD, Sue Green Party 1969 
, GOLDSMITH, Vivienne (Viv) Labour Party 5628, HUTTON, Toby No Commercial Airport at Whenuapai Airbase Party 258, JONES, Dail New Zealand First Party 683, KRONFELD, Tim ACT New Zealand 1149,
McCULLY, Murray National Party 18,428, McINNES, Ian United Future 200, ZAMORA, Elah Libertarianz 50
It must say something about the Greens that their policies are so toxic that no candidate can make much headway. The Greens are stuck at a distance from public scrutiny; they have their core supporters and ignorant supporters.
Vote:September 26th, 2011 at 11:41 pm
Said the family values Skeleton: My family values Mace!
Just piss off and write a letter to the editor, Bob.
Vote:Only a very small minority of angry little people – with very limited experiences of life – think like you do. You’re not a force in New Zealand politics, and thank christ for that.
September 27th, 2011 at 12:20 am
Just piss off and write a letter to the editor, Bob.
Only a very small minority of angry little people
The irony is strong in this one.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 7:31 am
Come back to me after the Conservative Party gets its final election night results scrubone.
You and I can discuss irony at length then…
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 8:04 am
toad (3,046) Says:
September 26th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Bob (The Bopper) McCoskrie and the Family Fist’s Greatest Hits, including “Fist and Shout” & “Fisting by the Pool”
Vote:…………………………………….
I would have though their greatest hit was the Yes Vote where they did rather well (despite ):
http://greenvoices.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/that-ridiculous-referendum/
http://electionresults.govt.nz/2009_citizens_referendum/2009_referendum_results.html
September 27th, 2011 at 8:25 am
@ angus “Really ? So if you discovered that one of those kids was a $10 a trick crack whore you’d be relaxed and sophisticated about it ? Completely at ease with her lifestyle choice?”
I assume you are just being offensive for shits and giggles. Of course no parent would want that. Interesting how you jump from being tolerant about people’s sexual orientation, personal habits and freedoms to that.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 9:59 am
I love some of this stuff. Especially the bits where Andrei claims he doesn’t want the state to enforce morality on people, unless of course it’s his “family values” morality. I can tell you where to stick that…
Lee01, you claim in all those links that they’re examples of Christians being persecuted…but in all cases they were examples of uninformed bigots preaching hate to impressionable followers. You have a right to think all that retarded stuff about homosexuality being the greatest threat to the stability of your family and community if you want, but to preach that utter bollocks to others is just dangerous and frankly I have no problem with the authorities dealing with that as it is hate speech.
If I give a public lecture about how God doesn’t exist and that believing in him is a logical fallacy, then you give a lecture stating the opposite, neither of us should be reprimanded and we won’t be – there is no harm in conflicting ideas. Harm exists when I give a lecture about how conservative christians are an evil sub class of people to be treated with suspicion because of their backwards values, or you preach about homosexuals being evil and a sub-class of citizen. That is hate speech, of course you have the right to think that, but you shouldn’t be surprised that when preaching this to a congregation, authorities start to get pretty curious. They’re tasked with maintaining a cohesive society, which you’re actively trying to undermine by preaching material that is both empirically false and causes people to irrationally discriminate against others.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 10:23 am
Good comment, although I think I’d set barriers against hate speech a little higher, to the point that encouraing or exhorting a crime is involved.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 10:30 am
somewhatthoughtful,
“Lee01, you claim in all those links that they’re examples of Christians being persecuted”
Which they are. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, they were arrested for expressing their opinions. Unless you want to claim that it is valid to arrest people for expressing an opinion, then it is reasonable to say they were being persecuted.
“but in all cases they were examples of uninformed bigots preaching hate to impressionable followers.”
Thats merely your opinion. I would say that they ARE informed, and their “followers” as you wrongly label them, are not “impressionable”, but people able to think and decide for themselves.
“You have a right to think all that retarded stuff about homosexuality being the greatest threat to the stability of your family and community if you want, but to preach that utter bollocks to others is just dangerous and frankly I have no problem with the authorities dealing with that as it is hate speech.”
So in fact your lying. You DONT think I have that right at all. You think people should be arrested for your version of thought crimes, which means you believe in a totalitarian state that enforces your opinions.
“That is hate speech”
No, its merely your personal opinion that it is.
“but you shouldn’t be surprised that when preaching this to a congregation, authorities start to get pretty curious.”
Lets turn that around. I coould argue, according to your own stated rules, that you preaching about the evils of Christians is hate speech and that you should be arrested.
Now I woudn’t in fact do so, but if I did you would scream bloody murder and whine that I was a theocrat.
So your an Orwellian totalitarian Liberal fascist and a hypocrite to boot.
In short, typical Liberal hypocrisy and proof as I have said here many times that Liberalism is at heart a totalitarian ideology that is not remotely concerned with freedom as it claims, and is a far greater danger to genuine liberty than Christianity.
Thankyou for proving my point.
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841
http://www.nationalreview.com/liberal-fascism
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 11:16 am
Agree mike, I was using the example to make the point that there’s a difference between expressing an idea, and actively encouraging people to discriminate against a large minority group in society based on nothing more than superstition.
Lee01, I define preach as in actively encourage others to do something. I don’t think this should be at all illegal, and like mike said, that test for actual illegality should be a lot higher, but in the same way that expressing radical green views gets you an SIS file, expressing radical christian views should too – if that’s the way our society is going to operate.
I also have one question for you, how can you be comfortable in preaching/encouraging discrimination against others?
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 11:25 am
“but in the same way that expressing radical green views gets you an SIS file, expressing radical christian views should too”
But not radical Liberal views? Radical pro-homosexuality views? Your self-serving bias is showing, proving my point about you and other Liberals wanting a police state to enforce your social liberalism.
“I also have one question for you, how can you be comfortable in preaching/encouraging discrimination against others?”
There are two anwers to this. The first is that I’m not a Liberal, so self-serving Liberal interpretations of what constitutes “discrimination” do not impress me. But in this case I’m not anyway, in the way you and other Liberals claim. Preaching against homosexuality is preaching against a behaviour, not a class of people. It is no different to preaching against drug addiction, murder, theft, loan sharking, alcoholism or any other behaviour.
When someone says “alcoholism is bad” why do liberals not complain that they are preaching hate against alcoholics? SELF-SERVING AND HYPOCRITICAL BIAS, THATS WHY.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 11:43 am
I would tend to agree with some of the earliest comments posted. DPF is according to my understanding not married, has no children. Generally when people get married and have children they moderate their liberal views. Their liberal views on sexuality for example often change when it is their daughter who is being brought up.
So if DPF ever did decide to make an honest woman of Karori girl or Auckland girl (how many girls are there, is there an Eketahuna girl for example, one wonders how does he find the time or the energy?), then I imagine his socially liberal views would moderate.
As for myself I think family first are an excellent lobby group. They stand up for good solid family values which are the backbone of this country in my opinion.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 11:57 am
Pharmachick,
“Christian Heritage of the West” LOL… Holy crap Batman (pun *definitely* intended) … where to start on that total annihilation of historical fact? Firstly, most biblical scholars will baldly state that believing in Jesus is NOT Western. In strict fact, it’s Middle Eastern ”
Christianity is a fusion of Jerusalem and Athens. While Jesus was a Jew, the early Church was Greek, and heavily indebted to Greek Philosophy.
But more to the point, for 1500 years the West (by which I mean all of Europe) was Christendom and vice versa. Therefore our heritage as the West is a Christian one.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
“alcoholism is bad”
But no one says, that, ni the same way that no one syas cancer is bad. Alcoholism is a disease. Poor alcohol policies to some extent encourage that disease. Homosexuality is not a disease either.
Anyway, I just had another look at the original blog post and so I now assume that DPF will be voting Labour!
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
“But no one says, that, ni the same way that no one syas cancer is bad. ”
Thats an absurd statement. no one says they are good.
“Alcoholism is a disease”
Thats an arguable point. But even then, the fact remains that many behaviours are considered bad, but Liberals do not claim that people saying so are engaging in hate, UNLESS of course they are behavious Liberals agree with. So, the hypocrisy remains. Liberals are simply privileging their personal opinions and beliefs and, as in somewhatthoughfuls case, arguing for an Orwellian police state response to opinions he disagrees with.
Now, I don’t have a problem with people privileging their beliefs and opinions, I do it myself. But be HONEST about that, and stop hiding behind lies about “human rights” and “hate speech”.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
mikenmild — I agree, I think DPF is much more at home in the Labour Party on most issues. The thing is he wants a free market and the ability to make money, which is what national wants too. Labour wants you to make money so they can tax you and redistribute it to somebody else.
But on most issues he is a screaming Liberal. Apart from believing that parents have the choice to use corporal punishment or not (which come to think of it is a more liberal position), he is generally much more aligned with Helen Clark and co-on social issues. Homosexuality, abortion, civil unions — he is right there in the Liberal end of the Labour Party.
I actually think being socially liberal and economically liberal are not compatible. Social liberalism produces weak families, lots of suffering and the need for government intervention. The big welfare state we have is a direct consequence of social liberalism. If we have strong families where mum and dad were married and stuck together to bring up their children we wouldn’t need all of this welfare state. So under social liberalism you will get high taxes to pay for all of this government spending on welfare. So the Labour Party is a perfect reflection of what socially liberal government needs to be. Big welfare state and high taxes and lots of government intervention.
The much more consistent position is to believe in small government and individuals and families being responsible for themselves. If people acted responsibly much of the need for welfare and large government would disappear. So conservative economic and social policies to my mind are much more in synergy.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
DPF – I respect your view on abortion, but would be interested in your opinion on a 33 minute movie called “180″ Movie, which was released online yesterday: http://www.180movie.com/
The trailer for it is here: Pro-Choice to Pro-Life . . . in Seconds!
[DPF: Send me a link after the election and I'll watch it.]
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Lee 12:12 pm …
I’m not so sure about your “Greek” argument. Surely you know that the Greeks came before the Romans. Christianity as currently practiced in Western Europe owes a lot to a certain Roman Emperor who took on the religion of a bunch of slaves than [then] inhabited the catacombs and went around drawing fishes on their hands so people would know who they were, without throwing them to the Lions.
Also, in Western Europe “christianity” has been a very changeable thing, going through several great schisms since (including in the 12th century and the reformation in the 16th), depending on the whims of several Kings & Queens (Charlemagne, Henry VIII and Elizabeth 1 come to mind). Then there was Martin Luther. So this idea of one “Western European” version of Christianity is drawing quite a long bow, no?
Anyways, back from the theological precipice, I still don’t understand why an omnipotent God (or the Great Pumpkin) cannot also love homosexuals or, if it finds them so abhorrent, simply ensure they don’t exist, but I fear that is a circular argument and we will never agree. Cheers for the reasoned reply.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Pharmachick you know diddly
The scriptures were written in Greek the Greek old Testament is called the Septuagint and is used by the Eastern Church to this very day the Gospels and Epistles were all written in Greek to start with.
The certain Roman Emperor was called Constantine and his capital was the Greek city of Byzantium called later Constantinople, after him, and today known as Istanbul.
God does love Homosexuals but like a parent God desires what is good, healthy and life giving for all his Children and homosexuality is none of those so just like you might tell your children not to smoke or stick knitting needles into light sockets if they are younger so God tells us well you know ……..
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Yawn, did someone say something about an invisible, imaginary creator spirit?
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Yes RRM, and since its nearly Halloween, me and Charlie Brown are awaiting the arrival of the Great Pumpkin.
He speaks Aramaic.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 9:51 pm
So andrei, your point is that God (i.e. old middle eastern “prophets”) thought homos were bad because they couldn’t get in on the good action?
Makes perfect sense really.
Vote:September 27th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
Oh and Lee01, I don’t want you thrown in Jail for being a bigot. You’re welcome to be as much of a bigot as you like, I’m not going to take such an obviously prideful thing away from you.
I like your framing of me as some kind of wannabe-Orwellian overlord. It’s cute – use “our” (liberals) imagery against us. Super original. If that was anything close to what I’d argued for, you would’ve looked really good as well, but really, you’re doing the typical thing of playing the man not the ball. I’m guilty of this too, but I’m going to throw that aside for now and ask you a serious question:
Why is homosexuality so evil that you think you have a right to prejudice an entire portion of our society?
Simple question can’t wait for the answer.
Oh, and to re-address the whole “wanting the police to pay attention to conservative christian ministers who preach hateful bigoted bullshit” thing, I stand by my statement that AS LONG AS WE HAVE SECURITY SERVICES WHO ARE PAID TO SPY ON US then they SHOULD SPY ON BOTH SIDES EVENLY AS YOUR TEAM HAVE FAR MORE POTENTIAL FOR HARM THAN MY TEAM – IN MY OPINION, of course.
Vote:September 28th, 2011 at 10:37 am
Permachick,
“I’m not so sure about your “Greek” argument. Surely you know that the Greeks came before the Romans. Christianity as currently practiced in Western Europe owes a lot to a certain Roman Emperor who took on the religion of a bunch of slaves than [then] inhabited the catacombs and went around drawing fishes on their hands so people would know who they were, without throwing them to the Lions. ”
First, the Greeks and the Romans were concurrent. One did not come before the other. Your probably thinking if the classical era of Greek civilisation, which was shortly before Rome’s ascendency, but the Greeks were very much still around and their culture was still influential during the Roman era.
Second, Greek was the language of commerce and philosophy in the Roman Empire. The Early Church Fathers spoke Greek, and thought in Greek philosophical terms.
I’m halfway through a degree in Christian history and theology at Otago, and early Church history is my speciality.
“Also, in Western Europe “christianity” has been a very changeable thing, going through several great schisms since (including in the 12th century and the reformation in the 16th), depending on the whims of several Kings & Queens (Charlemagne, Henry VIII and Elizabeth 1 come to mind). Then there was Martin Luther. So this idea of one “Western European” version of Christianity is drawing quite a long bow, no?”
No, not at all. For a start they are not as different as your implying. Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism all say the same creeds that were hammered out in the early church. The Apsotles Creed and the Nicene Creed define a basic Christian Orthodoxy that all the three major branches of the Faith share. In terms of the Reformation, both Luther and Calvin built on what had gone before, they did not overturn it.
“Anyways, back from the theological precipice, I still don’t understand why an omnipotent God cannot also love homosexuals”
He does. But disaproves of the behaviour, just as he disaproves of all sin, because it is self-destructive and destructive to society.
somewhatthoughtful,
” Why is homosexuality so evil that you think you have a right to prejudice an entire portion of our society?”
The first thing to understand is that in Christian theology sex cannot be seperated from love or procreation. Sex is a sacred union of love between two different things, a man and a women. It is this union of difference through love that defines Christian marriage. And this union of love has two practical ends; personal communion (friendship, sharing love) and children.
So sex itself is not evil, it is in fact good. But it is also powerful. The act, even when done casually, unites two human persons together. They become, as Scripture puts it, “one flesh”, one person. The very power of this sacred union makes it dangerous when it is abused, as all powerful things are.
Because of this potential for abuse and harm, God created marriage as the container for this sacred union. Now marriage itself does not prevent abuse, but it does at least contain the act with boundaries, both for the well-being of the married and for society. When sex is indulged in outside of those boundaries, harm results, often terrible harm.
All sexual sin is evil, not just homosexuality. So is rape, child abuse, and adultery. Sexual sin is evil because of the nature of sex itself, which is love and union of difference.
So people who indulge in sexual sin, which to some degree is all of us, are creating personal and social harm. The problem with homosexuality is not that “homosexuals” are evil, it is the act itself, because sex is a sacred union of difference, of one man and one women, meant for marriage alone.
Vote: