General Debate 7 September 2012

September 7th, 2012 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

100 Responses to “General Debate 7 September 2012”

  1. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    Is this the biggest ‘No Shit Sherlock’ study of the week. Probably paid for by tax payer funding as well.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/7629309/Sex-study-casts-light-on-students-risky-behaviour

    Young people living in close proximity apparently drink and shag. Who knew?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. iMP (2,387 comments) says:

    Interesting update on the Gay-Marriage vs Freedom of Faith, Elane Photography v. Willock (NM Supreme Court) case that parallels concerns here in NZ by churches and para-chuch groups and individuals alike, if the Wall amendment bill is passed here. This is shaping up as a landmark legal case in America at the interface of two clashing religio-ideological perspectives in modern life.

    http://conzervative.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    sweet jesus got up before I went anywhere

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    Except Elane Photography is not a church or para-church group, it is a commercial enterprise and is subject to the law as is every private enterprise.

    When one disagrees with the law, there are generally 2 options.

    1. Attempt to have the law repealed/amended.

    2. Violate the law.

    Elane Photography has chosen 2, they must now either defend their decision in court or suffer the penalty. This has nothing to do with religion, it has to do with equality before the law. No matter what the simple minded think, religion is not a get out of jail free card.

    I can just imagine the outrage if any photographer in the US refused to photograph a baptism!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. dai (11 comments) says:

    Wow, it’s grumpy growf wot dun it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Luke: Why on earth should there be outrage if any photographer in the US refused to photograph a baptism? Surely, a photographer should be able to turn down any job if they have moral qualms about it?

    I’m a Christian. If I asked a photographer to shoot an event at church, for example, and they said “No, because I’m uncomfortable about going into a church for xyz reason”, I wouldn’t sue them. I’d respect their personal feelings, and go find another photographer. Hell, if the first photographer wants to turn down a paying job, that’s up to them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    @ graham if they had any brains they’d just say “I’m too busy”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    New Zealanders shouldn’t be hypocritical about investment from China, former Australian prime minister John Howard has told a conference in Queenstown.
    Mr Howard was keynote speaker at the Property Council’s annual conference on Thursday, Radio New Zealand reports.
    He told delegates neither New Zealand nor Australia could expect to sell exports to China and then turn their backs when Chinese businesses wanted to invest.
    Mr Howard said investment from anywhere should be welcomed because it encouraged diversification.
    He said Australia and New Zealand should be careful not to put their economic eggs all in one basket, relying only on agriculture or mineral resources.
    Opposition parties in New Zealand have criticised Chinese investment, particularly the government’s decision to allow the 16 Crafar farms to be sold to Shanghai Pengxin.
    http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8528535/accept-chinese-investment-howard-tells-nz
    Ofcourse Howard wasn’t invited to say what they didn’t want to hear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. peterwn (3,275 comments) says:

    This reminds me of the incident some years ago when someone sent Bill Tito (a specialist book binder and restorer) a book that he considered offensive to be re-bound. I doubt the customer genuinely wanted the book re-bound, he just wanted to get Bill’s wind up. Bill refused and the customer threatened ‘human rights’ action.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    KiwiGreg, I understand your point, but why should they have to?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. kowtow (8,522 comments) says:

    Bollocks, every individual should be FREE to enter into or refuse a contract.For whatever reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    graham (1,189) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 8:42 am
    Luke: Why on earth should there be outrage if any photographer in the US refused to photograph a baptism?

    Mainly because the fruit loop religious nutbars in America are every bit as irrational, angry and ignorant as the Muslims they despise.

    She is 16, the daughter of a firefighter and a nurse, a self-proclaimed nerd who loves Harry Potter and Facebook. But Jessica Ahlquist is also an outspoken atheist who has incensed this heavily Roman Catholic city with a successful lawsuit to get a prayer removed from the wall of her high school auditorium, where it has hung for 49 years.

    (…)

    State Representative Peter G. Palumbo, a Democrat from Cranston, called Jessica “an evil little thing” on a popular talk radio show. Three separate florists refused to deliver her roses sent from a national atheist group.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/us/rhode-island-city-enraged-over-school-prayer-lawsuit.html

    She also endured threats of rape, bashing and even murder from the loving Christians of Rhode Island and beyond.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    kowtow (2,766) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:03 am
    Bollocks, every individual should be FREE to enter into or refuse a contract.For whatever reason.

    And they are, within the confines of the law. Don’t like it? Then campaign for change. But yeah, I know, that’s hard, it takes real effort, far easier to whinge on a blog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    In the U.K and NZ the costs of providing new infrastructure are not included when considering the fiscal impacts of immigration
    That is why the Savings Working Group and the Australian Productivity Commision are right and the lap dogs of the Property industry (our Honourable MP’s) are wrong.
    ……….

    Since 2002, the British Government department responsible for immigration, the Home Office, has claimed immigrants pay £2-5bn more in tax than they withdraw from the public purse. The workings behind this figure omit the cost of the additional infrastructure investments that immigrants necessitate (no small omission). The conventional wisdom is that funding government owned assets is a burden on the community at large, whereas funding private sector business assets is not. However the distinction between public and private sectors is artificial. Thus funding the private sector investments is just as much a burden on the community as funding the public sector. Thus it is the community at large funds the additional private sector business assets that immigrants necessitate. The important distinction is not between public and private sector assets, but between what might be called “communally used” assets (public and private) and assets which only one person or family benefits from, of which housing is much the most important. That is,
    New Zealand Research on the Economic Impacts of Immigration 2005–2010 – Synthesis and research agenda
    The study shows that all sub-groups of the migrant population analysed had positive net impacts, although the scale differed by the duration of residence, region of origin, and region of residence in New Zealand.

    Limitations and discussion
    Slack et al (2007) did not cover all components of government accounts. For example, settlement support expenses were not included as they were assumed to be one-off costs and often covered by the fees paid by migrants through the migrant levy.
    A potentially more important omitted category is the large-scale public infrastructure investment that might be needed following the expansion of the population. This kind of expenditure is conceptually difficult to allocate to relatively small changes in the population resulting from immigration. There is also the question to what extent existing infrastructure is sufficiently underutilised to be able to cope with additional population without incurring congestion effects. This may be particularly important in New Zealand, where most new migrants settle in Auckland; a city in which, for example, investment in transportation infrastructure has not kept pace with increasing demand. However, it should also be noted in this context that Slack et al (2007) did not consider the emigration of New Zealanders and earlier immigrants. In fact, if the impact of outflows were also considered, the net effect of omitting capital investment is likely to be less because the outflows offset much of the impact of the inflow on infrastructure.
    http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/research/synthesis-research/synthesis-research_06.asp

    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/downloads/pdfs/mi-jarrett-comm.pdf
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/4622459/Government-policies-blamed-for-house-prices
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/immigration-link-to-economic-growth-yet-to-be-proven-says-productivity-commission/story-fn9hm1gu-12261

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    Luke- Why stop there on her Atheist campaign?? Why doesn’t smug little Jessica Ahlquist go to Arlington Cemetary and smash over all the graves with the crucifix or prayers on them?
    I also wonder if she will take her crusade to the local Mosque…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    Longknives, stupid is as you stupidly write.

    Personal gravestones are the choice of the family members, not the choice of the government. The ACLU vigorously defends peoples’ freedom to choose the religious symbols of their choice. The right of each and every American to practice his or her own religion, or no religion at all, is among the most fundamental of the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

    The ridiculously stupid american Christians expect everyone to obey the law except themselves.

    And if you cannot see the difference between a publicly funded institution such as a school and a private place of worship such as a mosque (or even a church) then you are thicker than pig shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    Oooh nasty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Luke, you’re changing the original point.

    As I said, there *should not be* any issue if any photographer in the US refused to photograph a baptism. I surely wouldn’t expect an issue here, and as I said I personally wouldn’t have a problem if somebody refused to accept a job, based on the fact that it was something to do with a church and they had qualms about it. Up to them.

    Maybe Americans are just too damn “sue-happy”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    I bet like most who lean towards the left you think those cheap publicity whores Pussy Riot are just fantastic (‘Freedom of Speech’ ‘Fuck the church’ blah blah) yet find Koran Burnings ‘horrendous and bigoted’…
    Can’t have it both ways champ!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    In the Western world, in the wider sense atheist has really come to mean “anti-Christian”. Despite every atheist I know, me included, saying “all sky fairy worship is bonkers” it is really only Christian symbols and practices that are attacked with any real zeal. And that is also the problem. Why attack those things. Some prayer hanging on a hall wall wont hurt that girl. If it did her atheist beliefs must be held pretty tenuously. Lefty atheists want to destroy and deny the West’s Christian heritage – which in itself is insane. it is all part of what has made us – us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    Longknives (1,350) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:51 am
    I bet like most who lean towards the left you think those cheap publicity whores Pussy Riot are just fantastic (‘Freedom of Speech’ ‘Fuck the church’ blah blah) yet find Koran Burnings ‘horrendous and bigoted’…

    Yes, I support Pussy Riot’s campaign against the unholy alliance of church and Putin. Surely that is the essence of free speech.

    I don’t like burning of Q’rans, but that is more because I dislike the symbolism of book burning, but I don’t find them “horrendous and bigoted”, as after all, its IS just a few bits of paper.

    Can’t have it both ways champ!

    But I don’t even attempt to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    My point exactly Brian. I very much doubt you will see smug little Jessica Ahlquist taunting Muslims or Hindus about their religious beliefs as she has Christians (have a look at her gloating and sneering Facebook posts)….
    And I’d also love to hear her views on the Dalai Lama- every smug Atheist I know seem to contradict themselves and absolutely worship this guy despite his claims to be a ‘God on Earth’…bizarre!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Luke Mutton (247 comments) says:

    Brian Smaller (3,734) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:55 am
    In the Western world, in the wider sense atheist has really come to mean “anti-Christian”.

    BOLLOCKS!

    Despite every atheist I know, me included, saying “all sky fairy worship is bonkers” it is really only Christian symbols and practices that are attacked with any real zeal.

    MORE BOLLOCKS!

    Have you never heard of Mayam Namazie? Taslima Nasreen? http://apostatesofislam.com/

    The opposition to religion is in direct proportion to its prevalence in a community.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    Luke- So you openly support Pussy Riot yet “don’t like” Koran burnings?
    The hypocrisy is laughable….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Andrei (2,664 comments) says:

    Actually making a fuss over Christian things is a mental illness IMHO

    Take the elderly Christian couple who ran a guest house in Cornwall and stated up front that they held to Christian values in their home. This meant among other things that they wouldn’t rent a double room to an unmarried couple.

    A normal person on reading this would either say OK and be happy to comply or say “that place is not a good fit for me and my desire to get away to Cornwall for a dirty weekend with my secretary so I will look for somewhere else”. That way everybody stays happy.

    But to a certain type of mental defective such a statement is red rag to a bull – so two gay activists book a double room, pretending naivete as to the rules of the house and when the proprietors uphold their standards and refuse the room they find themselves hauled before the courts and punished.

    The real oddity in all of this there are plenty of guesthouses in 21st century England that advertise themselves for gays only or for gay males only.

    And strangely enough no Christian heterosexual couple has ever seen fit to book a room in such an establishment and make a fuss when denied – they have better things to do with their time I suppose and why insist on staying in a place where neither you, the other guests nor the proprietor would be comfortable. Life is too short for that

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    We should deport him: http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8528851/refugee-stole-power-for-cannabis-operation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. publicwatchdog (2,613 comments) says:

    Seen this Kiwibloggers? :)

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/democracy-backburner-canterbury-ch-127798

    The Auckland $UPERCITY corporate takeover, has been, as predicted, a disaster for citizens and ratepayers.

    So much for the ‘economies of scale’ achieved by abolishing 8 former Auckland Councils.

    Auckland rates have done nothing but increase since the formation of Auckland Council on 1 November 2010.

    The Auckland $UPERCITY was always about setting up a bigger public trough for fewer, but bigger private snouts.

    Currently, there are 5000 contracts with 12,500 suppliers to Auckland Council and the 5 CCO’s (excluding Auckland Transport and Watercare Services Ltd).

    However, the public are NOT being told the NAMES of the contractors / the SCOPE of theses contracts / the TERM or VALUE of these contracts.

    WHERE IS THE TRANSPARENCY?

    We are NOT being told how many of these contracts have been awarded to member companies of the unelected, extremely powerful private lobby group – the Committee for Auckland, of which (unelected) Auckland Council CEO Doug McKay is a member – in his capacity as CEO of Auckland Council.

    http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz/membership/member-organisations

    How DODGY is THAT?

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’

    (For background information – check out :

    http://www.stopthesupercity.org.nz
    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. MH (762 comments) says:

    I doubt whether Arlington is a private cemetry?State funded and maintained…therefore?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    There are reports that John Pagani is leaving Team Shearer for a lobbying job with the mining industry.

    He’s finishing digging Labour into a hole and he’s going to help others dig holes.

    Whale Oil asks who should Shearer turn to? Unless it’s to late, he should turn to himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Griff (7,808 comments) says:

    The tarnished penny has lost the johny link
    has reality finally entered her world view?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    As always, the greedy and rapacious hand of the state: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/online-shopping-targeted-in-proposed-gst-changes-20120906-25hff.html

    Our limit is $400 and there is push by some NZ retailers to reduce it. Cheeky thieves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    I still don’t see why a prayer hanging on a school hall wall affects that girl’s life in any way, shape or form. You cannot deny our history and if even seeing the words is so hard for her to handle, then her atheism is shaky at best. What the fuck are these people afraid of?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Longknives (1,356) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:16 am

    Luke- Why stop there on her Atheist campaign?? Why doesn’t smug little Jessica Ahlquist go to Arlington Cemetary and smash over all the graves with the crucifix or prayers on them?
    I also wonder if she will take her crusade to the local Mosque…

    Because symbols on graves clearly represent the personal religious views of the deceased or their family. It does not represent an endorsement of one religion over another by the state.

    A school prayer in a school is characteristically different in that it is attempting to promote a religious viewpoint using the power of the state. That is wrong and justifiably objected to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Morning Penny.

    Are you going to deign to answer ANY of the auestions that have been asked of you over the past few days?

    … no, thought not.

    Who would even consider electing someone standing for mayor, if she can’t be bothered to answer questions from those people she wants to represent?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    graham (1,190) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:49 am

    Luke, you’re changing the original point.

    As I said, there *should not be* any issue if any photographer in the US refused to photograph a baptism. I surely wouldn’t expect an issue here, and as I said I personally wouldn’t have a problem if somebody refused to accept a job, based on the fact that it was something to do with a church and they had qualms about it. Up to them.

    Maybe Americans are just too damn “sue-happy”.

    Do you agree that a shop should be able to hang signs in their shop window such as “No coloureds allowed”?

    In the offering of commercial services, is discrimination on the basis of race different to discrimination on the basis of religion?

    How about “No Jews allowed”?

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Brian Smaller (3,735) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 9:55 am

    In the Western world, in the wider sense atheist has really come to mean “anti-Christian”. Despite every atheist I know, me included, saying “all sky fairy worship is bonkers” it is really only Christian symbols and practices that are attacked with any real zeal.

    That’s because Muslims are batshit crazy. Just look at the madness over a girl burning pages of the Koran. They aren’t right in the head and understandably one is wise to exercise caution before making themselves a target for terrorism.

    And that is also the problem. Why attack those things. Some prayer hanging on a hall wall wont hurt that girl. If it did her atheist beliefs must be held pretty tenuously. Lefty atheists want to destroy and deny the West’s Christian heritage – which in itself is insane. it is all part of what has made us – us.

    The point which you have missed is that the state should be neutral on religion. If you want heritage then by all means protect it. No one is going to take it off you. But that’s not the point of prayers in schools. The point of promoting prayer in school is one of advocacy, using the state as the vehicle to advance religion. That is wrong just as much as if atheists wanted government to indoctrinate kids that religion was hogwash.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Weihana:

    Of course I don’t agree that you should be able to discriminate on the basis of race. With respect, though, I believe refusing to provide services on the basis of deeply-held moral or ethical beliefs is different.

    As an example, let’s say I’m a builder who happens to be a Christian. Let’s say a Satanist group approaches me and asks me to build them a place of worship complete with an altar where they will worship Satan (sorry, I don’t know what a Satanist would call their place of worship :)). Do you agree that I should be required by law to have to do this? After all, Satan worship isn’t illegal in New Zealand, so you could say it’s a legitimate job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    That’s because Muslims are batshit crazy. Just look at the madness over a girl burning pages of the Koran. They aren’t right in the head and understandably one is wise to exercise caution before making themselves a target for terrorism.

    Ahh. So I was right. Christians and their religion are easy to take a stand against because they don’t murder you for being an atheist or apostate so the other big religion gets a free pass because people are basically chicken shit scared. This is why Christians are not allowed to wear their jewellery cross but Muslims can wear their religious garb.

    A prayer on a wall is not forcing a religious view on anyone. That is my point. If the school was forcing the girl to recite a prayer she would have something to rail against.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Brian Smaller (3,735) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 11:48 am

    I still don’t see why a prayer hanging on a school hall wall affects that girl’s life in any way, shape or form. You cannot deny our history and if even seeing the words is so hard for her to handle, then her atheism is shaky at best. What the fuck are these people afraid of?

    If it’s no big deal then why not take it down? Their religion can’t handle the absence of the prayer on the wall? Their beliefs must be pretty shaky. :)

    Point is, it’s not THEIR school. It’s everyone’s school and no one belief, no one sect, gets preferential treatment over any other. It’s the thin end of the wedge. If you want to promote your religion then do it yourself. Do not try to shove it down everyone else’s throats using the power of the state.

    Talk of “western christian heritage” is exactly the type of thinking which reflects an expectation of preferential treatment and a privileged status in society. It’s the mindset where Christians own society and the rest of us are mere guests.

    If you want a prayer on the wall, I want a Hitchslap on the wall. You can put money on the fact that Christians will suddenly find that words are hurtful and impossible to endure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. thedavincimode (6,800 comments) says:

    I don’t know what a Satanist would call their place of worship

    Red Alert.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    graham (1,192) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    Weihana:

    Of course I don’t agree that you should be able to discriminate on the basis of race. With respect, though, I believe refusing to provide services on the basis of deeply-held moral or ethical beliefs is different.

    Who are you to say that members of the Ku Klux Klan do not have “deeply-held moral or ethical beliefs”?

    As an example, let’s say I’m a builder who happens to be a Christian. Let’s say a Satanist group approaches me and asks me to build them a place of worship complete with an altar where they will worship Satan (sorry, I don’t know what a Satanist would call their place of worship :) ). Do you agree that I should be required by law to have to do this? After all, Satan worship isn’t illegal in New Zealand, so you could say it’s a legitimate job.

    Yes, you should be required by law.

    If we are to have anti-discrimination laws at all then people cannot simply get out of such obligations on the basis of subjective personal views. Such a standard makes the law ineffective and pointless, or alternatively arbitrary judgment is used to say which personally held moral and ethical beliefs are valid and which are not. Such as your anti-Satanist views are valid, but the KKK’s pro-white views are not valid.

    If you want to discriminate in the offering of commercial services on the basis of religion then I think the service you are offering should have to be religious in nature. So a church shouldn’t have to offer marriages to gay people if that’s against their beliefs. But building? Photography? etc. That has nothing to do with religion.

    Alternatively we have no anti-discrimination laws (for private people) at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    tdm: if any of them see that you are so in deep trouble … :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Weihana: Really? You think the law should over-rule any morality, ethics, and values? I think we will definitely have to agree to disagree there.

    You say: “people cannot simply get out of such obligations on the basis of subjective personal views”. We are not talking about obligations, we are talking about people being approached and requested to provide a service. There is a big difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Brian Smaller,

    Ahh. So I was right. Christians and their religion are easy to take a stand against because they don’t murder you for being an atheist or apostate

    Yes.

    so the other big religion gets a free pass because people are basically chicken shit scared. This is why Christians are not allowed to wear their jewellery cross but Muslims can wear their religious garb.

    Free pass? Name the countries that have unmanned aerial vehicles hovering over them equipped with missiles that can summarily execute people. Just as well it has nothing to do with their religion. :)

    A prayer on a wall is not forcing a religious view on anyone. That is my point. If the school was forcing the girl to recite a prayer she would have something to rail against.

    It is forcing something upon people: it is forcing a second-class status on those people who do not belong to the privileged sect which has the government at its side promoting its religious views over the views of others.

    If an individual student, or a group of students, wishes to pray and to advocate to their hearts content, then by all means that is their right. But no one has the right to arrogate to themselves the power of the state in order to promote their personal religious views.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    graham (1,194) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    Weihana: Really? You think the law should over-rule any morality, ethics, and values? I think we will definitely have to agree to disagree there.

    You say: “people cannot simply get out of such obligations on the basis of subjective personal views”. We are not talking about obligations, we are talking about people being approached and requested to provide a service. There is a big difference.

    Not if people are approached because they run a commercial enterprise and they were approached precisely for that reason. In that context that is no different to hanging a sign in a shop window. A commercial enterprise is a commercial enterprise. If you are a builder in a personal capacity and do not generally offer services to the public then yes I agree you should be free to discriminate on whatever basis you wish, including race, religion, sexuality, hair colour, weight, gender etc. etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    The climate ‘sceptics’ seem to have resoundly lost this round.

    New Zealand climate change denial defeated

    The High Court decision on the Judicial Review of NIWA’s New Zealand temperature record was issued today. I will comment in more depth next week but interested readers can read the judgement themselves at http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/nz-climate-science-education-trust-v-niwa-ltd/at_download/fileDecision

    In short – the arguments made by the climate change denial/sceptics/ contrarian groups were tossed out and costs will be awarded against them.

    Here is the judgement’s summary:

    “[185] The plaintiff does not succeed on any of its challenges to the three decisions of NIWA in issue. The application for judicial review is dismissed and judgment entered for the defendant.

    Costs
    [186] The defendant is entitled to costs. Given the time involved and the steps taken, costs on a category 2 time band C would seem appropriate. However, if the parties are unable to agree I will receive memoranda and deal with the issue of costs on the basis of such memoranda.”

    http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2012/09/07/new-zealand-climate-change-denial-defeated/

    What next?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Weihana, I do work as a freelance marketing consultant. I publicise my availability to do this. If someone comes to me with a job to promote something that is at odds with my morals – say, promoting a Christian campaign against marriage equality – should I have the freedom to turn down the job?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. redeye (629 comments) says:

    I’m no church goer but for mine Christianity is attacked by some simply because
    a) it’s an easy target due to their turn the other cheek philosophy, and
    b) because they are unsure of their own atheism and need to constantly argue the point for reassurance

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Ryan,

    No, you shouldn’t. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    @redeye – I have never felt that Christianity was being forced on me by the State, a church or even other people. Quite how it is being forced on me by a piece of prose on a wall in a school is beyond me.

    I like going to my son’s school for Chapel services. I don’t do any of the praying because I think it is laughable, but I love the building, enjoy the singing and the maniacal organist. I think Atheists trying to get rid of every scrap of Christian culture and heritage anywhere “public” is pretty much the same as the Taleban blowing up the Bamiyan Bhuddas. I suspect the utopia would be for all churches to have to cover their buildings up so no one who is not an atheist gets offended by seeing the word Church, or a steeple, or a cross when driving by on a public road.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Andrei (2,664 comments) says:

    What next – Pete George?

    What next indeed.

    It has probably escaped your notice but the Western world is morally, spiritually, intellectually and financially bankrupt.

    The “climate change” debate is an example of intellectual bankruptcy where the scientific method has been perverted to transfer wealth from the few productive elements of society that remain in the cultural wasteland our elites have created, elements that haven’t yet destroyed, to those elites so that they can squander it.

    The game is almost up. the Chinese Government has bought a few months breathing space for us all by buying European bonds so that Europeans can continue to buy Chinese goods for a little longer with money borrowed from the Chinese.

    But it is all, to coin a word, unsustainable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    Brian Smaller (3,737) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    @redeye – I have never felt that Christianity was being forced on me by the State, a church or even other people. Quite how it is being forced on me by a piece of prose on a wall in a school is beyond me.

    I like going to my son’s school for Chapel services. I don’t do any of the praying because I think it is laughable, but I love the building, enjoy the singing and the maniacal organist. I think Atheists trying to get rid of every scrap of Christian culture and heritage anywhere “public” is pretty much the same as the Taleban blowing up the Bamiyan Bhuddas. I suspect the utopia would be for all churches to have to cover their buildings up so no one who is not an atheist gets offended by seeing the word Church, or a steeple, or a cross when driving by on a public road.

    You are being disingenuous in your argument. No one is advocating for a ban of religion in public spaces. No one credible at least that I’m aware of. As I put it to you, the issue is the endorsement of one religion/sect/belief by the state over all others. If it’s a state owned building then it is representative of the state and should not be endorsing religion, or non-religion.

    It’s a matter of principle and given the importance of the principle I am indeed being very pedantic in advocating against even the most trivial of breaches.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. kowtow (8,522 comments) says:

    dvm

    Red Alert

    A Stalinist place of worship.

    redeye…attacking Christianity also proves one is “with it”.By so doing they affirm themselvs as progressive. Bit like voting for the black guy.A subscription to The Guardian is another.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Some interesting arguments on raising the minimum price of alcohol.

    It seems that the Sellman and Connor claims of a 10% price increase leading to a 16% reduction in consumption might be quite misleading.

    Crampton points out their error and points at a more meaingful reduction.

    And, for total consumption, the 3.4% figure is the rather more relevant one.

    http://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.co.nz/2012/09/check-your-sources.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Weihana at 12:52 pm – See, I think Ryan should have the freedom to turn down a job if it’s against his morals.

    If I asked him to work on something – say, a campaign promoting a Christian rock concert – and he objected to it, then I wouldn’t get offended or threaten to sue his ass. I’d simply go find someone else.

    Simple.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. MH (762 comments) says:

    some photographers in under developed countries just see things in black and white,no coloureds allowed. Negative comments? What exactly did the prayer invoke,God help us if it was for peace and understanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. iMP (2,387 comments) says:

    The photographer’s “crime” (for which she was fined more than US $7000) was simply to decline to take on a commercial job, for whatever reason. The case says, that you are NOT FREE to refuse, which is coercion based on ideology.

    The lesbians did not like what she thought, so they sued her, because they felt hurt….and did a whole lot of REAL hurt to the photographer. $7000 of hurt. Why couldn’t they just “live and let live.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. publicwatchdog (2,613 comments) says:

    Here we go Kiwibloggers!

    You’ll LOVE this!

    Nibble away! ;)

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________

    RIO TINTO, STOP CRYING WOLF
    Just Close The Bluff Smelter & Bugger Off

    Here we go again. Every time that Rio Tinto, the gargantuan mining and processing transnational which owns 80% of they Bluff smelter, feels that its charmed existence in New Zealand is going to become less cushy, it threatens to pull the plug, close the smelter and walk away. Last time it did so (in 2008) was because of the Labour Government’s proposed emissions trading scheme. This time it is trying it on as a tactic to try to pressure Meridian over its power price contract, which has already been negotiated and is due to take effect in January.

    Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) calls Rio Tinto’s bluff (pun intended) Stop crying wolf, stop using your New Zealand workers as disposable pawns in your cynical game, stop holding Southland and the country to ransom. Go ahead and close the smelter and bugger off. See if we care, the country will be much better off without you. The smelter is the country’s single biggest user of electricity, consuming one sixth of the total, 24/7 for more than 40 years. It pays a top secret super cheap price that is not available for any other user and all it does is export electricity from NZ in the form of alumina, while being subsidised by all other electricity users. The smelter is the textbook example of corporate welfare in New Zealand. It is the biggest bludger in the country. Those who extol the bracing discipline of market forces for everybody else are strangely coy when it comes to this corporate recidivist.

    Rio Tinto Alcan won the 2011 Roger Award for the Worst Transnational Corporation Operating In Aotearoa/New Zealand. It was nominated for lobbying two Governments “over several years to secure excessive allocations of free emissions units under the NZ Emissions Trading Scheme”.

    The Roger Award judges agreed, concluding: “It appears therefore, that the New Zealand taxpayer is subsidising a transnational corporate rort of the emissions trading scheme… The significance of this stance cannot be underestimated; a major transnational player within New Zealand materially benefits from its non-compliance with a strategy to reduce global climate change and its ecological effects”.

    The Judges’ Report concludes that the company has a 50 year history of “suborning, blackmailing and conning successive New Zealand governments into paying massive subsidies on the smelter’s electricity; dodging tax, and running a brilliantly effective PR machine to present a friendly, socially responsible and thoroughly greenwashed face to the media and the public. Its milking of the Emissions Trading Scheme is entirely in character”.

    The extremely detailed Financial Analysis reveals that the smelter’s claimed benefits to NZ, namely annual export earnings of “around $1 billion” are, in fact, overstated by four fifths.

    The full, damning, 2011 Roger Award Judges’ Report can be read at http://canterbury.cyberplace.co.nz/community/CAFCA/publications/Roger/Roger2011.pdf

    In short, it is a liability to New Zealand, not an asset.

    What about the people who work for the smelter, directly or indirectly? The tobacco industry used to employ a lot of people here, but that was deemed to be no longer in the public interest. Lacing lollywater with booze and selling it to kids supports a lot of jobs too but there’s plenty of public demand to get rid of that particular industry as well. The P industry provides an income for thousands of people too, but we don’t hear any demand for that insidious trade to be kept going to keep them in a job. History is full of examples of horrible industries that kept people in jobs (such as the slave trade) but which were banned and/or abolished for the greater good.

    This smelter constitutes a crime against the people of New Zealand and has done for its entire existence.

    In the national interest, it must be closed and the sooner the better.

    Murray Horton
    Secretary/Organiser

    CAFCA
    Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa
    Box 2258, Christchurch, New Zealand
    cafca@chch.planet.org.nz
    http://www.cafca.org.nz
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=117427631610589&ref=ts
    http://www.watchblogaotearoa.blogspot.com/
    https://twitter.com/#!/NZN4S
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________

    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’
    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. thedavincimode (6,800 comments) says:

    You left off fuckwit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Dear Penny

    At the risk of repeating myself, who is “Dodgy John”? And where has he gone?

    I was always of the impression that an ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’ would be a purveyor of the truth, not a blatant liar and slanderer. You’re setting a very poor example :D

    Best, KS

    ‘Anti-fibber campaigner’
    http://wwwpennybrighttellsporkies.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. James Stephenson (2,191 comments) says:

    redeye…attacking Christianity also proves one is “with it”.By so doing they affirm themselvs as progressive. Bit like voting for the black guy.A subscription to The Guardian is another.

    No, I don’t think so. It’s just that most of the coverage of mean and nasty atheists comes out the US, a place where even the Democractic Party who sneer at the religiousness of the Republicans, end every speech with “God Bless and God Bless America” and even a Mormon with all his nutty beliefs has a better chance of being elected than someone who might dare to say they don’t believe in any god.

    I guess you missed Dawkins attempting to debate with a Islamic convert from Judaism, and the outrage the UCL’s Atheist society generated amongst the muslim students by using a Jesus and Mo cartoon…

    http://www.jesusandmo.net/ go on, you know you want to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Griff (7,808 comments) says:

    The “climate change” debate is an example of intellectual bankruptcy where the scientific method has been perverted to transfer wealth from the few productive elements of society that remain in the cultural wasteland our elites have created, elements that haven’t yet destroyed, to those elites so that they can squander it.

    WTF
    Science says more co2 =warmer planet +climate change

    The ETS and other solutions are not the science or driven by science they are politics a very separate field
    The wealth transfer at present goes to the people that own the oil resources like the Koch brothers or the fat Aussie tart Rinehart
    Its not the scientific method that has been perverted only a ignorant bockwurst would come out with such stupid dribble Its the politics that has perverted science for a political agenda and the perversion is the denial bullshit that moonbats like you believe in

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    And at the risk of repeating myself also …

    Penny, when will you answer any of the questions you have been asked over the past few days? Some of them are quite valid questions.

    As one example, I have repeatedly asked you if OccupyAuckland have paid for the electricity they originally STOLE. As this group claimed to represent everyone on Kiwiblog (remember, they claimed ‘We are the 99%’), then I think we are all justified in expecting some form of accountability from a group that purports to represent us and speak on our behalf.

    Or do you not believe in accountability?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Griff (7,808 comments) says:

    Notice gods nutters when there is not endless posts trying to restricting the rights of individuals based on religious text or the claim that religion has a prior and stronger claim in the debate over morals or rights atheists leave you alone.
    If Mohammed goat boys followers were on here in number the same would happen. Push your superstition and get pushed back with I might add a certain amount of glee. If you dont wave religion around its not a target

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. TheContrarian (1,086 comments) says:

    Watching Obama’s speech. Jeez man, compared to the wooden Romney…well, at least Obama looks less like some weird, rich, marionette

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    And good afternoon to you, Griff. Having a nice day? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. publicwatchdog (2,613 comments) says:

    Occupy Auckland were neither charged nor convicted for ‘stealing’ electricity – so may I respectfully suggest ‘Graham’ that you are little more careful with your (factually incorrect) language?

    Do feel free to raise this matter with the Auckland Area Commander of Police, who was directly involved with this matter.

    In the meantime – pull your head in – you’re REALLY getting boring………………………

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’

    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com

    http://www.pennybright4epsom.org.nz

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

    http://www.stopthesupercity.org.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Nookin (3,354 comments) says:

    “Occupy Auckland were neither charged nor convicted for ‘stealing’ electricity – so may I respectfully suggest ‘Graham’ that you are little more careful with your (factually incorrect) language?”

    John Banks was neither charged nor convicted of making a false statement in a prospectus nor of electoral fraud. Given your extravagant allegations, can we all assume that you have shown some modicum of integrity and have apologised?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Wow! A reply, finally! I am honoured! :)

    Penny, OccupyAuckland may not have been charged for stealing electricity – but the fact is that OccupyAuckland connected to the Council’s electricity supply without permission and proceeded to use their electricty. You have quite openly told us this yourself.

    Using someone else’s resource without permission is stealing. Fact.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    graham (1,198) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    Weihana at 12:52 pm – See, I think Ryan should have the freedom to turn down a job if it’s against his morals.

    If I asked him to work on something – say, a campaign promoting a Christian rock concert – and he objected to it, then I wouldn’t get offended or threaten to sue his ass. I’d simply go find someone else.

    Simple.

    It’s fine if you think he should have that freedom, I’m simply trying to point out that being a racist is just as much an ethical/moral belief as anything else. If discrimination based on personal ethical beliefs is okay then all discrimination by private individuals should be tolerated including the shop window sign “No blacks allowed”. Whether or not you have a retail shop or whether your business provides its services via an advert on the internet, discrimination is discrimination. The fact that someone contacts you as opposed to walking into your shop makes no difference. If you are a commercial enterprise then you are subject to anti-discrimination laws in the offering of those commercial services.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Here’s one of the news reports confirming the above:

    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/regak/136390759-occupy-protestors-demand-electricity

    Occupy Auckland protestors have connected themselves to the electricity supply in Aotea Square.

    A decision on a permanent injunction to evict them from the square is expected this week.

    Occupy Auckland council liaison member Penny Bright says the group applied to be hooked up to the power supply last Tuesday.

    She says they gave the council until midday today to give them permission to use and pay for the electricity.

    Sooo … now we’ve sorted that out, perhaps you could answer the question. Have OccupyAuckland paid for the electricity they originally STOLE? As I said, seeing as how this group claimed to represent everyone on Kiwiblog (remember, they claimed ‘We are the 99%’), then I think we are all justified in expecting some form of accountability from a group that purports to represent us and speak on our behalf.

    Or do you not believe in accountability?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    LOL Keeping Stock ALL her little websites are causes that have already been lost. If memory serves defaced ballot papers got more votes in Epsom.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. TheContrarian (1,086 comments) says:

    “In the meantime – pull your head in – you’re REALLY getting boring………………………”

    Ha, Penny calling someone else boring?
    That’s hilarious

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    So apparently, calling for someone to be held accountable is boring …

    … must remember that the next time Penny demands that John Banks and Don Brash be held to account, as she sees it …

    .. and accuses the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority and the Director of the Serious Fraud Office of not doing their job – because they refused to ‘hold them to account’ in Penny’s ‘considered opinion’ …

    Hey Penny – pull your head in, you’re REALLY boring!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    iMP (737) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    The photographer’s “crime” (for which she was fined more than US $7000) was simply to decline to take on a commercial job, for whatever reason.

    No, the fact that you cite it as “whatever reason” shows that you do not understand the issue. It is a very specific reason that it is not tolerated: because it is unlawful discrimination. People may refuse commercial services for many number of reasons. There are, however, specific grounds upon which they are not allowed to discriminate.

    The case says, that you are NOT FREE to refuse, which is coercion based on ideology.

    The lesbians did not like what she thought, so they sued her, because they felt hurt….and did a whole lot of REAL hurt to the photographer. $7000 of hurt. Why couldn’t they just “live and let live.”

    And if the photographer refused service on the basis of race? Is that acceptable? Is prohibiting that “coercion based on ideology”? Seems like it would be. What’s the difference?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. iMP (2,387 comments) says:

    A good run down of Obama’s Nomination speech is up already, at http://conzervative.wordpress.com. Interesting pitch by Obama.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Viking2 (11,488 comments) says:

    Harawira owes Maori Party an apology – Key

    Friday, 7, Sep, 2012 2:34PM

    The Prime Minister is calling comments made by Mana Party leader Hone Harawira about the Maori Party offensive.

    Mr Harawira called the MPs John Keyâs house niggers on his Facebook page.

    Speaking in Vladivostok, Mr Key says Mr Harawira’s latest outburst is wrong.

    “Frankly, I find them offensive about my coalition partners. Secondly, I think New Zealanders would find that term offensive. And I know it’s Hone Harawira being Hone Harawira but frankly I think he owes them an apology.

    HERE’S THE THING SEE JOHN
    Most of us couldn’t care less what one black calls another. They are mostly racist pigs who deserve one another.
    we would rather you manned up and told both lots to go away and stop rorting the taxpayers and killing their kids.

    But being a right socialist and an appeaser you won’t and so it will go on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    And if the photographer refused service on the basis of race? Is that acceptable? Is prohibiting that “coercion based on ideology”? Seems like it would be. What’s the difference?

    Weihana, sorry to say, but for you to make this comparison shows that you do not understand the issue. I would like to think that most people understand the difference between actions that are based on race and actions that are based on morals or ethics.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Griff (7,808 comments) says:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/09/general_debate_7_september_2012.html#comment-1019167
    Science 1 nutters 0
    And a big pile of shite on the face of the science denial disinformation trust
    who would like to bet costs are never paid

    A High Court ruling released today by Justice Geoffrey Venning said the New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust had not succeeded in any of its challenges against Niwa. justice Venning also ruled the trust had to pay Niwa costs

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Ummm … Griff, your link points to “TheContrarian” talking about the irony of Penny Bright calling someone else boring.

    At least the so-called nutters can usually get the link correct …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    “As I said, seeing as how this group claimed to represent everyone on Kiwiblog (remember, they claimed ‘We are the 99%’)”

    Actually graham, I’m part of the 1%.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Griff (7,808 comments) says:

    Climate change denial nutdom has its day in court and loses take 3
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10832396

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Weihana (4,557 comments) says:

    graham (1,204) Says:
    September 7th, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    And if the photographer refused service on the basis of race? Is that acceptable? Is prohibiting that “coercion based on ideology”? Seems like it would be. What’s the difference?

    Weihana, sorry to say, but for you to make this comparison shows that you do not understand the issue. I would like to think that most people understand the difference between actions that are based on race and actions that are based on morals or ethics.

    No I think I understand well enough. Your reasoning is arbitrary. Racism is an ethical and moral belief as much as any other. The fact that you disagree with it and assert (without justification) that it is “different” to any other ethical belief is merely evidence of your inability to mount a coherent argument.

    Moral and ethical beliefs are not merely what you deem is moral and ethical, or some range of values which you deem acceptable to hold. The KKK has its own morals. Al Qaeda has its own morals. NAMBLA has its own morals. None of these groups get to opt out of law by virtue of subjective ethical opinions.

    The fact the “most people” have some sort of muddled arbitrary understanding does not make for a convincing argument to distinguish between one type of discrimination and another. It is argumentum ad populum and fallacious.

    Under law there are various grounds of prohibited discrimination including race, religion and sexual orientation. It matters not what your personal subjective ethical beliefs are, you generally are not allowed to discriminate on that basis.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. iMP (2,387 comments) says:

    OMG Cardinal of New York Arch Bishop Dolan just closed the DNC but excoriated the Democrats in prayer on euthanasia, abortion and same-sex marriage. OUCH. That’s what happens if you leave God out of the Platform and then re-insert Him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    WRT to griff’s “nutjobs” being blown out of court, I still puzzle at this statement the Herald promotes as factual:

    Records from Niwa showed a national warming trend of almost 1 degree Celsius in the last century.

    The figure, which was almost 50 per cent above the global average for the period, was unreliable, the trust says.

    Why would you quote again such rubbish from the discredited party?

    Look here:

    http://berkeleyearth.org/results-summary/

    This is the project set up and funded by outright deniers and here is it’s considered finding:

    Berkeley Earth has just released analysis of land-surface temperature records going back 250 years, about 100 years further than previous studies. The analysis shows that the rise in average world land temperature globe is approximately 1.5 degrees C in the past 250 years, and about 0.9 degrees in the past 50 years.

    Now call me arithmetically challenged, but for the life of me I cannot get a 50% anomaly by comparing 1.0 with 0.9.

    I suspect that the “nut jobs” who challenged NIWA in court have actually confused NIWA’s land surface record with the global average record, which includes the much lower rise of sea surface temperatures. But couldn’t the Herald have checked out such an obviously startling claim?

    I guess the Herald is morphing into Fox News where fact-checking is treated with contempt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    Keeping Stock (2.19pm):

    Dear Penny,
    At the risk of repeating myself, who is “Dodgy John”? And where has he gone?

    A good question…

    I think ‘Penny Not-So’ is referring to a hooker she once knew and many moons ago, someone did a bolt without settling the bill. I hear that the bloke concerned [aka Dodgy John] was last seen hopping over a fence near the old Montana bottling facility in Glen Innes – apparently, Penny is off there tomorrow to see if she can find him!

    Or maybe not…. :D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    I see Obama has doubled down on hope and change. Problem is, for him, his electorate is weary of all hope and no change. I doubt he’ll get much of a bump from the convention, unless it’s the bump out of his job by the white man!

    And although the polls so far show him winning the Electoral College vote, one has to factor in the furious gerrymandering by Republicans in crucial swing states.

    My feeling is that Romney will win and the dogs of war will be unleashed. War on women. War on the middle class. War on welfare recipients. War by the 0.01% against the rest! War on Iran, Syria, North Korea, even. The Middle East should be preparing to shed more blood as the Western imperialists seek to boost their economies with war by remote control. No grunts to die this time around, just the average civilian in the street for the sin of, well, being the average citizen in the street. Bombs away!

    On the other hand, maybe Mitt will return to the acceptably moderate Mitt who once ruled liberal Massachusetts.

    Regardless, there is hope in the future of the USA, as evidenced by the fracas at the DNC over God and Jerusalem. The reinstatement vote was gerrymandered through against a clear no vote. This shows the Democratic party is turning brown and flexing its new muscles. Israel should get its house in order while it has the time or it will definitely go the way of white South Africa..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Reid (16,509 comments) says:

    On the other hand, maybe Mitt will return to the acceptably moderate Mitt who once ruled liberal Massachusetts.

    No chance Luc. Your para above that is correct. But that will happen under Obama as well.

    Israel should get its house in order while it has the time or it will definitely go the way of white South Africa..

    No chance of that either Luc. Don’t you know that AIPAC dominates the re-election public donation and a huge percent of corporate funding for candidates from both the Democrats and the Republicans in both Houses? If a candidate isn’t sufficiently pro-Israel why they simply garner resources from their Jewish base and fund the opposition candidate next time round, all the while vigorously using their extensive media resources to condemn the incumbent both blatantly and subtly for being “anti-Semetic.” That’s how it’s worked for decades. Nothings changed, unless you’ve detected a trend I haven’t noticed.

    unless it’s the bump out of his job by the white man!

    And that’s the danger because, rumours for a year or so are, Obama will play the race card if things don’t work out for him as the campaign gets underway. I really hope that proves to be wrong, and maybe it is, because all indicators are that as you say, the electorate has had a gutsful of the constantly vacationing, do nothing, lazy and arrogant Indonesian and the people who select and then manage the “President” wouldn’t have positioned him like that unless they wanted him to lose. But hey, maybe Obama will prove to be a bit more than a house nigger and surprise his handlers, and then all hell will break loose, in America.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Reid (16,509 comments) says:

    Luc in reference to your 0.001%, did you have these people in mind?

    The sheer size of the cash pile sitting out of reach of tax authorities is so great that it suggests standard measures of inequality radically underestimate the true gap between rich and poor. According to Henry’s calculations, £6.3tn of assets is owned by only 92,000 people, or 0.001% of the world’s population – a tiny class of the mega-rich who have more in common with each other than those at the bottom of the income scale in their own societies.

    “These estimates reveal a staggering failure: inequality is much, much worse than official statistics show, but politicians are still relying on trickle-down to transfer wealth to poorer people,” said John Christensen of the Tax Justice Network. “People on the street have no illusions about how unfair the situation has become.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Fletch (6,408 comments) says:

    Luc, what “war on women”?
    It’s just a made-up leftist narrative

    The only war on women is that perpetrated by Obama.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Viking2 (11,488 comments) says:

    5:48PM Friday Sep 07, 2012

    THE NSW Treasurer, Mike Baird, is proposing a dramatic lowering of the GST-free threshold for goods bought online from overseas retailers in a move that would raise hundreds of millions of dollars in extra tax.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/online-shopping-targeted-in-proposed-gst-changes-20120906-25hff.html#ixzz25lhYHiKu

    LOng overdue here as well.
    Pete when is your mate Dunne going to get to grips with this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. nasska (11,580 comments) says:

    Q. How do you get a South Auckland solo mother into
    your bedroom?

    A. Grease her hips and push.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Viking2 (11,488 comments) says:

    China’s richest has dairy designs on South West

    Date
    September 7, 2012 – 10:44AM

    Zong Quinghou has indicated previously that his group, Hangzhou Wahaha, wants to spend more than $200 million on milk production and processing in WA.

    Zong Quinghou has indicated previously that his group, Hangzhou Wahaha, wants to spend more than $200 million on milk production and processing in WA. Photo: Bloomberg

    Mainland China’s richest person is looking to set up a dairy plant in Busselton.

    Zong Quinghou, who’s wealth is reportedly more than double previous estimates of $11 billion putting his net worth at $21.6 billion according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, is chairman of the group looking to establish a powdered milk plant in WA to supply China.

    He is looking at Busselton and a number of other locations. The discussions we had are confidential at this stage.

    The project would involve thousands of cows and initially could have a big spinoff for local dairy producers.

    It is understood that if the project goes ahead Mr Zong’s group would look at establishing their own dairy farm in the region.
    Advertisement

    Mr Zong has indicated previously that his group, Hangzhou Wahaha, wants to spend more t

    Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/chinas-richest-has-dairy-designs-on-south-west-20120906-25hg4.html#ixzz25lkQrNp4

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Reid (16,509 comments) says:

    Excellent comment on UAVs – what the video at the bottom.

    http://www.zengardner.com/warlords-in-drone-frenzy-global-rollout-planned/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. wat dabney (3,775 comments) says:

    I suspect that the “nut jobs” who challenged NIWA in court have actually confused NIWA’s land surface record with the global average record, which includes the much lower rise of sea surface temperatures. But couldn’t the Herald have checked out such an obviously startling claim?

    Why don’t you check out your lazy claim that the ‘nut jobs’ claim was confused?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    Penny not so bright. Please do not tell me you are associating with Murray Donald Horton from PYM. Progressive Youth movement. I thought they were still banged up from the 1970s. You are judged by your friends and associates that you keep. Suggest you join “find a friend.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Nostalgia-NZ (5,220 comments) says:

    RF, obviously you are experienced in such matters, when did you get banged up most recently?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    I was the banger not the banged up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Reid (16,509 comments) says:

    http://www.ahealedplanet.net/home.htm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    An assessment of the Messiah’s speech: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/06/krauthammer_on_obama_one_of_the_emptiest_speeches_i_have_ever_heard.html

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