Smacking Sue Bradford
I admire Sue Bradford, she is an incredibly intelligent woman who has tirelessly fought for those who are weaker, her anti-smacking law is the exact type of symbolic legislation required for a country with one of the worst child abuse statistics on record within the developed world.
What has staggered me is the level of contempt those on the opposite side of this debate hold her in, so much so that she has now been threatened on the cyfs blog site. I supported the CYFs blogsite because of the totalitarian nature CYFs has towards investigating any complaints against it, leaving many parents frustrated and angry, but to now use the site to post violence against a person trying to ban violence is simply an intellectual flip flop too far, and I understand why you have lost your kids.
Sue inspires such hatred because of her broad working class accent and her membership to the Greens, to her enemies she represents all that they hate and write off as ‘politically correct’. One has to wonder at how much of this has been whipped up by the National Party MP, Chester Borrows who has told every reporter he can huff and puff on that Sue’s legislation will make criminals out of ordinary NZ parents – this is total, inflammatory bullshit and I do wonder how Chester sleeps hearing about death threats to Sue.
Let’s be very clear here NO PARENT WILL BE ARRESTED FOR GIVING A SLIGHT SMACK ON THE BUM!!!!!!!!!!! For the love of God, that isn’t what this is about, it is a statement to the country that we don’t beat our kids anymore and that there isn’t a defense to hit your kids, of course children should be disciplined, we all agree and know that children should be disciplined – but discipline doesn’t mean you should hit kids, there are better and more effective ways to discipline your children and if you really need a crash course on it, watch those nanny shows on TV.
I’ve heard the dumbest things come out of peoples mouth over this smacking issue, the stupidest has to be “what if my child was going to touch a power plug and I hit its hand, I’m going to go to jail” …….. how could anyone really ask that question and expect serious response? It is inane, of course no parent would ever be charged under such circumstances, there is more chance of America invading NZ than that scenario ever getting to Court!
The other eye roller is 'The Government is telling us what to do in our homes'! The Government also passed domestic violence laws that stopped you beating your wife in your home as well, I start to get the feeling that these are the very same people who violently oppossed Civil Unions, Homosexual discrimination and prostitution law reform - it is the fury of the provinces we can hear, that section of NZ community still smarting from the National Party loss who believe NZ has morally regressed mixed in with a disgruntled generation of males living in the power sharing shadow of MMP who believe political correctness has robbed them of machismo.
A legitimate comeback though is will this really change our appalling child abuse figures, and the answer to that is on its own, this legislation won’t be able to do that, but combined with other efforts, yes we can start changing the environment and start moving towards a violence free society.
What I don’t get is that if I hit my mate, it’s assault, if I had a kid and hit that, I’m safe – how come the weakest members of society get LESS protection?
Bradford braces for Smacking Bill battle
Green MP Sue Bradford believes her anti-smacking bill will become law, but by a razor-thin majority. The bill easily passed its second reading in Parliament last night, by 70 to 51. And it looks likely to pass its third reading, in about three weeks, when it is expected to received 63 votes. It needs 61 votes to pass. The bill would repeal section 59 of the Crimes Act, which gives parents the right to use reasonable force to discipline their children. Several MPs voted for the bill last night only so they could then support a proposed amendment by National MP Chester Borrows that would define reasonable force. Six National MPs who voted for Ms Bradford's bill last night are expected to be told by party whips to support Mr Borrows' amendment, although some of those MPs are believed to be strongly opposed to section 59. Two New Zealand First MPs also supported Ms Bradford's bill so they could then vote for the Borrows amendment. If those MPs and all those who opposed Ms Bradford's bill last night voted for the Borrows amendment, it would have 59 votes - not enough for it to be passed, but enough to ensure three weeks of lobbying before the bill returns to Parliament.