Comments on: “We have got a problem with Maori”

By: don

don — Thu, 14 May 2009 06:12:36 +0000

>So does she think that family issues are all down to karma? That would bode well!

Buddhism, like most beliefs, can be used to justify any action. Could be abusive parents are a punishment for the bad deeds of a former life …

By: Matty Smith

Matty Smith — Wed, 13 May 2009 15:28:22 +0000

Less obvious, but it’s also worth noting that Pilbrow is the marketing manager for the rather kooky ‘Radio Rhema’, which is most definitely a conservative Christian station.

By: Ari

Ari — Tue, 12 May 2009 10:50:10 +0000

Swinger is the right term for Dunne on so many levels.

By: Ari

Ari — Tue, 12 May 2009 10:45:42 +0000

I’m trying to say that no organisation can be so inherently evil as to automatically corrupt all of its members to its most extreme views, even when the philosophy behind that organisation is actively harmful.

The philosophy behind the catholic church has elements of male-centred heirarchy and the abusiveness associated therewith, authoritarianism, sexual repression, normativeness and the hatred associated therewith including homobigotry and transphobia and colonialism and general exclusiveness. Each one of these things are harmful on their own, yet somehow there are many church members who don’t believe in these things and who remain dedicated catholics while still not buying in.

As an organisation I dislike the catholic church, but many of its members and sub-organisations are great.

By: Lew

Lew — Tue, 12 May 2009 08:49:57 +0000

Jared, don’t try the false equivocation line. It’s one thing to criticise some religions on their stated beliefs and endorsed actions and quite another to ascribe innate characteristics to an ethnic group and then criticise members of that group on those grounds. Commenters have made their grounds for distrusting conservative christians, viz, that they tend to enforce their beliefs upon others and generally interfere in what ought to be mostly secular government (although NZ isn’t, as some people have claimed, a secular state, no party currently in government has a mandate for a religious agenda, having not campaigned on it).

By: Tigger

Tigger — Tue, 12 May 2009 08:32:21 +0000

Just viewed the interview. She closes by bashing anyone who is trying to raise a family that doesn’t consist of ‘Mum AND Dad’. So I guess solo parents are on her hit list along with gay parents.

By: illuminatedtiger

illuminatedtiger — Tue, 12 May 2009 08:20:15 +0000

And so National’s purge of the public service begins, replacing brains with bombshells.

By: Tigger

Tigger — Tue, 12 May 2009 08:09:22 +0000

So she’s bashing the gays now? Hell woman, we gave you those fashions you’re so fond of – don’t start tossing crap our way or there’ll be no more earrings for you!

By: Jared

Jared — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:39:06 +0000

If its ok to criticise religion does the standard condone racism? Where do you draw the line?

By: Lew

Lew — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:38:28 +0000

Jared, the OP does judge Rankin on her actions. It’s only certain fools among the commentariat who’ve made poor assumptions about her religious beliefs.

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:23:53 +0000

Jared, I think the argument is that, the appointment degrades the position. Degrading the appointment?

And there is no more any “invoking stereoptypical (sic) assumptions of “religious’ views.” than there is invoking stereotypical assumptions of political views.

We are talking of particular religious beliefs as we would particular political views. Nothing wrong with reasonable inference is there?

BTW Rankin’s little closing spat on Close Up claiming that a culture exists whereby families of heterosexual couples have been ghettoised and are somehow unmentionable is, I reckon, a nice sickening pointer of things to come.

Family Values meets Families Commission.

By: Jared

Jared — Tue, 12 May 2009 06:47:24 +0000

This has to be the dirtiest and lowest the Standard has dropped to in quite some time, degrading the appointment by invoking stereoptypical assumptions of “religious” views. Judge her for her actions, not her personal beliefs.

By: Jared

Jared — Tue, 12 May 2009 06:31:17 +0000

She doesn’t advocate Child Abuse, she abhores the act. Her position is that parents shouldn’t fear prosecution for correcting a childs misbehaviour. There is a distinct difference between a correction and a beating/

By: ak

ak — Tue, 12 May 2009 05:59:02 +0000

Hear hear Rex: the culture this creature inspired in WINZ and the harm and misery thus inflicted on the most vulnerable was vast and not forgotten – even after a decade of attempts to excise her evil fingerprints from the system.

This is a massive mistake from NACT (so watch the media bury it with haste) – and nothing more than a blatant pay-off to a vile, despised, talentless tory shriek.

By: Anita

Anita — Tue, 12 May 2009 05:53:07 +0000

A very quick check says that at least two of the current families commissioners are fathers. It could be more, splashing ones family all over the internet is not compulsory.