But in?

Even if no parent is invesatigated, let alone charged following light smacking.

Even if CYFS never consider taking a child from a family because of this bill, and none of the other doomsday scenarios come close?

Whatever one thinks is the rationale behind this bill, it is an anti-smacking bill.

I'll just restate Grant's point in his preface in different language.

The Crimes Bill was the anti-smacking bill, because that's the law that made it assault and illegal. There's nothing in current law which allows smacking,?

There are many things this bill can be accurately called – and the positive parenting bill?

and while I could have dropped in an "and" between neo-conservative and religious right, the links and?

Remove the pseudo-academic verbiage, I really have to wonder whether there are too many people on both the left and the right who view politics as (to paraphrase the late French political philosopher Jean-Francois Revel) a secular religion, with it's own pantheon of unquestionable dogma, saints and devils, and?

Nah, I think that the neocons (which I think of as free-market hawks with an imperialist bent) AND the fundies have both been duped by a rather smaller group who believe in nothing but the party,?

who parallels neocons in NZ

umm, take another look at The Hollow Men

the neocons are cynically exploiting the Christian vote

Wasn't it Strauss that came up with the idea of using religion to keep the population in line and distraction them. He was jewish and didn't care what religion was used. He had issue with letting the masses have a say on?

check out this from pro-smackers Friend of Family NZ
http://www.pureintimacy.org/gr/homosexuality/a0000061.cfm

or this from Family First

i would've thought after his '40 Below?

Plato, dude.

But yes, the Straussian influence on the neocons has been remarked.

yes but in a secular society we now have corporate sponsored Sport to do that

Now, I figure progressives are always going to work under a disadvantage because of the policies?

/coughs, produces megaphone:

NO ex-CUSE for CHILD ab-USE!

You're welcome.

Plato, dude

Yeah you got me, I was only thinking of modern thinkers and mentioning Strauss, since he is considered the granddaddy of neocons.

As for the right here, they should have had a bit of practice fighting bills (civil union, prostitution etc). They were bound to figure out an?

I would love to see some polls from a few months ago to provide some evidence for or against that.

Personally I think it's fairly obvious that there is a disconnection between the stated aims of the bill's advocates and the language?

Back?

Personally I think it's fairly obvious that there is a disconnection between the stated aims of the bill's advocates and the language of the bill, and you don't need to be a member of "the right" to be concerned about that.

Thankyou thankyou thankyou.
Thats what I've been trying to?

Personally I think it's fairly obvious that there is a disconnection between the stated aims of the bill's advocates and the language of the bill, and you don't need to be a member of "the right" to be concerned about that.

Yes, but also remember the bill's advocates, didn't write?

Grant:

Remove the pseudo-academic verbiage

Am I the only person reading this and thinking "Pot calling kettle, come in kettle"?

Craig, I like & appreciate that you're prepared to voice an opposing opinion in many of the discussions on Public Address, though I often find myself struggling more with?

For someone professing concern with language you seem to be remarkably loose about conflating the relgious right with the neoconservative movement.

How ironic considering the success the neocons have had in doing exactly that.

It is about people and how they live together. Government cannot bestow identity, inspire hope or secure belonging; it cannot shape character or show love. These things, which are vital for human flourishing, are forged and sustained?

I like & appreciate that you're prepared to voice an opposing opinion in many of the discussions on Public Address, though I often find myself struggling more with your turn of phrase, than the ideas you're expressing.

I've heard that possessing a Fine Mind is like owning a Ferrari. While everyday?

I made the mistake of reading Maxim's opening blurb on Social Justice

We live right by Middleton Grange, a private religious school which is the Maxim Institute's fourth biggest funder. One the aims for the school in their prospectus is:

To develop confidence in, and the ability to, communicate effectively.?

Heh... I'll confess my prose would often be improved by a good thrashing with a rolled up copy of Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. (Except it's far too slim to smack any sense into a skull thick as mine.)

I'll simply take my licks, and defer to?

If you simply google "Strauss neoconservative" you will find a?

Fair enough, if you feel I've made a crive-by accusation of intellectual charlatanism. At the risk of being sent back to Pseud's Corner :), it's pretty heavily contested just how big an influence a dense and highly abstract political philosopher?

on the power of framing though, anybody willing to suggest that coining it the 'Anti-Smacking' bill has had no effect on the discussion and people's understanding of the issues? really?

To be quite frank, I think the bill is explicitly 'anti-smacking' and I don't know why we've really had this semantic shell game being run by supporters of the repeal of Section 59 of the Crimes Act. I think you've just got to read the comments and blog posts?

anybody willing to suggest that coining it the 'Anti-Smacking' bill has had no effect on the discussion and people's understanding of the issues?

It helped to clarify things. But seriously, that's my understanding of what the bill intends. Otherwise why would there be the issue of police discretion over prosecuting?

To develop confidence in, and the ability to, communicate effectively.

Is it just me, or is that some really bad grammar?

To develop confidence in, and the ability to, communicate effectively.

Is it just me, or is that some really bad grammar?

That is some deeply, satisfyingly bad grammar. That kind of irony is especially pleasant.

Neil. The other day my nine year old daughter was playing in the park down?

it's been more than a hundred years since smacking your kid was made illegal in nz. but oddly enough?

I've never found any "research" from Maxim to be particularly credible but this is worth reading. The conclusion that there's always a trade-off between Equality and Liberty is not exactly news and?

Firstly the methodological problems of an internet survey run deep. Given this is Maxim I have considerable doubts as to the identity of who actually completed the survey. Secondly?

Given this is Maxim I have considerable doubts as to the identity of who actually completed the survey.

Given this is Maxim, I have considerable doubts about pretty much everything to do with it.

I think the "research report" is a load of crap.

I think your critique is unconvincing.

Maxim have regularly produced complete crap but this actually is an interesting piece of research. It's worth dealing with the issues it raises rather than complain that conservatives are stealing liberal's words.

I think?

I find it equally nauseating when people who are fundamentally illiberal pretend a liberal face

Bingo.

as a gay man with a sense of history, I know the fight for homosexual law reform began long before Fran Wilde put the Homosexual Law Reform Bill into the member's ballot. It was?

Firstly the methodological problems of an internet survey run deep

And here's where I get pissed with the media... too much credence is given to the tag "research" by the media. A webpage, cute corporate logo and bodgy survey appear to be sufficient to elevate what would otherwise be soapbox?

Actually, it's rather funny how many prominent abolitionists, suffragettes and folks in the US civil rights movement would probably be derided nowadays as Bible-thumping Jesus freaks who should STFU with all the God crap. :)

sure Craig. the fundy church groups supporting National's opposition to s59 taking away their god given right to hit their kids are all really big time social justice types. (unless?

Actually, it's rather funny how many prominent abolitionists, suffragettes and folks in the US civil rights movement would probably be derided nowadays as Bible-thumping Jesus freaks who should STFU with all the God crap.

Craig, I doubt it. They were from a long and honourable line of Christian social democrats.?