Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Rain on his parade

298 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last

  • Morgan Nichol,

    Dylan: All that fuss over what was really only a few tits, and none that were especially fantastic (at least by my measure).

    This really isn't the point.

    Grant: You think authority needs to be constantly questioned and watched very carefully indeed. Wouldn't that make the people doing the watching and questioning either:
    A) the real source of authority, or
    B) a bunch of loser, cry-baby wannabes?

    Have you actually heard of democracy? Who do you think a country is run for? The government or the citizens they're elected to represent?

    I really hope you're being wilfully obtuse, and only pretending not to understand this point.

    You then go on to suggesting that you would be justified in defying a law if you saw fit. So I guess actively opposing established law is only acceptable if you do it. Interesting set of .. *ahem* .. standards you have there, mate.

    And I was clear about the case in which that would be appropriate - in defense of democracy, which I consider a fundamental human right. I was also clear that I didn't think this was necessary in New Zealand.

    You think you don't need to be told how to live or what to think. And you think that's a reason to have a constitution? What is the constitution going to do? Not tell you how you can act?

    The constitution is to protect our rights, to help guide the hand of our elected representatives between elections, and to help our courts do away with unjust legislation that manages to get through.

    It's another safeguard against the poorly thought through kneejerk legislation that tends to win short term favour in the public eye.

    Allow me to clue you in. EVERYBODY, not just you, has the capacity to think just as they please. Why do you have such a problem with people who suggest courses of action that you do not agree with?

    I don't mind suggestions. The members of our council are free to suggest anything they like. What they're not free to do is: anything they like.

    A few things I expect to see from the council: clean streets, nice parks (which is more of a regional than city council issue), rubbish collection, dog control, parking management, community venues, and such.

    None of these are issues that require any moral judgement.

    You think you won? All you did was rant without coherency or any semblence of relevance.

    Did you know that the parade went ahead? Yeah. That's how I won.

    Protestors got a pretty fair whack of media coverage as well, which is another way I won.

    Everyone got their say - not their way - which is fair.

    You also would like to see current laws adjusted. So I guess, once again, that it only when you are unhappy with the law that anything has to be done or said. How about you step off your pedestal and find a moral standing you can defend without hypocrisy?

    Which law did I want to have changed? Are you talking about my desire for a constitution? That would really be about protecting me (and you) from any potentially unjust legislation coming down the pike in the future.

    Guaranteeing more firmly such trivial things as freedom of association, freedom of (and from) religion, due process, and so on.

    If you believe you've caught me being hypocritical, tell me how. If it's just nuance that your... remarkable... mind... fails to grasp, then I'll be delighted to have another laugh at your expense.

    Ian: But isn't there a distinction between Pornography (implies violence etc) and Erotica.

    I don't think pornography implies violence. It is an umbrella term that includes all sexual writing and imagery. This is of course bound to include some types of explicit material that depict violence. (Unless you believe that all sex is violence?)

    There's been a bit of an uptick in rough play stuff in the last few years. (Something I find a bit distasteful.) But I think the ratio is still overwhelmingly in favour of "the same stuff you get up to in your own home" variety.

    Only with better tans and less body hair.

    Auckland CBD • Since Nov 2006 • 314 posts Report Reply

  • rodgerd,

    It is one of those relatively rare occasions when I am entirely in agreement with Craig: 'pornography' is sexually explicit material we wish to sigmatise, and 'erotica' is that we approve of.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 512 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    On the whole "authority" question, there was an interesting "letters to the editor" comment in Granny today, to the effect that the ACC actually cannot legally ban a march because to do so is to interfere with the right to freedom of movement on "the Queen's Highway". The LttE cited to an incident around the Police seeking to prevent University of Auckland's capping parades back in the 50s because they were unhappy with the way they'd been turning out (shades of the Undy 500, innit), and going to the Council. The Council refused permission, but those bloody students went and did it anyway, arrests ensued, and the charges were overturned on the basis of what sounds remarkably like "freedom of movement/assembly" grounds.

    I really can't be arsed hunting through the law journals (and my legal search foo isn't that flash) to try and find actual cites, but it's either true or a very, very plausible and considered load of bullshit.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Danielle,

    Only with better tans and less body hair.

    And more pina colada mix.

    Charo World. Cuchi-cuchi!… • Since Nov 2006 • 3828 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    Are you talking about my desire for a constitution? That would really be about protecting me (and you) from any potentially unjust legislation coming down the pike in the future.

    Guaranteeing more firmly such trivial things as freedom of association, freedom of (and from) religion, due process, and so on.

    Just to pick, here, it's not a constitution that would ensure such protections. A constitution that didn't overturn parliamentary sovereignty would put us in no better a situation than we have now. What's required, and it doesn't need a constitution to achieve it, is for the NZ Bill of Rights Act to be made supreme legislation. Remove s4, which is what allows other legislation to override the provisions of NZBORA, and it's done, maybe with a replacement section to the effect that the entire Act is entrenched legislation and cannot be modified (including the entrenchment section) without a 75% majority of Parliament.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Morgan Nichol,

    Matthew, if that's the best way to achieve the it, then I'm all for it. I'm not especially attached to the name 'constitution' - I'm not a lawyer and probably using the word as shorthand as much as anything.

    Danielle: And more pina colada mix.

    Link plz, thx. :)

    Auckland CBD • Since Nov 2006 • 314 posts Report Reply

  • Morgan Nichol,

    "achieve the it" is so awesome I'm going to pretend it was intentional.

    Auckland CBD • Since Nov 2006 • 314 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    If you do not think a porn producer organising porn stars to ride topless down the main street in Auckland is pornography then you're ... well .. you're just lost.

    If what happened yesterday qualifies as porn, then they're really charging way too much for it. The little I saw on the TV looked like a topless Santa parade.

    And when did coffee become the currency of induction, that's what I want to know. :)

    I believe the currency is still the toaster oven. Though my understanding is that it goes to the converter, not the convertee.

    Ah I see that Craig has got that sorted however.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Peter Darlington,

    Only with better tans and less body hair.

    And more pina colada mix.

    And a worse soundtrack.

    Nelson • Since Nov 2006 • 949 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward,

    right to freedom of movement on "the Queen's Highway"

    What sort of damage did those tracked tanks do to said Queens Highway? I would have thought those things would have a pretty serious maintenance impact...


    And yes, I briefly paused to consider the interesting fact that a parade of topless women on Queen St engenders more thought from me on morality-through-voted-representation, commercial-event association and asphalt maintenance as opposed to said topless women...
    Desensitised? Perhaps, but in a positive way I hope!

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1727 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    to do so is to interfere with the right to freedom of movement on "the Queen's Highway".

    And that's it isn't it. Any number of people can assemble wherever they way. If the number is small enough then the police might consider telling them to move or face charges of obstructing the road, but when the number gets large enough the police, to their credit, recognise the sense in managing traffic to allow the people to be safe, and the obstruction to clear itself as quickly as possible.

    Applying for a permit is really only asking for the council to assist with road closures and traffic management - not permission, because we inherently have that as part of our greater freedom to assemble.

    Queen Street is public property, any of us have every right to be there.

    What sort of damage did those tracked tanks do to said Queens Highway? I would have thought those things would have a pretty serious maintenance impact...

    The tanks are relatively light, and have special road tracks (rubberised). The larger surface area of the tracks probably actually results in less damage than would result from a truck, where the weight is spread across a smaller surface area.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 311 posts Report Reply

  • Dinah Dunavan,

    This could be one of the most replied to posts I've read in while. Interesting that. I haven't managed to read through all the replies so I apologise if this ODT opinion piece is already out there. I think it is worth reading.

    Dunedin • Since Jun 2008 • 186 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Dinah. Someone is about to blame me for the length :)

    In interstellar news...

    Morgan wants to know how he is a hypocrite.

    Morgan doesn't seem to want to respond to simple questions. Big surprise there. Morgan, one more time. If a group has the power to check and control laws made by a government made doesn't that make the group the higher authority?

    Morgan freely admits that he is justified in defying laws because he sees fit, but has the temerity to mock and ridicule others for doing the same. You're a hypocrite, Morgan.

    Morgan thinks that a different name for a bunch of laws will help our courts do away with unjust legislation that manages to get through. He thinks more laws with a different name are another safeguard against the poorly thought through kneejerk legislation that tends to win short term favour in the public eye. Morgan is deluded. :)

    Morgan thinks the council is not allowed any moral judgement.

    Morgan thinks he won because the parade went ahead. Were you riding or driving, mate?

    Morgan thinks everyone got their say - not their way - and that is fair. But one group got their way which necessitated the opposition. Morgan is a moron who doesn't understand that in a battle there needs to be a victor. And Morgan is a hypocrite because if it had been the council or the protesters that had won then he'd be crying foul like a stuck pig.

    Morgan thinks that laws he promotes are about protecting everyone, but doesn't understand that millions would rightly reject what he thinks is "just OK".

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Tony Judd,

    @Grant
    That is one of the most incoherant rants I've read in some time. Are you drunk?

    If a group has the power to check and control laws made by a government made doesn't that make the group the higher authority?

    What sort of dictatorship do you want to live in?
    In NZ the system of government is based on Democracy:

    Democracy is a system of government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and exercised directly by citizens. In modern times it has also been used to refer to a constitutional republic where the people have a voice through their elected representatives.

    The people are the higher authority. The government is a tool for achieving the people's aims. That's why elected officials are also known as representatives. They represent the people. You are probably getting representatives confused with rulers. Traditionally rulers did not have any checks on their power because it was thought that they had a divine mandate... Oh, wait, I see...

    Morgan thinks that a different name for a bunch of laws will help our courts do away with unjust legislation that manages to get through. He thinks more laws with a different name are another safeguard against the poorly thought through kneejerk legislation that tends to win short term favour in the public eye. Morgan is deluded. :)

    Morgan clearly doesn't understand that a theocracy is the only answer to all questions of government.

    Perth • Since Nov 2006 • 63 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    Morgan wants...
    Morgan doesn't...
    Morgan freely...
    Morgan thinks...
    Morgan thinks...
    Morgan thinks...
    Morgan thinks...
    Morgan thinks...

    Ooooh oh, do me next!!

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 311 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    Queen Street is public property, any of us have every right to be there.

    You'd think that was the case, and it's certainly the case in England, where there is a legal concept of a public right of way.

    However I'm not sure about NZ, and maybe Graeme Edgeler (sp?) has an opinion. I know Rotorua council were trying to trespass people out of "their" city centre, which implies that the streets are private property of the council, and we only use them at their discretion.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Tony. Thanks for backing me up. Perhaps you could explain things to Morgan.

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    If you don't quite understand Morgan's problem then read his post where he said authority needs to be constantly reviewed and checked. Now you are claiming that the population is the real authority. My point should be obvious...

    ... but then again, this is a liberal forum....

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Socrates,

    For a much nicer project looking at a healthy image of the womans body I recoomend...

    http://www.fiftywomen.com/

    Since Feb 2008 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • Socrates,

    Lets try that again. This project is a wonderful attempt to give a real look at the female form. I recommend looking at the page and tracking down the film.

    http://www.fiftywomen.com/

    Since Feb 2008 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    Ah, Dickster, all the debating skills of Whack-a-Mole

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • B Jones,

    Tempting as it may be, I've always found it's a whole lot easier to maintain the moral highground in a debate when you don't resort to making up silly versions of a person's name. It's one of the least appealing things about what passes for debate in that other popular blog.

    Grant's contributions have been facile, naive, disingenuous, incoherent and downright infuriating in their blithe dismissal of demonstrable facts, but they have mostly been superficially civil. And civility is one of the most appealing things about this place.

    There are better ways to deal with it, just sayin.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 976 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Calling someone facile, naive, disingenuous, incoherent, downright infuriating and superficially civil is considered civil?

    I think I prefer the inventive re-spellings of my name....

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Susan Snowdon,

    maintain(ing) the moral highground

    B Jones, what you said. Derogatory name calling never won any arguments, not since I was a teenager. (And come to think of it, didn't work much then either.) Scrupulous civility can be really infuriating to someone looking for a slanging match .

    Since Mar 2008 • 110 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    I love a good slanging match as much as the next guy, but being one of the bad guys here I consider myself more prone to being banned. Thus I prefer to restrict my discussions and descriptions to a limited set of responses. Now, if I could get some sort of immunity .. :think:

    :D

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.