Posts by Gee
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Thanks for this Emma. It's so strange to hear people dismiss it, now that it's been a year/6 months. There's definitely a feeling outside of NZ that we should be 'over it' by now, and that 'insurance will cover everything' that isn't loss of life. But so many people are still dealing with the day-to-day coping.
-
Great pics, David! I'm guessing Bob's having the time of his life in the stuff. Hope it's not too cold.
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Hell, I just want the one civil marriage..... So, could folks like Newt STFU now?
With you all the way on that one.
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Tansy,
Thanks for sharing that, Tansy. I now have a reply from one Central Christchurch candidate ready to share on the website once it's up. Hopefully, the other candidates will respond too....
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Just look at the numbers people, and it seems like a no-brainer to me that fewer people would dissolve their marriages if we reverted to a lengthy and very expensive process where you’re required to air all your spunk-stained linen in an open court. With details in the next day’s newspaper for all your friends and family (and your childrens’ school mates) to read, of course.
I know you're exaggerating here, but it seems to me that lengthy and expensive divorces would be hugely disadvantageous to everyone. Unless there's a clause in marriage which decrees that your spouse will never lie or change their belief system or grow into a different person(ality) or etc etc then all marriages have to have recourse to affordable divorce. Don't get me wrong, I'm married for life... but I thought I was for my first marriage, too. Being miserable for your foreseeable future or sticking it out and being legally bound to another person until you can afford to divorce isn't the same as sticking together through thick and thin (which is what I think you're aiming at in your post). And if we're looking for marriage equality for everyone, then that has to extend to all socio-economic groups for both marriage and divorce. The problem in the "lengthy and expensive process" days was often that the child-carer of the couple was not able to instigate a divorce financially. In fact, there's still an aspect of this in our current, cheaper, divorce systems.
(Yes, I do recognize that I am privileged with having the option to be married. But I live in Canada where marriage is available to everyone, so I'm not- as -privileged here. And I'm really pushing for the same equality in NZ.)
That said, you're right on the money here:
[P]eople who are really that concerned about “the fabric of society” and “the sanctity of marriage”, really should turn their attention to the real threat:
No-fault divorce (and that means the Catholic Church should stop handing out annulments to Kennedys and Nicole Kidman too).
-
Why aren't we saying, very loudly and publicly, you know what? Yous were wrong about Homosexual Law Reform. Yous were wrong about Civil Unions. The sky didn't fall. In fact, nothing bad happened at all. You're also wrong about same-sex marriage. Our current marriage law is unjust, it's unfair, it's discriminatory and it needs to change.
+1.
Time for a Respectable Demure Legally-Bound-People Stroll perhaps?I'm not website-clever, but it strikes me there's a place for a blog/site devoted to sharing feedback from candidates across the country on this issue....
-
Hard News: The Orcon Great Blend 2011 in…, in reply to Jackie Clark,
I just think the "ladies-a-plate" tradition (and modernising it, of course, to just everyone bringing a plate) is a lovely one. Community spirit and all that that implies.
Absolutely!
Sorry for the sidetrack, got sucked in with the saying ('fraid that's my weakness!).
Anyway, if I could be in Aucks, I would absolutely be bringing a plate to this too...
-
Hard News: The Orcon Great Blend 2011 in…, in reply to Jackie Clark,
As I understand it, it was " Gents half-a-crown, ladies a plate”.
I'd never heard that before! Thanks for the link! I wonder if the "men a crate" is a Kiwi twist on it? I heard it as a common phrase used by older family friends and whanau in the 70s and 80s (though often talking about the 50s and 60s).... Curious....
(sorry for being OT)
-
Hard News: The Orcon Great Blend 2011 in…, in reply to Jackie Clark,
but I think you'll find, smarty arse, that in the days when that particular phrase was popular, men didn't bring food, they brought money, and their fine, manly selves.
I thought it was
"Ladies a plate, men a crate" ? -
Southerly: Tower Insurance Have Some Bad…, in reply to rcg25,
however one comment that the financial advisor made in the second interview - that insurance wasn't about being 'better off' afterwards. As if any of us could possibly be 'better off' than we were before September!
I thought the point of insurance, particularly total replacement insurance, paid over years and years at well above the book price policy premiums, was to at least not be worse off, particularly when you are already dealing with everything else that comes with any insurance event, let alone nearly 8000 aftershocks, no water for 9+ months, etc., etc.
My thoughts to David + family and everyone else on this thread who is going through this. Good luck and best wishes for getting the companies to play fair.