Attack a Labour cabinet minister and Helen attacks you right back.
It was pro-smacking group Family First who released the news that David Cunliffe (AKA, "Silent T") gave his child a light smack on the hand at the LynnMall shopping centre in Auckland on Saturday. And last night it was Helen Clark telling TV news that this is an "extremist organisation" making a "vexatious complaint."
Doesn't alter the nature of the complaint, does it.
And isn't "extremist" dangerously close to "not mainstream"?
UPDATE: Nothing like creating another scapegoat, is there.
6 comments:
On TRN yesterday morning, she also called FF 'fundamentalist'.
They've called her bluff and she doesn't like it one bit.
Family First are the same ultra Christian organisation who are lobbying to ban BZP.
Smell the hypocrisy when they want to keep the government out of your home with smacking, where a kid is actually physically hit, yet want to send the govt in when you put something, consensually into your own body!
Well said.
I hear Mrs Cunliffe is devastated at the allegations. (And of course she should be). But this is what the legislation does. True or not, an allegation of this nature does have devastating consequences for the parents because it is in allegation of a criminal act which is in the public domain.
It is a shame, but this is a taste of what many parents will experience in the future. But rather than having the Prime Minister "supporting" the parents as in this case, the parents will have to contend with CYPS and the police.
Julian
Correct, Julian.
Mikee, I deplore FF's position concerning the banning of BZP as much as you do, but that is a separate issue. What they've highlighted here is the absurdity of the ramifications of that legislation, as well as what can happen to those concerned when the spectre of the state hangs overhead.
I'd feel a darn site sorrier for the Cunliffe's if he hadn't voted in favour of the bill.
It's turned around and bitten them on the bum. Well, rather an MP who voted for it, than any other parent.
Well said Julian when you said:
"It is a shame, but this is a taste of what many parents will experience in the future. But rather than having the Prime Minister "supporting" the parents as in this case, the parents will have to contend with CYPS and the police."
That is what most parents are concerned about. Why shouldn't an MP, who voted for this, be the test case in court? Why should it be an innocent family who are trying to do the best when training their children to be good citizens?
Well said Sus when you said:
"Well, rather an MP who voted for it, than any other parent."
My sentiments exactly!!!!!
Cunliffe the beater should immediately be incarcerated in a cell until the docket can be cleared for a full hearing in court. Hitting children is a serious matter these days. It must be investigated and punished for the purposes of the rectification of society.
Probabtion reports, social worker reports, victim assessment reports and psych assessment should be thoroughly and carefully prepared. This likely will take six or seven months. Meanwhile the children should be fostered out to a safe house in another city, well away from possible risk of further harm.
The extremist Cunliffe and his fundamentalist apologist wife should both be dressed in paper boiler suits, preferably orange in colour, and manacled (after all the risk is that again a child may be hit by one or both of them in the future- precautionary principle applies here). Let them prove their innocence (unlikely to be possible as there were witnesses who saw the incident first-hand). The court of public opprobrium must be allowed to run its course. Verdict by acclamation! All in favour of conviction shout out now! Socialist democracy at work indeed.
...and as for Helen (didn't she get called "the cadaver" recently on talk-back), at least she aint got any kiddies to beat.
Hitman
Post a Comment