Yesterday, John Key was telling journalists that he knew the secret agenda taper, Kees Keizer, was a Labour Party activist. In fact, he knew that wasn’t true, which is why he refused to name him.
The Herald has. And what it’s also reveled is a close relationship between Cameron Slater and the National Party research unit:
Mr Slater said he worked with the taxpayer-funded National Party research unit at identifying the spy by going through the Facebook sites of Young Labour members.
This is the same Cameron Slater who has:
Stalked John Minto and published a photo of his house
Alleged a Labour party candidate was a sexual pervert
Photoshopped the face of a 15 year old labour activist onto gay porn
There have been rumours that Slater has been feeding smears onto the internet on behalf of the National Party and has worked with their research unit to seed other information on their behalf. Now it looks increasingly likely this is true.
When John Key was asked about the tapes on last night’s news he talked about pigs in muck. It seems his team has been working with one of the biggest pigs of all.
Diddums.
Pot calling kettle black here boys. You are the masters of sleaze.
You can blame your looming defeat on the H-Fee stuff-up.
Got your CV updated yet?
Key looked pissed off last night about these tapes, and all the while he knew that is was nothing to do with labour.
john. that thing with john key and those dodgy money deals?
True. Cameron Slater is the Karl Rove of NZ politics. On a side note, and i hope i don’t get burnt for this but I need your help Standardista’s.
I’m putting together a mail out for all my politically apathetic friends on facebook, myspace, and in general in an attempt to get some leftie viral campaigning going.
Basically i’m trying to put everything together that smashes the rhetoric of national and provides some factual analysis that’s easy to understand - graphs, tables and all stuff would be good. I’m been through the Standard Line series, the New Zealand sux campaign, The campaign hub and am about to go grab some key policies from National, Labour and The Greens, but if anybody can point me to some other important facts and figures that might not be on this site that would be great. All work will be given the credit it deserves and of course i will be very grateful to all those who help.
Thanks in advance
Too late Vinsin.
Trying to turn it back on to the Nats eh. You guys really are in damage control today. If you read how he actually put it together, it’s not hard. We’re just too lazy. I like how you link him to the National party. Like anyone here isn’t linked to Labour.
Vinsin: Rubbish. Rove was a brilliant strategist who took Bush to the Presidency twice.
Slater as a retard who delights in petty smears.
I don’t approve of Rove’s tactics and wanted Bush to lose every time he was up for election, but there is no denying that Rove was incredibly intelligent, extremely motivated and highly adept at working the system to ensure a result. Slater is an intellectual worm in comparison.
Infused, if the turnout on saturday is small than that’ll suit National, if it’s large like i’m hoping it will be - and trying to encourage - then it will be another 3 years of a labour led government.
Get the feeling the ice you’re standing on could be cracking underneath you?
Vinsin - sounds like an election advertisement to me.
If that get’s out and someone start emailing your mail out round, then you could get into trouble.
Be careful.
Wellingtonian, will do, i’m only passing on information if that gets me in trouble then so be it.
Vanilla, you’re right i withdraw my comparison to Rove, i didn’t realise how much of a compliment that was until you pointed it out to me.
SP
“that thing with john key and those dodgy money deals?”
You know those people who say “art forger” and “speeder”? That’s you that is.
To paraphrasing from the “Mary Whitehouse Experience”.
Vinsin: Indeed. Rove is the scum of the earth, but he was brilliant in his own way. Slater excels at making himself look like a tosser, but that’s about it.
Clint Emufarm Smith - what money deals, please let me know………..
[It's 'Emu'. Emufarm was the name of my travelblog. SP]
What’s the problem here? you lot aren’t short of hatchet men. This is the game of politics.
Coge
It’s OK when Labour do it. This is the overriding rule in being an apologist. Your own leader eating babies is showing how important it is to have a varied diet, the opposition leader eating babies… like you would expect that would be an unacceptable outrage.
(I expect this comment will be followed immediately by a comment from Felix attacking me – I like the way most of my comments are immediately followed by attacks from Felix – It reassures me I’m doing his feeble apologist head in)
Burt, you are correct. Like the justification of using a false bearded operative!
I’ve heard rumours that all your base is a 9th floor staffer and a few others are paid by Labour affiliated unions to post Labour attack lines here. There was also a rumour that the LPRU were sniffing dirty underwear in and around Melbourne.
Like him or not, isn;t the more valid point here, Slater correctly identified Keizer. He was right, and I suspect that really gripes your gizzard
Vinsin go to this link for some good stats to forward
In last nights debate the issue of Mike Williams digging the dirt was put back into the minds of the voters. However what I found highly amusing and also very revealing with regard to the personalities of the two leaders was the question about flip-flops.
John Key picked up the ball, quoted an example (two actually) where he had done the flip-flop and justified his position. He used the forum to remind people of his current stand and to show that he can admit his past mistakes. Helen Clark on the other hand didn’t want to engage with the question, she has dozens of examples she could have used to produce a positive outcome but in classic Clark style – she’s never wrong is she. Never admits any mistakes ever. Surely one of her many flip-flops over the last 9 years could have been used in a positive manner – she only needed one example where her end position was positive, just one.
Oh and BTW, what on earth possessed Helen to use speeding tickets as an example of breaking the law…. Bad call – right up there with saying something like signing other peoples paintings.
insider,
Sorry, reading your comments I’ve got no idea what your trying to prove? other than proving your wasting your time here.
That, I find funny
Vinsin
There is something unpublished about National that would turn this election around 180 degrees.
“Last year in Parliament two failed amendments were attempted trying to replace the government’s status quo nominees with anti-abortion ones. One attempted replacement was a doctor who has worked for an anti-abortion counselling service. The amendment was put forward by Peter Brown (NZ First) and supported by all the NZ First MPs who voted and 21 of the 36 National MPs who voted. His supporters included John Key, Bill English, Tony Ryall and Judith Collins ? the four hoping to be Prime Minister, Deputy PM, and Ministers for Health and Social Development. The second attempted replacement put forward by Gordon Copeland gained similar levels of support.
If those amendments had succeeded, they would have restricted access to abortion without public discussion or comment. Restriction of abortion is only a parliamentary vote away.”
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2008/08/guest-column-putting-it-back-on-agenda.html#links
John Key was asked about his personal view on BFM radio on september 11 this year and deliberately mislead listeners.
You can download and listen to the mp3 at. The question put to key on abortion are at 6min 48 sec into the interview.
http://www.95bfm.com/default,188611.sm
What your own opinion on it of course is unknown to me but I can tell you the majority of NZ women will not vote National if they find out. Whatever your own view its an issue that needs to be debated and should not be allowed to procede in stealth mode.
Abortion is still illegal as defined by the crimes act with a 14 year jail term and most abortions are approved through one of the exceptions to the act i.e. “for the mental health of the mother”. Should anti abortions doctors be appointed to the head of the abortion supervisory committee as John Key voted to do then that exception would be interpreted differently and most abortions would not be allowed thus ending 30 years of liberal abortion practices in NZ.
This would be disasterous for rape victums as even though there is an exception in the act for rape they would have to prove that they were indeed raped. That means women who are raped will not be reporting to police if they fear pregnancy because they will be looking to be sure that they get an abortion and of course if forced to get an unsafe abortion it could kill them and if discovered land them in jail if they could not prove rape.
An addon to my last post. On BFM radio John Key keeps saying he wants no change to the law on abortion. He knows full well that is not neccessary. All he needs to do is what he has already voted to do in appointing anit-abortion doctors to the head of the abortion supervisory committee who will interpret the exception differently.
Hah - I’ve met the “cocktail spy” a few times before. He’s old-skool dunedin. Didn’t seem like an overly serious guy - quite funny and casual actually. Certainly not involved in any radical politics when he was down here.
Gina, Thankyou! That’s exactly what i needed. Akld, thank you to.
It’s a women’s body and therefore a women’s choice. I agree with you if enough women knew this then the election would be in the bag for labour.
Gina: Last night Key said that he saw no need to change anything in the Laws on Abortion. He implied that he was happy with the status quo. Another lack of philosophical position?
There must be a bit of anxiety in the Gnat camp given the activity of the visiting gnats like Coge and Insider.
Vinson
Theres a pdf someone sent me with all the detail i.e. links to the Hansard, crimes act etc etc. Just tell me where I can upload it.
Lets get it out by email or any other way possible.
Ianmac and All
He knows he doesn’t have to change the law to stop abortions. Hes covering what he voted to do last year.
Can someone afford a big add with a link to the article and parlimentary votes in the Herald or other before the election.
That would do it I reakon.
hah the beltway boys letting their frustrations have a little boilover in public and burt set on prolix this morning. hmmm must get me one of them.
Vanilla eis
Carl Rove is a slimy corrupt piece of work who will get his comeuppance someday.
Daddy Bush bought Bush jr. the presidency so his marauding family and friends could suck the world dry one more time.
Ianmac, perhaps you can tell me what’s happening in the Nats camp, cos I’m not a member.
Back to the taper. Not wanting to play the xenophobic card, but I’m hardly surprised Kees is not a New Zealand citizen. It’s simply not the Kiwi way to tresspass a conference, misrepresent yourself & violate expectations of frank privacy. Trav can back me up on the Dutch tradition of extreme politics. But Kiwi’s don’t like to dob in their neighbours.
Frankly I’m surprised Helen Clark did not take more strident action to distance her party from this sort of activity, previously uncommon in NZ.
[lprent: Pious bullshit. If I'd thought of it, I'd have done it. I'm also damn sure that Whale would have - in fact those young ones from Act. Before you raise the xenophobia - I tend to think that if your family hasn't been a century that you're a recent immigrant.]
Well spotted Gina.
Vin, don’t worry about the EFA, commentary on blogs is specifically excluded and personal correspondence between people who know each other is just that, personal.
burt you fool, you really think I’m stalking you, don’t you? Delusions of importance, my dim witted little friend. I laugh at you not because you’re particularly interesting, but because you’re a paranoid mini-brain slowly losing your flimsy grip on reality. As you confirm again and again.
“It’s simply not the Kiwi way to tresspass a conference, misrepresent yourself & violate expectations of frank privacy.”
So the person who did the same at Labour’s conference, inside a closed workshop - what foreign country were they from, coge?
transylvania?
Felix
You never let me down. (hugs).
Randal: Ethniklashistan, most likely.
gina, i’m not sure where you can upload it. Anywhere is fine by me, i would put my email down but i get the feeling i’d be swamped by trolls within minutes. If you’re on facebook look for vinsin vegetable.
MP, goodness me. I hadn’t heard of that one. Maybe
‘cos the MSM didn’t think it a principled manner of garnering news. Do enlighten us.
Still not the Kiwi way. Even Helen would agree.
coge
The Kiwi way is what Kiwi’s define it to be.
Matthew Pilott.
I agree there are similarities. The Labour party situation was high ranking Labour party folk suggesting ways to subvert their own laws and the high ranking National party folk were answering questions about their own views on certain contentious issues. Big difference in the subject material but similar dishonest method of getting the information into the public domain.
Edit: Just for Felix - It’s not OK that Labour did it becasue National did it too. Either it’s bad in both cases and Labour should not have done it because National did - or it’s fine in both instances.
coge. Kees has been here since he was two or three. stop being a racist. next you’ll be saying polynesians’ hands are too clumsy for grape picking
Gina - Abortion in NZ is a conscience vote and I think both main parties strongly acknowledge that and want to keep it that way. There are members from all parties who vote on both sides of the debate. It’s a party political issue only in the sense that the individual MP’s who make up the major 2 parties have a position for or against. This is one conscience vote that will never be whipped.
You should worry more about ensuring the exclusion of the fruit cake parties (ie NZ First plus anyone running on a Christian fundamentalist platform) as they are the only parties who will try to instigate any changes to the status quo. Both Labour and National won’t touch the issue unless forced to do so by a minor party.
BTW, I’m not bagging Christians here- I just believe party politics should be secular.
I’ll be buying Kees a few beers if I see him around because that’s what real kiwis do.
gomango,
The issue Gina raised was Key expressing a personal belief in public on bfm yet casting his conscience vote in a manner inconsistent with that belief.
Good on you Felix. That’s what real Kiwis do.
coge - do you mean that you hadn’t heard of the Labour Party Conference secret tapings? It was in the news for a while. I would hardly put it down to some foreign influence.
You might as well say Key is a foriegner because he’s flying around on a chartered plane electioneering these last two days - that’s not a ‘kiwi’ thing to do either.
Burt - that’s a pretty fair analysis, although with a touch of paritsan spin (I can spin it the other way, but it’s not really the point is it?)… Whether it’s good or bad? There’s a lot accepted in politics that wouldn’t be tolerated in other areas. I think that it does define the reality and therefore the morality of the situations.
gomango
Yes I agree - I laughed when the PM talked about tollerance for religious views, chinless scarf wearers must be an exception and the drafting of laws to exclude certain religious groups because they don’t endorse Labour must also be an exception which was in
Labour’sthe countries best interest.Matthew Pilott
What we say no to defines us :-).
If we accept childish “they did it too” stuff from politicians then we endorse childish behaviour. I’d rather be governed by adults - so I have no problem constantly reminding them thay are behaving like children.
Edit for Felix: I know I’ve said this before (the bit about childish behaviour - they did it too) but sadly the reality is I’m not getting use to it and accepting it. Read what I said earlier in this very comment to Matthew before you tell me I have said this before many times.
Whoohoo! Now do the one about Cullen.
Oh burt, I couldn’t give a crap about politicians being recorded. They can be responsible for their own words.
Felix
You are a reliable attack dog - You are the best. (hugs)
Edit: Felix - well done, some of your own views in your comment. I like that.
Mmmm beer…
So, burt, if we accept that neither taper was a party member or affilate (less is, of course, known about the earlier taper), all we have to go on is the response. Clark wasn’t happy about the incident, but didn’t react a great deal. Key piled on the abuse, and blamed Labour, calling it part of Labour’s ‘dirty tricks’ campaign, when it has now become apparent that he knew this was not the case.
that sure as hell isn’t ok.
Matthew Pilott
If you are saying National taped themselves to make Labour look bad ? Have you been talking to Brian Edwards at all ?
No burt, I’m saying that it’s clear National have known who it was for some time. When did whale put the post up? Some days ago. He worked with the National Party Research Unit, and with National Party MPs in order to identify the taper. That’s as reported in The Herald.
So, when Key gave a response to the latest tape, he would have known full well that it was not a ‘Labour Dirty Trick’ and that Labour was not behind it all. He consciously chose to lie about it, or at best, state as fact something he had no way of knowing was true.
I’m not sure how you arrived at that conclusion in your last post - I’m talking about their responses to their respective conferences’ incidents.
Lprent, you make valid points, but none of the groups & individuals you mentioned “did it”, correct? Why do you suppose they did not think to do it? An innate & unspoken sense of what is proper conduct, perhaps? And not that it matters, but I’m fifth generation on both sides.
Let’s look at what Kiwis do. They help out each other.
Keep an eye out for their neighbours. Maybe enjoy a BBQ & beer in the weekend, deal with each other in an honest, upfront & friendly manner. Now trespassing a conference, misrepresenting ones politics, violating expectations of frank privacy & passing edited recordings to third rate journalists do not constitute normal Kiwi behaviour. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
I really hope Kees is reading this as I would like to hear what he has to say.
gina - the election would turn ‘180 degrees’ ? You are a wee bit naive with this.. When it comes to attempting to push through legislation about telling people what they can, and can’t do with their bodies, in their homes etc the Labour government would be made to look like hypocrites on this.
All your email will do will continue the perception that Labour is running a negative campaign. If this got any media coverage it wouldn’t take more than 5 minutes for the story to be linked back to this thread on the standard and in turn, the standard linked to Labour.
It will probably do more harm than good im afraid.
Matthew Pilott
I’ve been waiting for a long time to say this
WTF are you talking about - I never believe a thing WhaleOil says on his blog !
Mathew Pilott
DPF has an interesting thread here: What a coincidence.
Are you sure Key was telling lies ?
Back to my previous question, have you been talking to Brian Edwards?
captcha: up evidences ( it knows…)
Furthermore, covert taping, of any kind is a clear violation of the open society which we enjoy here in New Zealand. The virtues of our free society is something held dear accross the NZ political spectrum. Without that freedom, this taping would likely not have been able to occur. Something that those who seek to capitalize on this violation must understand.
[lprent: by private citizens conversing with each other - you have absolutely no idea of the law]
Coge, Fuck off.
Mattew Hotton, “Tape-Gate” hahhah chump. Can some mp get invoved in a scandal over farm gates or something we just need “gate-gate”
Everyone else: Set your damn bebos, facebooks, myspace’s to private for goodness sake? do you really want this overweight drouling perverted fuckwit trawling though your photos and friends lists?
Nice to see Farrar and Slater coming clean on using the National party research unit, now someone bloody name Steady Eddie
silly boy it’s not dirty tricks when national does it. It’s responsible educating of the electorate
Gina,
So someone who performs abortions is an impartial nominee for the ASC but someone who once worked for an anti-abortion counselling service isn’t?
That gross conflict of interest is much more of a scandal than your “neutron bomb” that would turn the election “180 degrees”.
Burt - nut sure what you mean, but I read the Herald, and it said Cameron Slater was working with the Nat research unit. I’m going on what I read in the Herald. It looks bleedingly obvious to me - Key knew who it was, and knew it wasn’t a Labour thing and that he wasn’t a “Labour Activist” when he said so. Simple.
Or are you going to tell me the Nat Research unit doesn’t tell Key anything? I know the guy can be cluelss, but that I wouldn’t buy.
Hi, can any of the friends of Kees confirm that his flatmate is Stephen Day who is employed by Ministerial Services and acts as a liaison between Labour and the Greens
scribe
you are a dreamer and morevoer willing to incite a mob with your stupid focus on womens biology
anatomy too probably
but anyway
mind your own business
get a life
and now labour supporters are pushing 75 year old women.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/vote08/4751942a28435.html
how low is this going to go?
who said that?
epsinner or hooton
Wow, Wellingtonian, she sure sounds like a fragile victim of evil commie thugs, what with statements like “I’ll push them around too, I can be very vocal. I’ve been working for National since 1975 and I’m still doing it.”
And any anti-Labour link which brings up the headline, “Key to protester: You’re an idiot” is one that’s only going to make us grin, you do realise?
and now national party leader is calling random citizens idiots
http://www.stuff.co.nz/vote08/4751942a28435.html
how low is this going to go?
You seem to be doing a fair bit of soinning and hooting yourself Randal.
Bill if you’ve read this blog over any length of time you’d be fully aware that many random citizens are idiots.
Speak for yourself, HS.
HS,
Does that statement apply to kiwipundit, or solely this site?
Scribe
“So someone who performs abortions is an impartial nominee for the ASC but someone who once worked for an anti-abortion counselling service isn’t?”
I don’t think most women will see it that way no matter how much propaganda is thrown at them. This can be confirmed so is not dirty politics. Whats dirty here is John Key deliberately misleading women by saying he doesn’t intend to change the laws regarding abortion. He is implying that abortion sevices will remain as they are. Hes a liar and his pants will be on fire if or when NZ women find out.
hs..
I’m having a great time
its like an alignment of the planets
and all that stuff
scary eh?
Burt, I have some a real scandel. I heard Goff say fuck
ooooooooooooo
Gina,
Justice Miller has said that the abortion laws are being flouted, so to have the CS&A Act enforced — strange idea, I know — would bring about a change in practice, though not in law.
Having said that, I don’t think Key necessarily wants the law to be enforced. I think he’s fine with the status quo of abortion on request, based on his responses to pro-life groups. And he’d have known that wouldn’t be a popular answer, so why give it if he didn’t believe it?
Oh, just found Cameron Slater on facebook. He’s got some lovely groups up and running - around 93 of them but here’s my favs: let’s be pro-life in new zealand, don’t vote greens, don’t vote labour, new zealanders for the gifting of tvnz to newscorp, i wish helen clark would get her teeth fixed and - possibly my favorite - march 14th is steak and blowjob day.
Man was i wrong about that Karl Rove quip earlier.
he is a bit of a ‘thing’ allright
blerrrrrrk
and the msm never say a word
Ok Scribe
So John Key votes to appoint anti-abortion doctors means he then won’t have a say in it.
The docs oversee it and believe me some of them ae pretty radical. they won’t be consulting him.
Women need to know what John Key thinks before they vote.
He’s playing this close to his chest because he knows he will not be elected if he tells female voters how his own “user doesn’t pay” consience works.
The docs oversee it and believe me some of them ae pretty radical.
We agree on that. Radical pro-abortionists have been dominating the ASC for years and look where we’ve got to: abortion on request.
I know you and your friends want another Labour term to follow Victoria’s lead and decriminalise abortion. Shame it’s not going to happen, Gina.
We’ll see I guess.
Scribe I hope that in your next life that you are landed with no money 10 babies, are declared sinful for enjoying sex with no means of support and then become pregnant with quintuplets via rape and are stoned to death for your shame while your rapist goes free.
Better still, if it happened in this life.
Maybe then you would have half a clue and would see the true cost of your consience i.e religious belief.
Church has no place in state and abortion is a matter of belief not fact. No one has the right to inflict their religious beliefs on me or any other woman. Thats what been pro choice means. It means to each according to her belief.
You are not god and do not know period!
Gina,
I hope you have a happy and prosperous life and get to achieve everything you want. I’ll pray for that.
And thanks for your kind wishes, too.
Scribe
Thats nice. I’m just trying to make the point that you with the consience will never pay the price for the ideal you seek to impose on someone else. It is your religious belief and has no place in law in a democracy.
Your belief could well cost the lives,prosperity and happiness of many women who you put second to a foetus not even born. The foetus is tiny up intill 12 weeks has no brain no idea of its own existance.
I see in our world that every seed does not grow, they are abundant and fall all over the place.
The world is fast becoming overpopulated and the solution in china for that is to kill live girl babbies and old women. Yes Ive read they are exterminating old women in China now.
Instead of opposing abortion you would be better to campaign for paying women to be mothers without the disrespect and hypocracy that is so often inflicted upon us.
In Europe the great Catholic Church used to turn a blind eye to the killing of live girl babies yet women who had abortions were jailed.
The words “ye are all hypocrits” was never more appropriate.
I know I am a hypocrit also because we all are to some extent.
gina, please check your facebook messages
Ha, I’ll pray for you too Gina. To Beelzebub.
That should cancel out Scribe’s voodoo.
These kind of issues, like abortion and LGBT issues, are some of the big reasons I don’t want Key as PM. The Nats seem to me to be a party mostly for white men, and I think Key’s attitude to abortion is a biggie for a lot of women.
Slater “photoshopped the face of a 15 year old labour activist onto gay porn”??!!
You must be joking. If not, what was done to this piece of shit?
Not joking at all.
The whole abortion debate is a bit miss placed, before any one on any side goes and claims whats right and wrong, first they have to come up with a damn good reason why every one else should do as they say.
killing, are you a woman? If not i’m afraid you don’t get to comment.
In addition to my comment before: Nothing was done, Slater is highly prone to throwing tantrums as you’ve probably seen, the best way to deal with it was to stay quiet and let the whole thing go away, there was several offers from Lawyers at the time of legal assistance to the victim. In summary you can call him a creep, a pervert and anything like that, but avoid calling him a pedophile or child pornographer, that will get people in trouble.
Who is he? Is he a member of the National Party?
Not that National would admit it anyway, given the above.
“Vinsin
killing, are you a woman? If not i’m afraid you don’t get to comment.”
Looks like I just did comment though haha.
All I’m saying is I haven’t seen a good enough reason yet why any group of people should be able to force their opinions on someone else, if it makes you feel better I’m sure I could find half a dozen women who would be quite happy to come here and type it on my behalf, would that make you feel better?
“Danny
Who is he? Is he a member of the National Party?
Not that National would admit it anyway, given the above.”
Who Whale (the son of a former National Party president) or the victim?
Hes a Labour supporter but I’m sure the victim doesn’t really want to go over it all again so I’m going to leave it at that.
How is it not child pornography, it is indecent and it concerns a 15 year old? It is open and shut, no? His motives for doing it are irrelevant. If what you are saying is true, it should be pushed, no questions.
And it has nothing to do with politics. Rather, it has everything to do with punishing this pervert.
The whole pro-abortion argument is that a woman should have the choice as to whether she wants an abortion or not. Consequently, if a woman is against having an abortion, no-one’s telling her she should have one. So I don’t understand your point, Mr. Killing.
My point is people are getting far to caught up in claiming the anti-choice protesters are wrong. When I see that near senile geriatric by the gate to parliament each morning I think “great, abortion is wrong for him, who would have thought huh?” the same with any anti-choice protester, all they are proving is that abortion is wrong for them. None of them, no one so far, has come up with any reason why they should be able to inflict their opinion on every one else.
Looking back over the thread I actually think I agree with you both, I just think every one on the pro-choice side spends too long trying to engage in their debate and not enough time saying “well good for you, now fuck off and stop telling me what I should do”
his point is that women should do what men tell them to
so he can feel um err well manly..
Yes, but actually as the law stands, it doesn’t actually say a woman can have an abortion if she wants one. To get one requires certificates from doctor/s saying it would endanger the health of the woman to give birth to the baby. A recent report said the law is being bent at the moment to virtually make it abortion on demand. This means the law, and compliance with it is a bit dodgy.
So pro-choicers want the law changed to make abortions available for any woman who wants one, without doctors reports etc. Anti-abortionistis are trying to limit women’s choices by either stopping any law change happening, or changing the law to make it harder to get an abortion. So they are trying to limit women’s choices, not the pro-choice campaigners.
We have had abortion on demand for 30 years and its been an accepted norm in our society. Whats happeining lately is not dodgy but has been accepted proptocol in NZ for a generation. If you read the article on norightturn you will see that there was a fight about this in 1977 and a compromise was reached.
I remember my father telling me that in earlier years parlimentarians of the day were all flying their misteresses to Australia for abortions while for many years their consiences in parliament told them it should be against the law for the rest of us.
Gina, what I’ve been told by a woman in a local feminist group, is that the law doesn’t actually guarantee abortion on demand. In practice this has been happening. But this could change if anyone in authority decided the letter of the law should be followed.
http://www.abortion.gen.nz/legal/index.html
Thus not abortion on demand, but apparently it’s pretty easy to claim one of the above.
also see here:
http://gaynz.com/blog/redqueen/archives/241
“A recent report said the law is being bent at the moment to virtually make it abortion on demand”
Carol everything you have said is right. However the law has been bent for 30 years and successive governments Labour and National have overseen it being bent.
The pro life people now know that they may have enough allies in the National Party and NZ first to roll back the status quo especially with the support of Nationals leaders.
yes, that’s the problem as I see it, and a reason to be very wary of a National government on this issue.
Also see an Idiot/Savant guest blog pos, which begins as below:
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/search?q=abortion
off topic but is Leighton Smith still voicing his fatuous opinions on his crummy little radio show?
“randal
his point is that women should do what men tell them to
so he can feel um err well manly..”
Excuse me, that is not at all what I think, and I would greatly appreciate it if you could retract your comment.
My position is that it should be entirely for the women to decide, that it should not even need 2 doctors to sign off on it.
ok