A 5 year-old punches his mother in the face and she gets the headline for punching him back. Then she prostrates herself before the public and judiciary. Get this line, about the new anti-smacking laws;
It also meant people who saw such things would be forced to make judgments on other people's parenting and to weigh up whether they thought it was necessary to call police to intervene, she said.
Now there's an idea I hadn't thus far appreciated. I am sure Sue Bradford wouldn't be very happy about the thought she has forced society back towards judgmentalism. Most liberal lefties worship at the altar of non-judgmentalism and moral relativism. How often do you hear one say, walk a mile in my shoes before you judge me?
The left produces a curious mix of permissiveness and authoritarianism, does it not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
A deft observation indeed, Lindsay.
Mark Hubbard
It's always been obvious to me that the left are extremely judgmental, and very fundamentalist in their views.
Whatever doesn't meet with their approved list invites an authoritarian response to ban it, control it or tax it.
For example, you cannot discuss smacking with a Bradford disciple without it being considered full scale physical assault (although they prefer the term "abuse").
As you say, a curious mix of permissiveness (liberalism but not libertarianism) and authoritarianism. One that elevates nature and animals over people, and is ultimately destructive.
I regret that my wonderful mother did not smack/slap me as I grew up. While she taught me good manners, to respect others, their property, their opinions, and to understand why people are motivated to do what they do (both good and bad), I was still an ungrateful little smart-alec. I had a wonderful, uncomplicated, almost perfect childhood, but was treated too tolerantly when I needed a tune-up.
She should have slapped my cheeky face.
It's not curious - the left are a mix in the same way as Stalin and Mao - liberal with themselves but authoratarian with everyone else.
heh ... ten days ago, Sue Bradford issued a media statement saying:
"Green MP Sue Bradford is welcoming the results of the police review showing that hysteria whipped up by critics of her Bill to amend section 59 is thoroughly unfounded.
The review shows no increase in the number of ‘smacking’ events police attended over the three month period since the law came into effect. Police attended 111 child-assault incidents during this time, three of which involved smacking and 12 involved minor acts of physical discipline.
All 15 cases were determined to be inconsequential and not in the public interest to prosecute.
You're scaremongering again, Lindsay.
Zentiger --
(1) you've just admitted to being a very judgemental person. Are you typical of the 'right'?
(2) Your sweeping comment about the discussion of smacking is wrong.
(3) You mention nothing to support your third par -- sounds like bullshit and bluster to me.
"(1) you've just admitted to being a very judgemental person. Are you typical of the 'right'?"
Hmm...so a comment about someone or a group being judgemental is by definition "judgemental"?
Which would make all comments about groups or individuals impossible. What an idiot position to take.
"(2) Your sweeping comment about the discussion of smacking is wrong."
What's your evidence for that Harpoon? Zen's statement certainly mirrors my experience when trying to discuss the bill with its supporters.
You'd be the same Harpoon who made a total prat of himself in Whale Oil's blog, I'd guess. The lefty style is unmistakable.
I'm guessing that Harpoon is the kind of person that enjoys being told how to behave by the Govt. Such weak mindedness.
Post a Comment