Paul Le Comte hits back
Paul Le Comte of the http://concernedoflinwood.wordpress.com blog launches an attack on the Don’t Vote Labour website. First of all, good on him for not just sitting back and saying nothing, but having a darn good go at me. Sure, I believe he’s wrong, but all the same Paul, good on you mate. Below is the first bit of his post. I’ll drop a few comments in, in bold.
———————————–
As left as I am, I will never tell anyone how they can vote, this is not mine nore anyone’s right. I would encourage anyone and everyone to get out and vote, this is our democratic right, and despite what nostalgists like Garth George think, MMP is a good system, your vote does count. Of course it is my right to tell people how to vote. I’m not forcing anyone to not vote Labour, but on the other hand, what Candidate stands up and says “I’m not asking you to vote for me”? Get it right Paul.
However (and here’s the irony and beauty of our democracy) there are some out there, despite their protestations to the contrary, have the freedom of speech and gall to tell you who to vote for, or worse who not to vote for. You will probably have heard the cries of martyrdom from the folks at www.dontvotelabour.org.nz. It seems their quest for martyrdom was only temporary and they are up and running their democratic (if not arrogant) right to tell you why you shouldn’t vote for Labour. You just said I didn’t have the right to tell people who to (not) vote for. As for the martyrdom theory, well, it was a bit of a blast 
[Remember folks, I am in no way shape or form connected with the Labour Party (or any party) and haven’t voted for them for years, so this ain’t no ‘protect Helen and Labour’ post].
Despite their funky graphics, (thanks!) their claims are largely false and can be argued against in any manner, so here goes.
Actually no they haven’t invaded your home, well no less than they have passed laws from you accessing Kiddie Porn (pedophiles would say that’s an invasion), or they passed a law stopping you from shooting up most nights at home (addicts would say that’s an invasion), or they have a body which censors the very TV, magazines, books and video games you consume every day at home (what is the line in the sand for censorship, someone’s love of violence is another persons repulsion). Actually, yes, they have invaded our homes. Not physically, yet, obviously. But they’ve taken away the rights of parents to choose how they bring up their own children. Loving parents will *never* abuse their children. Bringing up pedophilia is a pretty emotional thing Paul. Irrelevant and not called for.
Who cares if 83% think that a smacking ban is wrong. (um, the 83% I believe…) 77% of Kiwis thought that being Homosexual should still be illegal, (wrong again, they weren’t calling for the act itself to be legislated against) despite the Govt passing the Homosexual Law Reform Bill. Over time society was proven wrong, and even The Herald (Labours highest profiled and most public critic) had an editorial to the effect of “it’s here now get over it”. Not sure how many flying squads are screaming around the streets of NZ tonight, ready to bash down your door “invasion” style to stop you smacking, none I would imagine.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
“Bringing up pedophilia is a pretty emotional thing Paul”
We’ll if you are like me and believe that hitting a kid ‘lovingly’ is the same as interfering with a kid ‘lovingly’, both disgustingly weak acts by those with the inability to see past their own ego, then It’s a valid argument to bring up.
As for the 83%, what are they saying no to? Are they like some of the rabid right whom just don’t care for the state in any shape or form, or are they of the crowd that seriously sees no harm in the jug cord around the legs at the first sign of disobedience?
As for the right to hit one’s kid, well only if you sign up to the ’sword’ christian version of life (and even then it’s a pretty bloody tentative grasp on the notion of right), nobody, despite what they think or believe, has the right to hit a child (lovingly, christian or otherwise). This so called right is a fabricated antiquated belief in a systematic indoctrination of Christian dogma, based famously on of course wonderful advice along the lines of Sodom and Gomorrah. Because it’s in the bible, does not of course make it right. If you are just an angry parent whom devoid of will and intelligence, just wants to inflict vindictive pain on a child, then that is of course very shameful.
I’ll repeat, Nobody has the right to hit their kids. You are not teaching anyone anything except violence is might. An example people use over and over again is the kid running onto the street. Mine have done this. But I would have thought the first act would have been to grab the child by the arm? Then if the child is restraint, why not use words, the greatest gift that humans possess. Sure they have just given you a hell of a shock, but explain to them in the simplest means necessary, that what they did is dangerous and there are consequences of that. Hitting the kid only tells them that something was wrong, but what exactly - who knows?
As for the Homosexual Law Reform public groundswell, well yes they were protesting against it. They thought that the status quo of denying Homosexuals basic human rights was a good thing. This of course wasn’t a good thing (unless you are God - then to hell with them they are from Sodom anyway). 77% of Kiwis thought that by ‘normalising’ homosexuality the nation would fall apart etc etc. It’s interesting of the 800,000+ signatures gathered against homos Mickey Mouse himself was moved enough to sign, as was one person whom was so incensed at the idea of gays in the community, felt compelled to sign 27 times.
How’s the death of democracy going by the way. Free speech ground to a halt, Storm-troopers roaming the country rounding up dissenters, blogs shut down, papers muzzled? Or was it all a hyped up lie like Y2K was?
March 29th, 2008 at 12:44 am
Just replying to your last paragraph there.
No, free speech has not ground to a halt. However the Electoral Finance Bill is one of the first steps down a very dangerous, slippery path on the way to a totalitarian state.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:37 am
Governments are actually the first step to be correct.
Removing the right of the people to participate in consent processes included in the RMA, such as proposed by National is far more dangerous to the every day lives of Kiwis.
I should be able to object to a major road etc which could affect my life directly, but no not according to National - that isn’t totalitarianism - nah just simple corporate cronyism.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:40 am
No, there is such a thing as good government.
March 31st, 2008 at 5:02 pm
And removal of the right to participate democratically isn’t good govt, is it National.
If a freaking large dairy company wants to build in the paddock behind me, I should have the right to say that I am uncomfortable with it - that is democracy, but not under National it is expedient business - bollocks.
It’s like the bleedin Dairy farmer on the weekend who in the Press was complaining that he could increase production if only ECan would grant him more drilling rights. We can not all self actualise, someone will miss out.
Ever heard of the Tragedy of the Commons!