Sunday’s soapbox

Sunday’s soapbox is yours to use as you will – within the bounds of decency and absence of defamation. You’re welcome to look back or forward, discuss issues of the moment, to pontificate, ponder or point us to something of interest, to educate, elucidate or entertain, to muse or amuse.

30 Responses to Sunday’s soapbox

  1. Andrei says:

    The New Zealand Herald is in high dudgeon this am

  2. robertguyton says:

    Captain Fantastic asks Homepaddock readers how they can stomach the sick effort by Judith Collins to bend reality by denying that van owners have been overcharged by ACC. Astonishing arrogance and duplicity, bare-faced and brazen bullshitting of the New Zealand public. Thinking of riting a post on this issue, Ele? It’s a doozy – a Minister of the Government, bending the truth right before our eyes. Captain Fantastic, commenting on your Saturday Soapbox isn’t swallowing those lies at all, have the rest of you help your noses and let it slide down?

    Then there’s John Key’s disgraceful attack on the Human Right’s Commission. Their report to the Government rings the alarm bells over the rushed and faulty GCSB bill, and Key responds to it like a tetchy dictator. Here on Homepaddock, his defenders trot out the seriously worrying ‘If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide’ defense that was used by some seriously evil characters from our recent history, that is, the engineers of fascist regimes. Where’s your considered defense of the GCSB bill, Ele? You cast yourself as someone who keeps a close eye on National and its wonderous ways, detailing every positive utterance, but where’s the commentary on this major issue? Buried? Studiously avoided? Of course, you get to choose the topics, but when you operate a blog that focuses on the National Party, omissions like these are telling. Still, it may be that you are working on a post on this very topic and you’ll give it a fair airing, flap, flap, oink, oink!

  3. Viv K says:

    It is wrong for a GP to attempt to control other people’s lives in accordance with his personal religious views. Please explain Andre what would be the difference between this situation and a Jehovahs witness doctor refusing to give a patient a blood transfusion?

  4. Andrei says:

    LOL Viv – I posted that link without comment but I guess you picked with whom my sympathies lie 🙂

    Your example wouldn’t happen a hard core Jehovah’s witness wouldn’t make it through medical school without compromising his/her beliefs.

    This thing is a beat up, of course. Getting a prescription for the pill is easy in New Zealand, they are doled out like candy even to underage school girls.

    And that is why this guy is getting the treatment – not because he is preventing some woman from getting the pill, which he isn’t, but because he suggests that it is wrong and leftists cannot stand it when people don’t go along with their sacred beliefs and have hissys.


  5. TraceyS says:

    There are other medical reasons for prescribing oral contraceptives to young women that have nothing to do with avoiding pregnancy.

    I wonder if this doctor would deny his patients relief from pain due to his personal beliefs?

  6. robertguyton says:

    Judith Collin’s blatant trashing of the truth and John Key’s determination to destroy your right to privacy – no takers here on Homepaddock?

  7. Viv K says:

    Contraception isn’t a left/right issue, there are plenty of left wing Catholics. Population growth can not continue unchecked in a finite ecosytem whether bacteria on a petrie dish or humans on this planet. Also, as a woman I find it a bit rich that some random male doctor thinks he can tell women what the ‘right’ number of children to have is. IT’S NOT HIS BODY!

  8. TraceyS says:

    Robert, I’m more concerned about the issue posted by Andrei. But I might be more worried about spying if people like that were in power – the ones who advocate freedom for everyone except women in regard to their own bodies. I would be offended if my medical information was secretly intercepted and used by the government, particularly if those in power were nutters who considered birth control to be an offense against one’s country.

  9. Viv K says:

    While the scenario you describe is extremely unlikely Tracey, it is why civil liberties and human rights advocates oppose the GCSB bill. Surely the fact that if the GCSB legislation is passed in it’s current form and if Andrei and this doctor were to form the next government, it could legally happen must make you think again about it. Have you read the bill? It’s not very long. The Internet NZ submission addressed the very real issue you raised on a previous thread of cyber security. Their submission also says (pt 24) ‘The only safeguard that the law-abiding New Zealander is presented with in this Bill is their personal trust in the discretion of those in empowered to refrain from accessing their communications and metadata. This, however, is not an appropriate substitute for the legal safeguards that the law demands’.

  10. Andrei says:

    Don’t you like people Viv?

    To be sure when I saw a slut walk populated by screeching harridans I had my doubts about the merits of humanity but overall people, especially the little ones are the most beautiful thing in the Universe.

  11. Viv K says:

    My comment ended up in reply to Andrei, darned unsmart phone!

  12. robertguyton says:

    Tracey – yes, you are right to be worried by the power of whoever is in Government to have unfettered access to your information. It’s understandable, perhaps, that as a Key supporter, you feel he won’t allow your personal information to get into the hands of people you fear, but Governments change and the people they are beholden to have different ‘needs’. It would be very wise, in my view, to keep Governments out of our private spheres. No Government should be granted the right to enable it’s spies to spy on its people. The New Zealand Government should not legislate to spy on New Zealanders. It’s the very thing the Human Rights Commission is loudly declaring. Key is belittling them for stating the obvious. It might be prudent to consider other countries that allow their ‘intelligence/enforcement’ agencies to spy on their own people. Do you feel comfortable when you do run through the list and history of those?

  13. Andrei says:

    Robert, I’m more concerned about the issue posted by Andrei.

    What is the issue here Tracey? There isn’t one

  14. jabba says:

    boring .. maybe it’s not an issue we really care about bObby. You can continue to rant though bOb ,, paranoia can be a terrible thing though so be careful

  15. TraceyS says:

    Like you said, Viv, it is extremely unlikely.

    The telephone exchanges used to be notorious for operators listening in to people’s phone calls, party-lines too. How were people protected from that?

    It did do harm too when that information was used inappropriately. Nowadays we have the Privacy Act as a level of protection for how information is gathered, used, stored etc.

  16. TraceyS says:

    The woman featured in the article was not a teenager, she is 23 years old. When they are ready to have a child should be a decision for the couple.

  17. TraceyS says:

    I’m prepared to accept that I might not have a full and complete understanding of the size and/or extent or nature of security threats. Are you absolutely sure of that yourself, Robert?

    It seems to me there are risks in both directions. And no perfect solution.

  18. Andrei says:

    When they are ready to have a child should be a decision for the couple.

    Has anybody said anything otherwise? Not that I have read

    Though of course To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven and if delayed too long especially for a female the season runs its course and it becomes entirely too late to think about raising a family.

    Time runs out. the grave awaits for us all and maybe there will be somebody left that cares enough to put flowers on our graves from time to time.

  19. Viv K says:

    Why would you think I don’t like people Andrei? I think it important that all babies are loved and wanted. From other posts it sounds like you have children (and grandchildren?) living overseas. To me it is sad when circumstances force families to live apart. The love of grandparents is very special, while it does reach over oceans, it is wonderful when the extended family can spend regular time together. As for a 23 yr old needing to worry about declining fertility, there is still plenty of time for her. I had my son 2 months before my 41st birthday.

  20. TraceyS says:

    Birth control is part of enabling that choice. Fair enough if the doctor concerned doesn’t want to prescribe it. There are plenty more doctors to choose from. Thank goodness most of them put empathy ahead of doctrine.

  21. Andrei says:

    Sometimes empathy and compassion might consist of not giving someone what they think they want now but in the longer term might not be in their best interests.

    This is a beat up, as I have said all along, the lady has got her contraceptives, and got them without any trouble, you can count on it.

    You know why people have flown off the handle over this?

    They suspect or even might know deep in their hearts, the doctor is right</b

  22. Viv K says:

    This in reply to Andrei at 9.02 (the reply option wasn’t there). Andrei that is an incredibly patronising attitude. There is no way a doctor, who would be lucky to have spent the total of a few hours in the company of a young woman, decide for that young woman what is in her best longer term interests as to when she has a baby . What astounding arrogance! There are a multitude of reasons why couples delay starting a family, perhaps they have student loans to repay, or they are starting out in business. As someone who rants against government interference in people’s private lives, you sir, have no grounds to think you are entitled to say when or whether other people should have children.

  23. TraceyS says:

    Sounded like a fairly sensible couple who knew exactly what they wanted.

  24. TraceyS says:

    Congratulations for putting that so politely.

  25. Andrei says:

    There is no way a doctor, who would be lucky to have spent the total of a few hours in the company of a young woman, decide for that young woman what is in her best longer term interests as to when she has a baby

    Viv, the doctor is deciding nothing for the young woman at all – the doctor is giving the young woman the best advice as he sees it. She is not obliged to take it. Happens all the time doctors give patients advice and the patients don’t take it

    You know and I know that getting contraceptives is easy in New Zealand, the country is awash with them, Catholic doctors, if they are true to their Church’s teaching should not prescribe them – I bet most of them do preferring not to rock the boat and wanting a quiet life. This story is a warning shot across their bows of those that don’t go along with the modern zeitgeist.

    My personal opinion is that “the pill” has done more harm to humanity than the atomic bomb. But like the atomic bomb it has been invented and can’t be uninvented. We’re stuck with it and will have to live with its consequences.

  26. TraceyS says:

    “… the doctor is deciding nothing for the young woman at all.”

    This is true, Andrei, because she and her partner had already made their decision.

    Had he straightforwardly referred her to another doctor for the prescription he could have avoided the beat-up whilst preserving his beliefs and his dignity.

  27. Paranormal says:

    And therein lies yet another reason why ACC needs to be privatised. It is just another insurance company that happens to be owned by the state. When it is owned by the state you are going to get politicians running interference when there’s a cock up. If it was privatised we would be able to choose which insurer to pay to cover our liabilities. Over the decades there has been too much political interference that has cost, and continues to cost taxpayers too much money.

  28. robertguyton says:

    Of course truth isn’t an issue you really care about, jabba. No National Party flunky could keep the faith if truth had to be considered seriously. Judith Collins, quod erat demonstrandum.

  29. jabba says:

    Judith is a great lady .. pity opposition parties don’t have MP’s of her quality .. as a gween flunky bOb, you would disagree I guess, I mean you have the like of Delahunty representing you.

  30. Viv K says:

    The example you give of people listening in at party lines is the old technology version of hacking, a valid concern. It is mentioned in InternetNZ’s submission saying there are cyber security issues that need addressing, but that is not the same as surveillance. The old fashioned version of the GCSB issue would be a man from the government coming to tap someone’s phone.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: