The comments button is at the bottom right of this post.
We’re just about to have a referendum on the anti-smacking law. Here’s a timely reminder of the personal integrity of the lady (please forgive me for the terminological inexactitude) who first put the bill forward:
If her cause was true and just she would have no need to lie.
She lied to bring in the anti-smacking law, and then her arrogance went from obvious to blindingly obvious:
As I said in my earlier post:
Even if a marxist swears that he is telling the truth, don’t believe him. Why not? Because a true marxist will follow the words of Trotsky in Their Morals and Ours: “A means can be justified only by its end.”
In other words, if you’re a marxist whatever you want to do is okay if it aids in achieving your goal. Lying, cheating, stealing, and murder are all fine under this credo. Thus, even if a marxist swears that he’s telling the truth you can’t believe him because breaking an oath is fine under his belief system.
In this case Bradford’s end (goal) was state control of the raising of children, and her means was lies such as this one.
So far she’s been successful: see my post The anti-smacking law lets citizens be agents of state terrorism for details.
Now you have an opportunity to make a stand for freedom:
Arrant arrogance (read this first)
John Key shows his arrogance (he is the paternalistic enemy now)
If you want to read more use the category selector on the right.
A democracy is not a meritocracy, and having democracy means having criminals in power. This is explained in my post The problem with democracy – part one.