Tumeke! blog rankings

I was very impressed to see my blog included in the Tumeke! nz blogosphere rankings for September (thanks heaps Tim Selwyn). I am at #80 overall, which I am pretty pleased with for the first time I am listed.

As MandM have pointed out, this puts me at #5 out of NZ Christian blogs, which I am very pleased with.

Thanks readers, I am glad to see what I am posting is of interest to so many people.

Freedom – Family vs Green

The left like to think of themselves as “liberal” and in favour of freedom. Well as many on the right would point out, they are generally anything but liberal, being liberal on sexual matters and restrictive on pretty well everything else, that is part and parcel of being socialist.

I thought I’d compare the Green party website and the Family Party website and see how often the word “ban” appears, using a Google search. It’s been done before on the blogs, but I can’t find the original to quote.

The word “ban” appears 1,010 times on the Green Party website today, click here to check for yourself.

It appears 76 times on the Libertarianz site. (here)

It appears a total of THREE times on the Family Party website! (see here)

Furthermore, the three times the word “ban” appears are:

  • “Be open to debate on dropping the ban”
  • remove the ban”
  • “energy and resources to ban gang patches would be better spent on the war against drug dealing.”

In other words, each is talking AGAINST a ban!

Very unscientific of course, but the contrast is still incredible. So who is really promoting freedom, the conservatives or the so-called liberals?

This election is about freedom

Garth George has written an excellent column on what this election is really about – not “trust”, not even the economy, but freedom. And he’s dead right.

This election is all about freedom – the freedom of the individual to live his or her life with as little interference as possible from the state, its politicians and minions.

It’s all about being loosed from the tyranny of dogmatic “do-it-my-way-or-else” socialism, which contends that the state knows best how to spend our money, how we use our property and how we run our families.

But isn’t Labour supposed to be all for freedom? Isn’t it full of liberals pushing for homosexuals to be free to marry, for prostitutes to be free to be prostitutes, for abortions to be readily available etc? Aren’t we supposed to be more free now than ever before? Well GJ and PhilBest were discussing this the other day on Kiwiblog:

GJ:

The only freedom this current lot gives us is SEXUAL freedom, everything else they want to control!

Think about it – all those examples I came up with before were about sex. Is there a single thing Labour/Green want to free up that isn’t to do with sex? For Green maybe drugs, that is all.

PhilBest:

Norwegian blogger “Fjordman”; in “Sweden; the Triumph of Cultural Marxism”:

The British historian Roland Huntford wrote a book in the early 1970s about Sweden called The New Totalitarians. He noted how equality between the sexes was aggressively promoted from the late 1960s and early 70s. This was closely linked to a campaign for sexual liberation:

“Indeed, the word ‘freedom’ in Swedish has come to mean almost exclusively sexual freedom, product perhaps of an unadmitted realization that it is absent, or unwanted, elsewhere. Through sex instruction at school for the young, and incessant propaganda in the mass media for the older generations, most of Sweden has been taught to believe that freedom has been achieved through sex. Because he is sexually emancipated, the Swede believes that he is a free man, and judges liberty entirely in sexual terms.…The Swedish government has taken what it is pleased to call ‘the sexual revolution’ under its wing. Children are impressed at school that sexual emancipation is their birthright, and this is done in such a way as to suggest that the State is offering them their liberty from old-fashioned restrictions.”

By old-fashioned restrictions, read Christian morality. Huntford noted that this came together with efforts to downplay or attack Western culture prior to the French Revolution. As Mr. Olof Palme, who was Swedish Socialist Prime Minister from the late 1960s until 1986, said: “The Renaissance So-called? Western culture? What does it mean to us?”

“As political and economic freedom diminishes” said Aldous Huxley’s in Brave New World, “sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase.” This fits perfectly with Huntford’s description. The state strips away your personal, economic and political freedom, yet grants you sexual freedom in return, boldly hailing itself as your liberator. Sweden in 2008 is a society with no real freedom of speech if you deviate from the ruling ideology. The more crushing ideological censorship and political repression become, the more frantic the displays of “sexual freedom” get. Sex is freedom; freedom means sex, and only sex.

State authorities present this as liberation of women and sexual liberation, but it is actually about breaking down rival sources of power: The traditional Christian culture and the nuclear family. This leaves the state more powerful since it can regulate all aspects of life and, most importantly, can indoctrinate the nation’s children as it sees fit, without undue parental interference. The state replaces your family, raises your children and cares for your elderly…..”

We oppose immorality because it is immoral, and as Christians or conservative-thinking non-Christians we know morality is important for a host of reasons. But there is more to it that this. Sexual freedom can be used to hide a socialist agenda. We need to be very wary of it

When we stand up for morality we must also remember that we are blowing away the smokescreen of socialism.

Christian Vote 2008

Andy Moore has put together an excellent website analysing which party is best for Christians to vote for this election. He backs up everything he says with facts. His overall conclusion is:

  • Best choice: The Family Party
  • Close second: Act
  • Not recommended, but better than nothing: National
  • Not worth considering: United Future and Kiwi

Putting Kiwi and UF so low may surprise some readers, but as I said he backs up what he says with facts so I would encourage you to read the entire page.

I would add to his electorate recommendations however so it stated:

  • Mangere – Jerry Filipaina
  • East Coast Bays – Paul Adams
  • Manukau East – Papali’i Poutoa Papali’i
  • Epsom – Rodney Hide

Remember that these electorate votes are vital in MMP, both Family and Act need to take one electorate each to be represented after the election. Andy recommends National in other electorates, but I would disagree as electorate votes make little difference to the outcome for either National or Labour. Vote for whoever would do the best job in your opinion in other electorates. But Mangere, East Coast Bays, Manukau East and Epsom are vital to vote as recommended above to ensure we have a decent government after the election.

Check out his other websites too: Don’t Vote Labour and Don’t Vote Greens.

Key on moral issues

More from the Dominion Post on John Key. I have already covered Key’s view on smacking, ie no change to the existing law.

Gay Marriage

If a bill came before Parliament allowing gay couples to marry and it was a conscience vote would you vote for the bill?

No.

That is good to hear.

Abortion

What are your personal views on abortion law in New Zealand?

I don’t support any changes to the existing law.

That is disappointing, but that doesn’t mean he would object to the current law actually being enforced correctly – ie abortions only being given for genuine medical reasons rather than “mental health” being an excuse for abortion on demand. We therefore can’t trust Key on his own to reduce the number of abortions but I think the Family Party may be able to work with him to restrict abortion. At least he isn’t wanting to make abortion more available.

National’s proposed amendments to the ETS

John Key has announced what he is intending to do about the ridiculous emissions trading scheme. Just as I suspected, he is just fiddling round the edges. He would making a dumb expensive scheme that does nothing for the environment into a dumb nearly-as-expensive scheme that does even less.

In the first 9 months we will amend the emissions trading scheme. The second thing is that we want to put balance into the scheme so balancing our environmental responsibilities with our economic opportunities. Thirdly we need to ensure that the scheme is fiscally neutral so that it’s not a big moneymaking device for the government and thirdly that it’s got some either regard or respect for schemes that are similar around the world, where we could be at a competitive disadvantage, particularly Australia.

So all the changes that we are looking at a forestry offset scheme to allow forestry to be a bigger part of the solution. Some specific changes like ensuring that there is 90% grandfathering provision for fishing which at the moment is currently zero would change to 50%. There are other aspects that we are looking at. For instance the current scheme has a linear phase out of the credits from about 2018 depending when they come in the scheme. We think it should be more flexibility when it is phased out. Fourthly it is about getting I think getting the right incentives in that scheme so for instance take farming. In Australia agriculture comes in 2015. In New Zealand it comes in 2013 at 90% their historical allocation and then by 2018 it’s reduced. In Australia they are saying let’s be flexible about that and I am just saying I think we have got to make sure we have a scheme that reflects the need to be more flexible.

Once again, showing why we need the Family Party and Act to knock some sense into the new government.

Key will ignore smacking referendum

After all that effort having a petition, so we will have a referendum on the smacking law next year, John Key has now come out and said he won’t even listen to it. We all knew Helen Clark wouldn’t, but I was hoping for better from Key.

“We’ll have respect for what the referendum says, but it wouldn’t make us change our mind because there is no point in changing the law if it is working as intended…”

If he does see that the law isn’t working as intended (by which I assume he means the police are charging people with smacking rather than using their discretion as per National’s amendment), then he may consider changing the law. So that tempers it a little. But he is still announcing that the referendum won’t influence him to change the law whatever the result, which is pretty arrogant (and stupid politics just before the election).

I want a change of government for sure, he should still be better than Clark. But this shows once again that we need the Family Party in that government if we want it to listen to the will of the people.

Hat Tip: Family First

The Brick Testament

Bible stories made from lego! Really, really well done. I am very impressed with the quality of the photos.

Check before showing some stories to kids if you don’t want them to see lego people having sex or cut in half however, the stories are exactly as told in the Bible – which I like, it is nice to see he has stuck to the text.

Hat tip: Not PC (yes, I was very surprised to find it from that particular blog!)

EDIT: On closer investigation some of the stories cross the line into gross indecency – wherever there is the slightest chance to portray something sexual the author finds the most disgusting thing he can illustrate with lego figures to illustrate the point. So view with caution. Definitely not for children. Furthermore some of the illustrations, though the text is the exact Biblical text, are chosen specifically to be satirical rather than educational. But some of the stories may well be of use, at least those that don’t involve sex. They are very well made.

Care workers told to help clients masturbate

Ok, now this is just disgusting if the allegations are true. Basically care workers allege that they were instructed to help mentally disabled clients masturbate if that was what they wanted, which they rightly refused to do, and they claim this is asking them to be prostitutes. I fully agree. But we can expect further cases like this in a country where prostitution is legal.

In addition to the entire case being ridiculous and disgusting:

None of the six women had masturbated any clients, including the one remaining employee, who is Maori and said she had been told she was exempt on cultural grounds.

So it is ok to expect white women to act as prostitutes, but not brown women?

The woman who allegedly told the workers they were to assist their clients to masturbate is Claire Ryan, whom I assume is the “Relationships and Sexuality Advisor” by the same name at IHC. If you are interested in the sort of stuff that IHC teaches about sexuality, download their September 05 Networker newsletter. This newsletter discusses disabled children growing up and becoming sexual. Not once does it mention whether it is appropriate for teenagers to become sexually active – it just assumes that they will and parents just have to let them do it.

Very worrying stuff, but not surprising at all – this is the exact same rubbish that Family Planning spouts to teenagers at school. In the few encounters I have had with Family Planning, I have found:

  • A school educator boasting to a 6th-form class about how she had managed to convince 12-year-old boys that if they didn’t masturbate their balls would explode, and thinking this was hillarious.
  • The same woman maintaining in front of the class that you could not catch HPV (virus that causes genital warts and cervical cancer) while using a condom, even when challenged, but then admitting privately after the class that she knew full well this was incorrect.
  • A Family Planning nurse claiming that the morning after pill worked by stopping sperm working and preventing conception, not by allowing conception but preventing implantation (the truth, which I regard as an early abortion).
  • A GP who recommends all his patients to ignore everything Family Planning says because he is sick of fixing up all the messes their terrible advice has made for so many of his patients.

This is the state of sex education in NZ. You can walk into Family Planning and get a case of 144 taxpayer-funded condoms for a $3 prescription fee, while Pharmac struggles to fund medication that could potentially save lives. And no-one will even ask you whether you really think you should be having sex at 13 even though it is illegal.

This is why we need the Family Party to push abstinence first as the best option.

Kiwi Party election chances

Ok, we all know the Kiwi Party hasn’t got a hope of gaining any seats this election. They need an electorate seat. They are pinning their hopes on Tauranga, which Baldock will never take in the current political climate.

I have found, when discussing this with Kiwi Party supporters (such as at Being Frank) and even with a Kiwi Party candidate at a “meet the candidates” meeting last night:

Even strong Kiwi Party supporters & candidates know they haven’t got a hope

Yet they are still pushing for party votes, and say “no vote is wasted if you are voting with your convictions”.

This is ridiculous. They know they won’t get in. They know any vote for them will not change the makeup of parliament. Yet they are still trying to take votes off other parties.

If someone is “voting with their convictions”, and likes Kiwi Party moral policy, they will probably also agree with the Family Party policy – and the Family Party actually has a chance of taking electorate seats (Mangere, East Coast Bays, Manukau East). Therefore these moral votes could be used by the Family Party, but will certainly be wasted on the Kiwi Party.

Alternatively these votes could have been used by National, to at least change the government (Kiwi have said they will not work with Labour so must want a change of government).

I have refrained from posting much on this issue up till now, as I don’t like to criticise our Christian brothers & sisters in Kiwi – I wish I was working alongside them rather than against them. But to have even a Kiwi Party candidate clearly understand voting for them would not do anything to change the government, yet still try and take votes we could use effectively, just tipped me over the edge.

If they know they don’t have a hope, they should encourage their supporters to vote for Family or National. Otherwise every bit of campaigning they do makes a Labour-led government MORE likely.