New Zealand recently had a referendum on hitting children, the notorious "Smacking" referendum, which, unfortunately cost nearly $9 M and did absolutely nothing.
The question on the referendum was "Should a smack, as part of good parental correction, be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"
- yes
-no
Well - how can you vote against good parenting? You can't. A normal person would say "No" to this, which was by far the vast result as seen in this "Stuff" article. Nearly 90% said "no" in fact.
That doesn't mean that people are pro-smacking, not at all. It means that the question was loaded and there was no way to answer it sensibly.
Say I answered "yes" - that means that I just said that an aspect of good parenting was illegal.
Who the hell worded this question? What kind of morons are they hiring for the phrasing? I can't believe it got by an editor.
This isn't the only issue with the smacking law, it's meaningless anyway. Child abuse has always been illegal - it hasn't stopped abusive parents in the past!
I'm disappointed that the law was made and that a referendum that cost so much went through (seriously - they could have given the money to me - I would have done something with it - promise), and not only that, it isn't going to change the law anyway, since the referendum doesn't have that power. The prime minister said no to a law change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
you knoe what ypu don't care about childrens of your age or some some one else sometime smacking could be a trigger to mantal illness how would you feel if it was you not us childrens han what are you wuit and there is no need to tell people that antismacking law should stop ok
Hello Anonymous,
I don't really understand what you are saying. I would be happy to discuss.
Maybe you should explain this to me as if I'm a 6 year old. Then, I might understand you.
If it helps, I am dead set against child abuse, but then, I think that applies to everyone.
I didn't bother voting because of the stupid phrasing of the question AND because Key already said it wouldn't make any difference to the law.
But I'm not against it anyway - as long as police don't waste their time investigating light smacks, but have more power to charge parents who really hurt their kids, then the law is working.
Besides, I've never had to smack our daughter. I'm reckon very few kids are so naughty that they can't be disciplined in some other way.
Violet, I agree with your reasoning, which is where I sit. I only voted to exercise my right.
I got smacked quite a lot as a kid, but it was never particularly scary and it was always obvious what it was for.
I'm hardly an absolutist when it comes to most things, this included.
Post a Comment