Sue Bradford, the MP who first proposed the anti-smacking law in New Zealand, is not surprised that the majority of those who voted in the recent referendum do not share her views. However, she maintains, some of those who voted “No” were actually people who do support her, but accidentally ticked the wrong box. She “believed some people were so confused by the question they accidentally voted the wrong way.”
Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?
I understand that some people – unaware of the basic legal reasons for the wording of the question – personally felt that the question was somewhat biased, but so confused that they didn’t even know if a “yes” or a “no” constituted agreement with the current law? Does Sue Bradford really think that her supporters are thick?
Glenn Peoples
Similar Posts:
- The smacking referendum – my summary
- Thank God Sue Bradford is Leaving
- The anti-smacking law: Only a law change is morally acceptable
- No, Mr Baldock, not this time: Should referenda be binding on Parliament?
- Yo Blair!
Apparently yes, she is so desperate for explanations that she is willing to push this line.
I posted something from the Yes Vote site the other day – there does seem to be some basis for the claim as one of their own supporters abused them twice!
http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/zelots-in-charge/