Saturday, August 9, 2008

Liarbour's secret agenda: Legalised polygamy!!


As the left talk about secret agendas from National, remember the stuff Liarbour delivered without any warning , any mention in the 2005 party manifesto, like the anti-smacking bill or the Electoral Finance Act.
Yet the left are having orgasms over Bill English who said he wanted to sell Kiwibank 'eventually', a comment that wholly fits in with National's policy of no privatisations during National's first term.
And what did Lockwood Smith say, that National would would have to engage in deabte with the voters, in other worlds consult with them, before doing things, something totally absent from the Helengrad regime.
And so after legalising prostitution and civil unions, we see yet more social engineering: allowing people to have more than one wife or husband.
The story is the lead in Ian Wishart's newly launched digital newspaper TGIF, and his inquiries led the government to remove a speech from Minister Ruth Dyson from the Beehive website, but google caches have preserved her speech for posterity and scrutiny.
Indeed, as Whale Oil notes, what is Liarbour trying to hide, when it removed Dyson's speech from the Beehive Website. I might add, doesn't such shady behaviour highlight Liarbour's own secret agenda, doesn't it confirm that Ian Wishart is once more onto something and leading the media pack, again.
Of course, is such a legalise polygamy policy so shocking. It is becoming accepted in various Western Countries in the name of multicultiralism and bowing down to radical Islam.
Take a look at Britain and its Liarbour government, whose activities usually lead to some copying by Helengrad a few years later, such as with pledge cards and Liarbour's recent announcement to raise the school leaving age to 18.
In 2000, Muslims initially were 'challenging the law' . By 2004 the Inland Revenue talked of recognising it in tax law . Then, earlier this year, a UK government review said it would allow men to claim extra benefits of £33.65 a week for each extra wife!
Already in Australia, similar campaigns to recognise polygamy are underway.
So don't be too surprised that Dear Leader and Helengrad is yet to embark on another journey in its undermining of traditional Kiwi social values. We cannot be too far behind.
True, some of its laws like civil unions and legalising prostitution were brave and correct, but if it had the courage of its convictions, Liarbour would argue freely for such policies.
It can hardly accuse National of having secret agendas when its own furtive behaviour confirms its own dirty secrets.
There again, we all know the one word, beginning with 'h' that sums up Dear Leader and her Liarbour government. And for once, I don't mean Helengrad.
Hat tip: Whale Oil, TGIF

9 comments:

Psycho Milt said...

I've seen this bullshit line that Labour had its own secret agenda of civil unions, legalising prostitution and banning smacking on a few blogs now. And certainly, if those laws hadn't arisen through private members' bills it would be a good point. But they did. So it isn't.

Anonymous said...

Fine PM - but who were the private members putting those bills through? Labour and Green party stooges no doubt! Good way to hide the party agenda isn't it!

I suppose Dyson will now be putting the Polygamy bill through as a private member!

Also, what about the secret 42% tax rate that is going be put on the 60K rich pricks?

ZenTiger said...

I'm not sure liberalisation of marriage laws is a secret agenda, more like an assumed eventuality to many liberals.

Just because ministers can drop private members bills into the debate, doesn't mean that the ruling party need vote them in. Where they do vote them in, then secret agenda or not, the point is moot. What cannot be denied is that the law was voted in.

This is what struck me about many of the Greens policies. In writing, in their Tax submission papers a few years ago, they were open to Capital Gains Tax on the family home. They were quick to say it wasn't their policy. That, again, is hardly the point if they introduce things that "aren't there policy" but those things get voted in anyway.

All we can do is look at what Labour/Greens actually voted in, and then extrapolate out to what they are likely to vote in, even if it's apparently some big cosmic accident that the bill comes up for discussion.

WAKE UP said...

The only thing that ever trickles down from the top, under any government, is not $$ but Attitude (think of the Nixon White House, where an an honest man could not survive) - and none of these dodgy and often irrelevant initiatives (polygamy, same-sex etc) would have had legs if it wasn't for the dodgy lot at the top in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Just wait for their other secret agenda to come forth - lowering the age of consent. I bet they can't wait to get one through.

James said...

Hmmmm so people will be free to set up their own relationships as they freely choose to without interference from the State or other busybodies...? I like it....well done Labour if true.

Psycho Milt said...

Just wait for their other secret agenda to come forth...

Given that the first secret agenda was non-existent, the term "other" is superfluous.

...who were the private members putting those bills through? Labour and Green party stooges no doubt! Good way to hide the party agenda...

On reading this, one feels a sudden urge to seek out private members' bills put in the ballot by National and ACT MPs, to uncover their cleverly-hidden secret party agenda... but then sanity prevails.

mawm said...

PM - I agre with your point that they were private members bills, but when every member of a party is whipped to vote for that bill, it no longer has that appearance and looks suspiciously like a 'ploy' to hide their agenda.

Bradford's bill is a case in point and one can only assume that there was a secret deal done between Labour and Greens and that it was very important that Labour gave them 100% support.

Anonymous said...

V writes:

I am with James and PM. I have no interest in polygamy myself but it's scary to see how many people actually feel some kind of hatred towards it!

The picture at the top of the article would seem to imply that there is some kind of Muslim connection? I don't know about that but what I do know about is the large number of polyamorous and would-be polygamous white or brown everyday Kiwis...

Once again a case of check your facts before knee-jerking along with the Wishart Brigade...