Help with language definition to cover the new laws.

#1 Repeal of Section the Use of Reasonable Force. Or making what is reasonable illegal to criminalise those acting reasonably. 

Ok there seems to be a deliberate attempt to redefine a “smack” as a “beating”.

This ham fisted attempt at nurolinguistic programming by the left has led to people (85% at last count) being labeled as “pro-beating” by leftist hacks and Mike Moreu (who is possibly a subset of group A anyway).

To claim back our languge and provide a guidline for those who may be confused please apply the floowing principle:

1. A smack as an ”acceptble spank” would be want you want to do with Haley Westenra. 

2. A smack which would be “acceptable thrashing” would be what you want to do to Sue Bradford.

Use it in good health and send the abuse, threats, and hatemail to the usual address: cramithippie@likeicare.com 

Wait did I mean unacceptable there? Meh who can say, we’ll just legalise it with retrospective legislation after the election. As Helen said, retrospective legislation is ALWAYS an option.

We don’t answer to you. You work for US!

Press release from SmackingBack

“Government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

Abraham Lincoln once used these golden words to describe the purpose of politicians in a free society. Yet with polls now showing over 80% of New Zealanders in opposition to Sue Bradford’s proposed anti-smacking bill, it is clear that our current government no longer understands why they have been elected. In accordance with another cornerstone of a free society, freedom of speech and freedom to dissent, Coalition Against Nanny State’s Anti-Smacking Law (CANSAL) will be staging a peaceful march on Parliament to remind our politicians just whom they are elected to serve.