Naughty Daddy

Facebook for politicians is a double edged sword. Some like to think they are engaging with people, this was the deluded strategy of Trevor Mallard and Labour. Others think it is good for debate…until your daughter gives you a spank.

Good on Damien O’Connor’s daughter showing the generational divide up in such a public manner. Bridgette O’Connor says it well:

Unfortunately people do not make the choice to be gay, it is who they are. They cannot change this and are people like you and I. Why should they be denied the same human right everyone else is entitled to just because they love someone the same sex? I hope he does vote for gay marriage as society needs to wake up and realise these are normal people who deserve the same treatment and rights as everyone else.

Damien should listen to his daughter.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Pete George

    She should have put her father right on something else too. When asked to consider changing his position on the bill he said:

    “In short, I have taken into account all of the facts and I believe that
    there are far more injustices that need to be addressed. For example,
    people who are disabled through accidents receive full support, while
    those disabled from birth do not. These injustices are the issues that
    need to be addressed.”

    Becasue he thinks there are bigger issues he’s going to vote against this? Or abstain? Or not vote because he’stoo busy doing more important things?

    • Unsolicitedious

      Well said Pete. And kudos to Damien for being the kind of Dad that allows their child to have their own opinion & respectfully express their own points of view. I like how he defended her. In fact I think he was by far one the more palatable Labour MPs.

      Abstaining – the cowards way out. I respect those who know their own mind far more (even if based on myths & general crazy).

      Interesting that Damien’s own friends have so many pro gay. There is definitely a groundswell going on – not because it is necessarily the most important issue we are facing as country, but because the penny has dropped for so many people & they’ve realised hang on, this has got to change – the current law as it stands is wrong & doesnt make sense.

  • Andrei

    Damien O’Conner should listen to his Church, which is a greater source of wisdom than the young who as we know are easily sucked into ephemeral fads which soon fade away – like Hula hoops or the Spice Girls.

    • ConwayCaptain

      The RC Church is not a greater form of wisdom.  The organisation that has bouught you the Inquisition, Corrupt Vatican Officials, Pedophilia covered up on a large scale, cruelty to Children in orphanages in Europe and elsewhere.

      • Lion_ess

        Not forgetting the Rhythm Method of contraception and “don’t eat meat on Friday’s” – oh hang on, God’s changed his mind – it’s now ok

      • Unsolicitedious

        I am always amazed at how so many Christians, especially Catholics have the audacity to try & claim some sort of moral high ground, like they are one of the few invited to a special secret party. What they fail to miss is that many of us have been & fled after seeing that these people have more in common with Judas than they do Jesus. Interesting also that the snakiest of comments always come from the Christian women – so charming.

      • WayneO

        The Pope also locked Galileo up because he dared to suggest the earth revolved around the sun.

    • Mike Hunt

      nickleback are touring in november

      there is no god

  • Apolonia

     If we had a referendum both Damion and his daughter could have a say on this important topic.

  • Young girls are naive.

    • Polish_pride

      Very dissapointing comment Lucia I suspect that you would have been championing her view to anyone who would listen if her view was the same as yours.
      You too were once a young girl which makes the comment even more shameful.
      I can respect the fact that you have a difference of opinion on the topic and that this is based on your faith. But this comment is the single worst comment I have ever seen you post (seems to be a day of it).  You should be ashamed of yourself on this one.

      • I don’t believe in politicising the comments of young people as Whale has done.  They tend to be clueless as to how the world works, and what the effect of commenting on political positions will be. 

        Yes, I was a young girl once, and yes, I was naive.  Young girls in today’s society tend to really only grow up when they have children.  It’s a massive, massive shift that can’t be explained, only experienced.  Everything changes when you have your own children.

      • Polish_pride

        Actually I tend to find young people tend to question more and often have a fresh perspective, their mind is more open and is less prone to thinking only within the boundaries of the current system.
        To put it in a way that you might more readily understand and appreciate. God presents you with lessons everywhere, in everyone, and in everything. Especially with children no matter their age. Watch a toddler with an uncorrupted mind explore nature with a sense of wonder and amazement that chances are you lost a long time ago because after all you know how the world works.  It is up to you whether or not you pay attention to the lesson God is presenting you with.
        Here is a good example for you God has given everyone a very important gift. The gift of intuition. This is Gods way to let you figure out what is right and what is wrong.
        Now take this gift and ask yourself the question, Is God a loving god or a Jealous, vengeful and wrathful god. or both.
        Ask in your heart what the answer is.
        Not in your head. Your head Lucia will give you what the bible tells you and has told you all your life.
        Your heart and intuition will give you the truth directly from god.    
        Remember when you do this in your faith,  God and Jesus… one in the same…..              

      • Polish Pride,

        The problem with intuition is that you don’t know who is influencing you when you feel it go off.  That’s why God gave us a mind as well, so we have an ability to evaluate every impulse that we are subjected to.

        For instance, the cream donut.  It’s very easy to let the desires of the body overwhelm you, and then fool yourself into thinking that God really wants you to have that donut.  I mean it’s calling to you, what else could he possibly want you to do??

      • Polish_pride

        Wrong Lucia your intuition will tell you you don’t need the Donut (i.e. you will know deep down so to speak). Your head will try and give you the justifications you need to have it anyway. Why do you think it is that someone who is ‘possessesd’ often cites voices in their head telling them what to do. Yet they still instintively know that it is wrong.
        If you want to know the truth of everything you only need to ask god to show it to you and he will. Only after having done this have you truly surrendered yourself to god. But hold on it is a wild and amazing ride.  

      • Polish Pride,

        You seem to be confusing intuition with conscience. :)

      • Polish_pride

        Lucia Thanks for pointing that out – fixed….and all is right with the world..
        Still the lesson on intuition is there for you whether you wish to use it or not is up to you.
        It also lets you determine what in the good book is from God and what is from man. And yes I am well aware that right now you are of the opinion that it is all from God.

    • In Vino Veritas

      “They tend to be clueless as to how the world works, and what the effect of commenting on political positions will be.”

      Thats true Lucia. They also get to vote using their cluelessness. Oh, and become an MP (see Jacinda Adern). 

      • jay cee

        and paula benefit

  • Bridgette unfortunately does not think for herself but instead repeats tired old Progressive crap.

    If she had been educated rather than indoctrinated by NZ’s left controlled education system, and perhaps even if she had been allowed to mature without the pervasive influence of the neo-Marxist culture promoted by NZ’s left wing media entertainment sector, then she might well have been able to think for herself, and then she may well have come to a completely different conclusion to the one she has come to now.

    • Yep, the view she is putting forward is being taught in schools.  My older son had a class on it this week.

      •  Yep, schools no longer school, they merely indoctrinate youngsters so that they all think the same.

        If we had real schools, Bridgette would not be speaking such lame Progressive dogma, but would be forming her own opinions.

    • JimboBug

      Yeah – because equality for all and encouraging marriage is a really left-wing concept.

      I went to a boy’s public school in the UK. The school was about as progressive and left wing as Maggie Thatcher (who I generally worship). But the simple fact is that my generation, and the one beneath it, utterly believe that this is the right thing to do. Not because of left-wing marxism but due to the simple fact that it is not for the state to discriminate between citizens. If religions wish to do this then I have no problems with that at all as it is a choice as to whether you participate in that religion … but the state is compulsory and, as such, its rules need to be blind.

      •  Jimbo, none of what you have written above makes any logical case. It is just Marxist mumbo jumbo. Where ever you went to school, you were taught fuck all about critical thinking.

  • Cows4me

    How is marraige a human right? What a crock of shit.

    • Polish_pride

      Oh really I think you’ve perhaps been getting high of the fumes from Cow shit.
      but really interested is it just Homosexuals that we should deny this right to or are there others of legal age too. Can’t wait to hear your response on this one.

      • Tony

        Pedophiles (and their well-groomed victims) and people under three years of age are also refused this privilege – so are mental patients (I think that they still do). 

        As to your belief that marriage is a right – how can it be? If it is a right b/c it is covered under the law then driving on the left hand side of the road is also a ‘right’ – I wonder how the right-hand side drivers would react? 

        You really make me despair of either your lack of logic or your complete dishonesty.

      • Paranormal

        I’m just a little sick of this whole debate.  I agree with C4m, marriage is not a “basic human right”.  It is a social and political construct.  I’m surprised WO has bought so heavily into the progressives “it’s a human rights thing”.

        The human rights bit was dealt with years ago giving individuals the freedom to be with who they want to be with and able to do wha tthey want together as consenting adults in private.

        All we are seeing now is a political debate and frankly I’m over it.  The only good thing about it, is it’s distracting politicians from making an even bigger mess of the country in other areas. 

      • Polish_pride

        If you read the post Tony you will see I said ‘of legal age’.
        Your example of driving on the left simply does not make sense. It is a law designed so that people do not crash into each other. Driving is a priviledge for which you must sit tests and obtain a licence. You must also not do a certain  things – speed and get caught, drive drunk and get caught, cause and accident that injures or kills someone. Do these things and you can have the ‘privilege’ taken away
        A better example of a right under the law is that you have the right to buy and consume alcohol once you reach 18 years of age.
        You have the right to vote once you reach 18 years of age.
        You have the right to receive a pension once you reach 65 years of age.
        See how it works.
        What makes me despair is coming on here and having to educate supposed right wingers such as yourself in very very simple concepts! No wonder this country is fucked!    

      • Tony

        Actually PP you have proved my point. A Right is a Right – it has no limits You have misused the language to demonstrate your lack of understanding. Don’t worry – you are not alone. This is the arena of Progressives, to destroy the language and invent new meanings.

        One does not have a Right to vote upon reaching a certain age. One has been provided a legal privilege. If was a Right – then it would be there regardless of age and mental capacity. You can tell that it is not a right b/c the age can be changed.

        How can you use the alcohol example when just 20-years ago the age was not 18 but 20?  

        Plain dumb.

      • Tony

        If you would like some good info regarding the concept of Rights I would suggest “Intellectuals and Society” by Thomas Sowell.  Your use of the term ‘rights’ to actually mean the arbitrary imposition of limits by the powerful on to third parties (driving, voting, alcohol) does not accord to the actual ideas of rights. I could say more but I wouldn’t want to spoil a great read!

      • Polish_pride

        Wrong Tony I gave you examples of the difference between a right and a priviledge if you can’t understand the difference. Then I cannot help you.
        read the first paragraph.

        Isn’t it funny the actual Elections page even calls it the right to vote. In fact if your so convinced it is a priveledge I suggest you contact them and ask them to correct it. I’m sure they will….

        read the fourth paragraph it talks about priviledge…..but then this isn’t 19th Century England.

        And if you are going to come on here and try to debate a point with me first of all good luck. 2nd try google it might help you a lot…… then again it might not.

      • Unsolicitedious

        I am not sure if marriage is a human right per se, but everyone has the right to be free from discrimination – that is most definitely a human right. Obviously these rights are limited to what the law has said is OK. The law says that same sex relationships is OK (especially men – interesting that there was no law against lesbianism…..nice hypocrisy that one!), just the same as it has said it is OK for blacks to sit anywhere on the bus, get married, for women to vote/are no longer the property of men & for everyone can have whatever faith the like. 

        So if the law has said that gays are first rate citizens just the same as everyone else, why is they are still treated as second rate citizens when it comes to marriage. 

        It is this point that will almost guarantee gay couples getting the right to marriage as the law does not make sense in the context of modern society and further, it is blatant discrimination.

      • Unsolicitedious

        P.s re election/right to vote: it is an absolute right. I was never given permission, I didn’t have to pass a test or do anything. I just got sent election papers when I turned 18. 

        The only people that dont automatically have this right is, I suspect, some people with special needs or who are severely mentally inhibited. 

        But everyone else rich/poor, fat/thin, brown/black/yellow/white/pink, tall/short, criminal/not, literate/not, educated/not get the right to vote. The electoral law doesnt discriminate. Just my 2 cents

      • Tony

        PP – your counter-argument is based upon a government web site. I can understand that you think that the government is all-seeing and all-knowing. I however do not.

        Unsolicitedious – Voting is absolutely not a Right. 
        It can be taken away by a simple change of the law. 
        What you are looking at is an age-related automatic privilege – which can 
        be taken away when you go to prison

  • LesleyNZ

    And how does Bridgette know it is not a lifestyle choice?  The gay people may be “normal” as being human beings, but is their behaviour and lifestyle “normal”? I would not have thought so. It is that word “normal” again. No such thing these days.

    • Polish_pride

      Perhaps she is Gay, perhaps some of her friends are.
      I personally think we should stop bigots getting married to reduce the chances of them procreating and bringing up bigoted children.
      The world would be a far nicer place to live in if we did that.

      • Tony

        Your complaint of bigotry only seems to extend to the things that you support. If you want complete freedom then you need to widen laws to include polygamists and pedophiles. If, on the other hand, you only want to include gays and ignore other areas of our society then please don’t use ‘freedom’ and ‘rights’ as your central plank. You need to be more honest than that.

        If you said, gays are closer to normal people than pedophiles then you get my interest. If you say gays are not dangerous to other people then we have a debate – don’t however talk about rights without attempting to deal with the other aberrant sections of our society.

      • Polish_pride

        Luckily for me when it comes to freedom and equality I support a lot of things. 
        No problem with widening the laws to polygamists. So long as existing wives consent.

        Paedophiles – Hmmm no you have to be 18 years of age before you have the ‘Right’ to Marry (16 with your parents consent). Both parties in a marriage need to be consenting and of legal age.
        Btw Paedofiles can marry and in fact many are. Grahajm Caphill prime example!!

        I hope you know some gay people and also have the figures on white hetrosexual men in both paedofillia and serial killer statistics before you come with a Homosexuals are bad for society argument.    

      • Tony

        I didn’t.

      • jay cee

        “stop bigots breeding” now theres a thought it would wipe out the right in a couple of generations!

    • Tony

      Agreed. There is no way that a spot of buggery is normal. It just isn’t normal. Running around a parade float in jockey shorts and a glittery singlet with a top hat shouting about being a hero is not normal.

      Heroes are the two guys that are coming home from the ‘Ghan – by the way, whose going to break it to the morning weather boy that he got the job b/c he was a brown fag – not b/c he got top of his class at physics?

      • le sphincter

        THats why they are in the Ghan,  to shoot bigots like you in the head. Only difference is that there they  wear floppy robes

      • Tony

        very sad – arse muscle.

        you clearly don’t know our mission

      • Unsolicitedious

        Normal: the usual, average or typical state or condition.

        Anal & oral sex – been around since sex first began between men and between men & women. 

        “Buggery” was such a issue in biblical times between the so-called heterosexual man and his slave that 2 apostles wrote about it.

        At the time normal also things like including slavery, pedophiles free to do what they love (endless accounts of men forcing girls to marry them), incest, polygamy, female & male circumcision, being forced to marry your rapist, encourage 2 bears to maul 42 children to death because the mocked a bald man, Kings demanding 100 foreskins before they allow someone to marry their daughter….the list is endless.

        The definition of normal changes as society evolves & decides what it values.

        Judging by the support this Bill appears to have most people seem to have moved on from such antiquated & gruesome ideals

      • Unsolicitedious,

        I will have to agree with you on the definition of normal, when taken to mean what men and women do, in comparison to what is good or not harmful for them to do.  It’s only been Judaic and Christian societies that have frowned on most sexuality activity beyond what occurred between spouses.

        As we slide back into paganism, all of the associated sexual behaviours will return, after all, without growing up in a moral society, men especially will generally have sex with anything.

        It’s not going to be a good environment to be a woman in.

        Same-sex marriage will devalue women in society

      • Unsolicitedious

        Lucia re “as we slide back into paganism, all of the associated sexual behaviours will return” – problem with that statement, it assumes such things left when in actual fact they have always been part & parcel of any society regardless of era.
        Re “after all, without growing up in a moral society, men especially will generally have sex with anything” – so very true. For once we agree. Men are just made differently.I had a look at your blog. Re “it was Judaism — very much through its insistence on marriage and family and its rejection of infidelity and homosexuality — that initiated the process of elevating the status of women.” – I disagree. Jesus elevated women not Judaism…the faith that fails to acknowledge the King has been & gone (crude, but you know what I mean). Judaism didn’t even begin to value women, it treated women as property only whose only purpose was to make the bread, serve sexual needs & have children. And to claim same sex marriages will devalue women – I could not disagree more. The only thing that devalues women is women themselves when they put up with men who treat them badly & when hate on each other. The growth of individualism over community has meant that women are pitted against one another more & more (jobs/best mother in the world job/best mother & carer girl in the world/best homemaker/best anything!) which in essence undermines the very fabric that holds society together. The erosion of sisterhood devalues what makes us women.

    • Unsolicitedious

      Once again an irrelevant comment: the law says being gay is fine. And it is the law that we enter marriage with. Not God and no you.

      In doing so the law made gay people (well men since there was no law again lesbianism) in NZ free to live their lives as they should. There is no reason why they should not be given full societal rights. It’s that simple.

      • guest

        The law is an ass as we all know

      • guest

        There are also a lot of reasons why they shouldn’t be given full societal rights too which is why we are debating this topic over and over and over again, if everybody shared your view we wouldn’t be discussing at length everyday.

      • Unsoliciteidous

        But none of them have any substance – not under the law or common decency. 

        The only way for the anti gay marriage views to hold any weight is for the law to declare homosexuality (including lesbianism) illegal. 

        And that is never going to happen.

      • LesleyNZ

        Irrelevant according to you Unsolicitedious. They have already have societal rights with Civil Union. Get another name for “Gay Marriage” because whether you like it or not it is very different to heterosexual marriage.                      

      • Unsolicitedious

        Refusing to allow gay couples to marry and instead creating a special new law for them is not full societal rights Lesley.

        And yes I have see your feeble argument that they are trying to steal the word “marriage” from you. 

        If your marriage is that vulnerable I suggest you stop posting on here & start engaging with your spouse.

        Btw, if you look up what the word “marriage” means, it is most commonly defined as ” social union or legal contract between people called spouses that creates kinship”. That applies to gay couples wanting to public declare their commitment.

    • Unsolicitedious

      Lucia re “as we slide back into paganism, all of the associated sexual behaviours will return” – problem with that statement, it assumes such things left when in actual fact they have always been part & parcel of any society regardless of era.
      Re “after all, without growing up in a moral society, men especially will generally have sex with anything” – so very true. For once we agree. Men are just made differently.

      I had a look at your blog. Re “it was Judaism — very much through its insistence on marriage and family and its rejection of infidelity and homosexuality — that initiated the process of elevating the status of women.” – I disagree. Jesus elevated women not Judaism…the faith that fails to acknowledge the King has been & gone (crude, but you know what I mean). Judaism didn’t even begin to value women, it treated women as property only whose only purpose was to make the bread, serve sexual needs & have children. 

      And to claim same sex marriages will devalue women – I could not disagree more. The only thing that devalues women is women themselves when they put up with men who treat them badly & when hate on each other. 

      The growth of individualism over community has meant that women are pitted against one another more & more (jobs/best mother in the world job/best mother & carer girl in the world/best homemaker/best anything!) which in essence undermines the very fabric that holds society together. The erosion of sisterhood devalues what makes us women.

      • Unsolicitedious

        Oops wrong spot

  • Groans

    Obviously this girl is a victim of the mandatory Socialist Religion preached in NZ schools.  Sad stuff.

  • George

    Gays can have their romantic liasons formalised now with the civil union that protects their rights.
    They are not denied any rights by not being described as married.  What they are trying to do is compell society by law to recognise their sexually based lifestyles as wholesome. Thus it would criminalise anyone who disagrees.   Marriage can only take place between a man and a woman. Alternatives are farcical, no matter who performs the ‘wedding’ ceremony, or who agrees with the concept.  Some things are timeless.

    • Tony

      Totally agree. Their ‘prize’ is not marriage – it is gay adoption – the inculcation of innocent children into an aberrant lifestyle. That is their strategic aim. The rainbows need to get honest.

      In saying that, I am fair more relaxed about lesbian adoption than I am of two blokes – that is sick, that is wrong.

    • George you are talking through a whole in your arse…go get a civil union and then see how you get on adopting children…as a heterosexual….they are not the same. 

      • George

        You don’t even need to get civily unionised to be knocked back on adoption. Try adopting if you’re single, or be a slightly older hetero couple or different race than what the powers that be think appropriate.

  • MASH_4077th

    Why is it ok for gay people to get married but I am not allowed more than 1 wife at a time? Why am I not allowed to marry my cousin? Why am I not allowed to marry anything other than another human being? Bottom line these things are culturally unacceptable. Where does the blurring of the line stop. I have no problem with gay people getting married..bloody good luck to them the problem is sooner or later the moral fiber is broken down and eventually it is ok root your cousin and get married to your dog.

    • JimboBug

      If you can show me that the non-human being has the capacity to willingly enter into marriage then I think that would be more shocking than the actual marriage.

      Lots of countries (and states) allow you to marry your cousin (and many places encourage it to keep wealth in the extended family) – there actually isn’t all that much wrong with it genetically if it isn’t a regular occurrence.

      And I personally think that you should be allowed to have more than one wife / husband. Its just the state should only recognise the first for welfare / benefit purposes.

    • You are allowed to marry your cousin. One MP is currently married to her cousin and has had children. It isn;t illegal to marry your cousin in NZ.

      Another person blindly repeating nonsense without any basis in fact.

      • Unsolicitedious

        Ha including first cousins – never knew that (I just had a look at the Notice of Intended Marriage form). Classic NZ – no wonder some families look so ‘close’!!!

      • MASH_4077th

        I stand corrected! 

  • ConwayCaptain

    In 1965 I went to sea and was confronted on my first voyage by out and out homosexuality the like you wuld never have seen ashore.  WHY???  Becaise at sea they could carry on with their friends and partners and if they didnt try it on with you it was live and let live.  The Passenger vessels were full of them.

    I have friends who have been in LONG term Gay relationashipos which broke up and because they were not covered by a civil union in those days they were ripped of by their partners and left with very little.

    If people want to live in a loving relationship with their same sex partner that is fine with me and I dont care if they call it a civil union or marriage.  I dont think that the churches should be made to carry out these ceremonies if they dont agree with it. 

    • JimboBug

      And I don’t think that anyone plans on forcing churches to do so. Marriage between divorcees is relatively common and allowed under law but churches are allowed to not perform them. Heck even Prince Charles had his second marriage in a non-religious ceremony and he is the future head of the C of E!

    • Vlad

      Bit of solid commonsense from the Captain, and not for the first time.  Let’s get it done and move on to more important stuff.

      • ConwayCaptain

        Thank you Vlad.  Your ancient namesake would have had them impaled.  Maybe the male gays woulod have liked that!!!

        I was bought up in Jersey and in the 50’s and 60’s it was legal between consenting adults over a certain age.  One of the wealthiest men there in the pre tax haven days was gay but he gave a hell of a lot to the island and was one of the world;s leading experts on orchids and there is an orchid centre there named after him.

  • jaundiced

    Some of the comments on this post today are peurile and dumb. Allowing gay marriage will lead to you rooting your cousin and marrying your dog. Supporting gay marriage is like wanting a cream donut – should I laugh or cry? If God gave you a mind Lucia, he is probably disparing at the mindless dogma being practised by his so-called followers.  

    • Jaundied,

      Supporting gay marriage is like wanting a cream donut – should I laugh or cry?

      Probably cry, because that’s not what I said.

      • Mediaan

        I agree, Lucia. That’s not what you said.

        I am a lot different from you on religion, but I have been reading all this stuff and sighing. But I’ve been thinking that your views were extremely sensible and well thought-out.

  • Bunswalla

    I’m not sure what age Bridgette O’Connor is but I’m pretty sure she’s not a silly little girl. Regardless of whether you agree with her views or not, she has a right to put them and she does so very well and without malice or personal attack i.e. better than most of us here.

    I struggle to see where the “spanking” the “Naughty Daddy” or the “bad-dad” parts come in though – I suspect that cheeky WO chappy of fomenting more mischief on this hot-button topic.

  • Markm

    This young girl falls into the same trap as other intellectually vacuous individuals.
    She claims marriage is a basic human right.
    It was an early christian institution intended for a man and a woman.
    Chris Faafoi this morning is quoted as saying he will support the bill because everyone is entitled to equal rights regardless of their race , religion or gender.

    So I am now expecting Chris and his liberal mates to champion the selection of non Maori in the NZ Maori rugby team , an Anglican as the next pope , and male Hockey players in the Womens Black sticks , although the latter may weaken the team.

    Some things just arent meant for everyone.

    I am not against Gays marrying per se , I am against what is behind this bill , and that is bringing an unnatural practice into the mainstream of acceptability
    In ten years time those on this site and many others will be complaining that their childrens sex education classes refer to sex with the opposite sex or the same sex as simply personal choice.

    To late then to complain when your future All Black son becomes a hairdresser

    • Tony

      don’t we now have an AB who is a hairdresser?

      • Markm

        Your right , my mistake .
        Note to self not all hairdressers gay

    • Unsolicitedious

      Markm re “to late then to complain when your future All Black son becomes a hairdresser”…..really bad analogy given the amount of dry humping that goes on in rugby clubrooms.

      As for stating anyone who is pro gay marriage is ” intellectually vacuous” – that is as laughable as stating we are left wingers.

      At least when I say your ignorance is indicative of a low IQ I can back it up with some research….unlike you who appears to pull comments directly from your arse and assert them as fact.

      If you dont want your child/ren to be taught about sex by the school then how about you start educating them now – sex education may be covered by the school, but everything of any real substance pertaining to this topic – including relationships, emotions, safe sex etc, is the responsibility of the parent.

      As for gay marriage “is bringing an unnatural practice into the mainstream of acceptability” – welcome to modern society, this has already happened…..did so when sex first started. The law is merely catching up.

      The lack of comprehensive reasons why you oppose gay marriage indicates that it is you rather than Bridgette that is “intellectual vacuous”.

  • jaundiced


  • Polish_pride

    I still say change the name of ‘Civil Union’ to ‘Celebration of Love’ and then the only ones getting ‘Married’ in a generations time will be religos and bigots.  

    • Tony

      Agree with your proposal but you are quite wrong with your outcome. Brain S says it very well (below)

    • davewin

       Why not simply call it an orgy?

  • Brian Smaller

    Once again most of you frame anyone who opposes homosexual marriage, for ANY reason, a ‘bigot’.  What is the difference between that and the AGW people calling anyone who raises a contrary opinion a ‘denier’?  Even some gays, and who knows how many, don’t support gay marriage. Are they bigots too? 

    • davewin

       The reason is that we have become afraid to describe ourselves as we are. I am proud to be a Homophobe and a Redneck. My family and friends who know me can make those judgements. Commenters on Blog sites are simple unwanted static.

      • Lion_ess

        So why blog Dave? 

        I read something somewhere, sometime ago, that “people try to repress what they fear”, this registered a click for me:- BlacksWomenNon ChristiansNon muslimsGaysIn our shameful, bigot-filled society, black coloured people are equal. So apparently are women although wages haven’t caught up across the board (still working on it), Christians fear non-Christians, muslims fear non-muslims, and general folk fear gays.You claim to be a homophobe & redneck, Dave – what is it that you fear?

  • guest

    Is it just me or is it trendy to be a fag or lesbian these days? Whats up with this Alison Mau woman all of a sudden turning lezzie after being happily married with two kids for most of her life? Im just not getting this pro gayness thing is there any evidence that they just perhaps need to see a shrink for a decade or so till have have these sick twisted thoughts exited from their minds. Just my opinion or is it illegal to think like this these days?

    • In some places, it’s getting to the point where it’s going to become illegal to get therapy to change orientation.  You can only get therapy to accept it.  Such as California: California Bill Would Ban Conversion Therapy to Make Gay Teens Straight

      • Oh the Pray the Gay away method…works as well as the Rhythm method of contraception…

      • Whale,

        Conversion therapy is psychological, not religious.

    • LesleyNZ

      Guest – it is illegal – you are not allowed to have an opinion these days – unless you agree with what the latest liberal “popular culture” is – that is just how it seems to be. Those who turn “lezzie” after having been married for many years have made a choice to be in a homosexual relationship – not in a heterosexual relationship anymore. They were not born like it at all. 

      • Guest

        LesleyNZ  I couldn’t agree more, as mentioned above my cousin was straight entered the dance party scene along with excessive drug taking then turned gay? We were all quite gobsmacked but he hasn’t found true love in a gay relationship he’s just F*&$d up in my view.

  • Pingback: Go Bridgette | Kiwiblog()

  • guest

    Unsolicitedous, drawing a long bow there comparing treatment of blacks on a bus and discrimination to some homos wanting to play mums and dads don’t you think?

    • Unsolicitedious

      Nope as it is about civil rights & full societal rights. Put simply, the law as it stands says OK gay people, you can be gay and in fact you can have the same legal rights as heteros, but we wont let you call it marriage as that’s just for the heteros. This is discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation – same legal rights with a massive BUT. It’s the same as continuing to keep blacks at the back of the bus – they’re allowed on the same one as the whites, just not allowed full access.  

      There is simply no plausible reason why marriage cannot be extended to gay couples – gays can after all marry heteros (whether as celebrants or ministers – see Margaret Mayman), and people can get married anywhere at any time. It maketh no sense!

      “homos wanting to play mums & dads” – charming. I assume that means you have no issue with women being in same sex relationships….that exclude men! Big shock: “homos” or gay men & women are already mums & dads. But if you were serious about discussing this issue properly you would know this.

      • guest

        Very clever that you have figured out I am anti gay marriage, your nit picking on this issue is becoming a real bore You will just have to accept that my views differ to yours and get over it.
         In my opinion there are many plausible reasons as to why marriage cannot be extended to gay couples including lesbians but we have mentioned reasons here many times by people that oppose gay marriage.Want to have a serious discussion about gays as parents, I have a cousin who lives in Sydney who is gay and he and his partner have three children (mixed up sperm) so anybody’s guess who the Dad is. They are the most promiscuous lot (gays) I have ever come across, they take drugs and it makes them more kinky apparently.The sorry mess they leave for other people to pick up when they keep breaking up and sleeping with other people is a sight to behold, his parents are too old for this shit hell they don’t even know the Mother of these children and  guess what because the Mother is some random from Mexico when it all falls apart ,she’s nowhere to be seen because she only carried the children for the money.The gay faux mum and dad are busy rooting other people and can’t do their parenting job properly.bloody hopeless don’t we have enough problems in society with straight parents trying to parent in a PC gone mad world. Lets just have complete anarchy and let everybody do what they want because everybody has the right to be what they want without any dissenting views in your world and lets not have losers everyone is a winner yay! 


      • Unsolicitedious

        Guest – I’m only boring you because you dont like what I have to say! :-)

        Re your cousin & his mixed up sperm kids – so what? Sperm & eggs dont make a parent. Love, nurturing, commitment & validation do. There is plenty of mixed up people from so-called white picket fence hetero homes.

        Sounds like your cousin & his partner are really messed up. But that is not a reflection on all gay couples just the same as the Kahui/King horror is a reflection on hetero couples. Lots of people are messed up – environment (lack of good values & being brought up to be self-managing, respectful & contributing members of society) has more to do with it than ones sexual orientation.

        Re “They are the most promiscuous lot (gays) I have ever come across”

        Well according to Colin Craig & Durex New Zealand (hetero) women are the most promiscuous.

        As for the leap from gay marriage to anarchy – you realise that we live in hell on earth as it stands? Always have since Eve took a bite of that apple…..humans suck so dont blame the worlds woes on 2 adults in a consensual loving relationship trying to have the same right to commit as others!

      • guest

        Why do pro gay bring up the Kahui twin horror as you describe it all the time? What happened to your precious laws in this case? What happened to the rights of the babies and people in society to live without fear from the mongrel that did this?Why oh why it maketh no sense there is simply no plausible reason why no one has been arrested to this day? it maketh no sense to me here ye Lord we are living in hell on earth especially if gays can marry then have babies!

        • Lion_ess

          Does the word “maketh” make you feel holy?  Actually it makes you sound gay, but not in a homosexual way.  You sound like a dick-head, or Amish

      • Mediaan

        So calling some lambs pet lambs and letting the kids take them to Pet Day is discriminatory…

        And calling some women beautiful is discriminatory…

        And giving Peter Jackson a Sir in front of his name is discriminatory…

        I looked up Margaret Mayman. She sounds a lot like you, Unsol, but has probably got better manners. She is a lesbian who has a job as a Minister for the Presbyterians at St Whatever on the Terrace, Wellington.

        Get this. In 2004, she

      • Mediaan

        Let’s see if my computer will allow me to finish.

        In 2004 she made a speech at or near Parliament, and told them homosexuals were rejoicing because society had recognised their rights in the Civil Union entitlements.

        I look forward to much celebration as we embrace the rights and responsibilities that civil unions will bring to us as individuals, couples, families, and as a nation.

      • Polish_pride

        Guest you completely missed the point on the king Kahui thing. You can say gays would make unfit parents and thats the reason not to have gay marriage. Heteroes make unfit parents and even kill their kids (how much more unfit can you get FFS) and yet they are allowed to marry. Not all Parents are like KIng/Kahui and not all Gays are like your messed up cousins. 
        Given the situation with your cousins and the fact that there’s kids involved- what have you done about it!?! More than come on WO and post about being against gay marriage I hope!

      • Unsolicitedious

        Guest – I brought up Kahui/King purely as an example of 2 heterosexuals who are not worth the air they breath. As it has been in the media recently it immediately came to mind. My point being is that child abuse is a completely separate issue to sexual orientation: 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 6 boys are likely to be sexually abused before the age of 16. 90% of children who are sexually abused are sexually abused by someone they know – according to Statistics NZ this is 99% male with Uncles being the number one offender.

        In my view to suggest those who are in same sex relations/are attracted to the same sex pose a threat to our society is not only deeply insulting to the gay community itself, but it belittles the silent terror so many children go through every day in this country. It illustrates a complete lack of understanding, knowledge, respect & empathy for the thousands of children abused, neglected & maltreated every year.

        Mediaan – if you found the time to google an old quote of Margaret’s then surely you can find the time to read what she said on Stuff 2 weeks ago? And surely you could find the time to look into her whole background so you have a complete understanding of her perspective on things, rather than the one you are attempting to allude to….

    • Alext

      You don’t wake up one morning and come out and say “Today I’m

  • guest

    Lion_ess if you are having trouble keeping up maybe its time for bed, merely quoting another blogger if you care to read what’s being written.
    A dickhead or Amish? a tad immature there showing your age maybe?

    • Lion_ess

      The guest blogger was trying to connect pro-gay with Kahui on this site.  Personally I haven’t observed the connection. Seriously, if you are talking maketh, perhaps you need the early night.

  • GeorgeRomero

    Hey polish , why dont you show us the stats of white ”paedofillia” and white male serial killers.
    Don’t fuck around , get the stats or shut the fuck up you racist.

    • Unsolicitedious

      George R: 

      1 in 3 girls and 1 in 6 boys are likely to be sexually abused before the age of 16.5 – 90% of children who are sexually abused are sexually abused by someone they know -according to Statistics NZ this is 99% male with Uncles being the number one offender. The odds are that given the overwhelming number of non maori to maori in NZ, non maori – namely of European descent, are most likely to be overrepresented in the statistics. Interestingly other statistics show that Children are seven times more likely to be beaten badly by their parents than sexually abused by them.MSD noted in their social report in 2009 that Maori children were more likely to have been exposed to more physical abuse, maltreatment & inter-parent violence but not sexual abuse (i.e reporting of sexual abuse against Maori & European children – mostly girls, is roughly the same).Quick google search of recent sexual abuse cases committed by the lovely white NZ male:*Graham Capill *Beast of Blenheim*Peter Ellis*Robin Andrew, 61 European, a former St John Ambulance area manager (2008)
      *European middle-aged man wanted in connection with an indecent act in a Wellington public toilet (2009)
      *60 year old European Allen John Ellis (2009)
      *That talented comedian who made us all laugh  but whom we cant name(2010)
      *Dennis McKenna (2012)*numerous teachers (given current statistics the likelihood of them being white & middle class quite high)*Bede Hampton, 62 – former Catholic teaching brotherI could go on…..

      • GeorgeRomero

         Please go on , also you haven’t given any links ,  and who are these’ 61 European’ you are referencing too.How many of your child sex offenders are homosexuals? .Cough up arsehole

      • Tony

        “likely”……………………………….”likely”…………………”likely”……………….what a goat

      • Polish_pride

        According to the Survey of Inmates of State Correctional Facilities by the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, the following statistics have been recorded concerning the characteristics of offenders who violate and assault children.
        * Those inmates who were convicted of committing violent acts against children were more like to have been white, a percentage of nearly 70%, than any other race.* White inmates were nearly three times more likely to have victimized a child than black inmates.* About one in every seven Hispanic convicts had been convicted for a crime against a child.* Nearly two-thirds of convicted child molesters and/or offenders were or had been married.

      • Polish_pride

        ad the  “Intellectuals and Society” by Thomas Sowell”Intellectuals and Society” by Thomas Sowell

    • Polish_pride

      George Romero

      racist A label given to a person, or group of people who hate/dislike those who belong to a different race. This typically applies to hatred based on skin-color.

      bigot One who is narrrowly or intolerantly devoted to his or her opinions and prejudices. This word is a general term that applies to everyone (racists, anti-Semites, misogynists, homophobes and xenophobes).

      btw I have posted the link on paedofillia down further

      at best you could have called me a bigot for being intolerent of the bigoted views on here but then to do so you would be drawing a very very long bow.

  • Guest

    Wow Polish you want me to pick up the pieces of their sorry lives? Its called CHOICES and no I didnt miss the point anout the Kahuis I think you missed my point.

  • Mediaan

    As far as I know, various people being named here as famous in relation to child crimes are completely anonymous as to their sexual orientation.

    Where have these famous individuals stated they are homosexual or heterosexual?
    Probably nowhere. It exists only in the fevered imagination of angry gay arrange debaters.
    Some of them have not been convicted of any crime so are, furthermore, legally innocent.

    If you wish to make a point about behaviour, do what the commenter on a gay parent couple in Sydney did — make it clear how you know they are gay (or heterosexual)