Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Lucia Marriage Ammendment Submissions

Andrew Sullivan, same-sex marriage campaigner (from the point of view that there is a "conservative case" for same-sex marriage), entered a submission into the select committee that was looking into the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Ammendment Bill by Labour MP, Louisa Wall. It's just selected paragraphs from an article he wrote ten years ago for Time Magazine and it's considered a unique submission.

Andrew Sullivan does not even live here in New Zealand, he's not a New Zealand citizen, he is not likely to live in New Zealand and yet his submission is giving weight to the pro-same-sex marriage argument. It would be nice to be able to differentiate those submissions that were actually by New Zealanders that live here, as opposed to those that are by activists who want to change laws around the world.

A personal friend of mine, who shall not be named, also submitted a personal submission to the select committee. She wrote it herself and like Terry Wallbank's submission, does not exist on the Government database, so presumably can be considered a form submission or a non-unique submission, which it certainly was not.

I am amazed.

Terry Wallbank has been going through the submissions to show how asinine some of them, those that were considered unique, were. Go have a look, especially at the first example he gives of a heart cut out of a piece of paper and folded in two with the words, "Marriage Equality is not a moral issue, it's a HUMAN RIGHT!" Yep, that was considered a unique submission, while as many well-thought out arguments against "marriage equality" were ignored!

UPDATE: Ok, that last one was actually by Mark Johnston and 32 others, with the "others" not explicitly named. So, there were 33 in total of this type: Heart Letter. And there were 4050 of another type, listed under Cox Family and 4049 others: Cox Family Form Letter.

Related link: A sample of pro-gay-marriage submissions to the select committee—some doozies ~ Terry Wallbank, The Conservative

5 comment(s):

Chris Sullivan said...

I know 3 people who wrote submissions against and asked to be heard, and were not allowed to present their submission in person.

This refusal to hear submissions properly is a very serious violation of democracy.

God Bless

the conservative said...

Lucia, I have just figured out who you are--sorry. I am still confused about what is considered a unique and what is not.

But how many submissions are from foreigners is another question.

Terry Wallbank

ZenTiger said...

I think it's worth a question to the people who classified the submissions to explain their methodology and process.

Looking at the term "form submission" implies a standard letter that is the same as others, word for word, with a different signatory.

On that basis, the are lying to call an individual submission that is clearly its own work a "form submission", as the examples cited above.

On the other hand, if a unique submission is considered "making a different argument" then the way things are categorised becomes very important. In the case of these submissions, we see the categorisation of individual submissions as form submissions creates an entirely different set of statistics, and different set of conclusions.

All in all, this is fast becoming a total sham on several fronts.

the conservative said...

Zen, where I get confused is this: I posted the heart picture on my website. The heart is the total submission (no letter attached). It was submitted by one main person plus some others. So as I see it, one person is considered unique and the others aren't. So the heart is considered unique for the submitter only.

Have a look at the select committee report which says they considered 2898 as unique and then look at the select committe evidence page which is almost the same with 2887, which suggests to me every individual submission is considered one unique and every group is also considered one unique.

I am not sure about this; I am only guessing.

Lucia Maria said...

Hi Terry,


With regards to the heart picture, on the listing for it, it says "Mark Johnston and 32 others". They only show Mark Johnston's heart picture, but (I think, and I'm guessing too) that 32 other people, individually, sent in a heart picture with those words on it (or similar). So, the government officials or select committee looked at all 33 heart pictures and decided to just scan Mark Johnston's heart picture and then make a note against his name that 32 other people also sent in a submission much like that one.

I don't know if they count the heart picture as one unique submission (even though 33 people sent one in) or they don't include it in the unique submission numbers - I'd have to go through their website and count all the "others" and see what the totals add up to. Their website is so slow, and going through it is painful, so I'm probably not going to do that, unfortunately.

Hope Bob McCoskrie will get some answers.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.