Friday, May 10, 2013

ZenTiger Support Government policy - or else

As I thought, the decision to terminate charity status for Family First is simply because they are perceived, by the government, to be against the government.

The Charities Board has made the decision to register the National Council of Women (NCWNZ) as a charity is because it aims to promote the status of women. Yet, Family First promote the status of the family, and get struck off for it.

Both organizations promote research, but the government doesn't agree with research promoted by Family First, and calls it propaganda.  In one case, the activity is deemed a charitable purpose, and in another, it is deemed propaganda.  I wonder if that means the peer reviewed academic studies they have cited will be rounded up and burned?  It would seem to be an appropriate next step.

From the Bob McCroskie blog: In the most bizarre argument, the Board argues that any lobbying or submissions done by the NCWNZ is not ‘political’ but rather ‘a means by which the NCWNZ advances it charitable purposes’ – the complete opposite measure than that which they applied to Family First NZ.

How's that for progressive thinking? Wake up NZ. We are being screwed over.

Link to Family First Website
Updated 10:50am Saturday 11 May to correct links to sources.

10 comment(s):

Swimming said...

Hey this is a pretty bad post. Have you actually read the decision by the Charities Commission?

Lucia Maria said...

Hello Swimming,

Can't speak for Zen, but having read the document issued on the decision myself, I wondering why you think his post is "bad".

ZenTiger said...

Hey Swimming, this post is going off the Family First post.

I haven't seen the decision concerning the National Council of Women (NCWNZ), nor the Greenpeace ones - assuming they are even in the public domain.

I will read the Family First decision over the week-end, and perhaps that will produce a different outcome, perhaps not.

What part concerns you?

Anonymous said...

Probably the same part that concerns me - you are echoing McCroskie, a well known "hater and wrecker", rather than commenting on the actual decision.

ZenTiger said...

LRO, he is not a "well known hater and wrecker". That is the label assigned to him by political opponents who cannot tolerate an alternative point of view, and like to pepper every comment with some sort of smear phrase. A very poor form of debate.

A quote attributed to Brendan Ward in a newspaper article:

"Family First maintains that it is beneficial to the public that it promotes debate and discussion of different points of view on family life. However, the current legal position is that promoting debate on particular points of view is not a charitable purpose."

However, the Charities Commission website (still up and active) suggests that to be a charity, you only need to be doing one charitable purpose, so it would seem to be in Family First's interests to point out some of the charitable services they do, including research and the promotion of research from other bodies, as well as providing advice and assistance to parents unfairly treated by the police or CYFS.

ZenTiger said...

Sorry, his name is "Brendon" Ward, and he is the General Manager of the new Charities department/board/group or whatever they want to call themselves. Either way, it's been rolled into DIA.

JJ said...

NZ is drifting towards fascism with the full support of the public. If we can be convinced that perversion like homosexuality is normal then we can be persuaded anything is normal. It has become obvious to me now that only religious people have morals. The unbelievers just believe whatever is good for them and them alone.

Psycho Milt said...

It has become obvious to me now that only religious people have morals.

There really are some seriously damaged people out there. Take this opinion to your pastor and hopefully it will be enough of a warning that they'll give you some help.

ZenTiger said...

I have to agree PM. I know a lot of non-religious people with morals. Bad morals, but at least they have some. A few others have good morals, but don't use them. Not only that those morals were probably stolen from a Christian, which explains why some Christians do bad things - their morals were stolen!

Joking aside, I think JJ is pointing out some of the population seem to be ruled by hedonism, self-indulgence and self-centredness, which appear to be declared new virtues. It wouldn't be a problem except it has an unfortunate side effect of despising some of the more standard virtues - things like honesty, charity, temperance, chastity, patience, humility etc.

I can kind of see where he is coming from.

bamac said...

Maybe NZ is following the U.S.? Have just seen this :-

It is fairly long but , I think, interesting


Mrs Mac

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.