What's your party-vote preference? (Nov edition)

[Ab]

New with added last-minuteness.

[crocos]

Undecided if I want to support any of the bastards.

IF I vote, it'll be National or Act for Party. Not sure which as yet.

[cEvin]

i love it how those abstaining are always near the first to rush in and vote

[Ab]

So tempted to vote Maori Party, but their "no GE" and "no GST on food" policies hurt my brain. But I'm not too thrilled about ACT's maternity-leave policy either.

[Crankshaw]

Whats with the italicisation of labour? It's subliminal manipulation isn't it!

Where's my colander hat so I can resist this heinous attempt to pervert my choice of tickbox on an internet poll?

Edit: err now it's showing green in italics. Must be a poll display thing, odd.

[cEvin]

It means you voted for them genious

[Crankshaw]

Haha, that would be why.. *whistle*. Must've just misread it the first time.

/me hides in the corner.

[Juju]

Originally Posted by Ab

So tempted to vote Maori Party, but their "no GE" and "no GST on food" policies hurt my brain. But I'm not too thrilled about ACT's maternity-leave policy either.

What about the $500 they want to give to poor families to spend on piss and cigerrrr I mean presents for the kids.

[Logik]

Look, spending free money on piss and cigarettes is a past time of many NZ "families". Who are we to deny them of this right? First, it's the piss and cigarettes; next it's the weed and pokies. Where does it end? The hard fact is that these are long established cultural traditions, and we need lots of taxpayer money to preserve them and continue our social sustainability.

[AKuma]

Haha thats actually kinda makes sense Logik..

but yeah theres nothing like maori hospitality.. any of "you's" that have been onto a marae or kicked it with some haati maoris will know that.. even though theres all that segregatoin talk and all that, they are a very open, loving and welcoming people. Thats what i like about being maori and thats why im voting for them.

[Waldo]

Originally Posted by Ab

So tempted to vote Maori Party, but their "no GE" and "no GST on food" policies hurt my brain. But I'm not too thrilled about ACT's maternity-leave policy either.

would you be able to summarise the maternity thing please, Im googling atm :0

[MrTTTT]

go Winston@!!!#@

[MrTTTT]

Originally Posted by cEvin

i love it how those abstaining are always near the first to rush in and vote

what is the subtext of your post??

[SpaceCowboy]

Originally Posted by AKuma

Haha thats actually kinda makes sense Logik..

thats because it IS common sense. and it IS everyones right to govern their own body, no matter what anyone else thinks. these are fundamental RIGHTS, and the law should reflect this.

[Lightspeed]

Science proves this?

[SpaceCowboy]

what are you talking about?

[Lightspeed]

How is something fundamental unless it's got a scientific basis? Unless you're talking about some sort of personal or spiritual convictions?

[crocos]

Originally Posted by cEvin

i love it how those abstaining are always near the first to rush in and vote

Just because you're voting ALCP.

[Logik]

Look at the Greens go!

[SpaceCowboy]

lightspeed, its so obvious, it doesnt really need explaination, but i will spell it out for you anyway.

1) i am an individual. you are an individual.
2) i am not your slave.
3) as i am not your slave, you cannot tell me what to do to myself
4) therefore, i have rights when it comes to my body.

if you want a spiritual basis, fine, accept the wiccan creed: An' it harm none, Do what thou will.

[JP]

I'm guessing you're voting for the legalize marijuana party then eh? Or maybe the Libz if the actually hold true to what they should believe in.

The right to smack/pollute etc can be far more justifiably taken away than that of someone to do drugs. Yet look at how uppity people get about those things.

I believe in personal freedom for things that don't affect others. Freedom to smoke, eat salt, even seatbelts (on adults) etc. But with things like pollution, child abuse, water conservation, people have 100% proven we can't self manage. That's the massive advantage of a government. In those cases the good of the whole can easily be held above the slight inconvenience of the individual.

Things like fizzy drinks in schools is borderline. It's not adults, so to be honest, if it's proven that they're causing a lot of youth obesity, which they probably are. It's not the end of the world to get them out of there. Shit the lazy fucks can walk to the dairy on the way to school if they need a coke. But I mean seriously, so many people complain about how fat kids are getting, but they don't want any attempt at a solution? Sounds like typical right wing politics.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by SpaceCowboy

lightspeed, its so obvious, it doesnt really need explaination, but i will spell it out for you anyway.

1) i am an individual. you are an individual.
2) i am not your slave.
3) as i am not your slave, you cannot tell me what to do to myself
4) therefore, i have rights when it comes to my body.

if you want a spiritual basis, fine, accept the wiccan creed: An' it harm none, Do what thou will.

You may not be a slave to any individual but many would argue you are a "slave" to society, corporate greed, etc.

Pay attention to when you use the phrase "it's obvious". It typically means you have an underlying assumption in your belief system.

[Macca@Work]

National - only becuase Helen has had a long go at running things and its time for a change

[Macca@Work]

Originally Posted by Ab

So tempted to vote Maori Party, but their "no GE" and "no GST on food" policies hurt my brain. But I'm not too thrilled about ACT's maternity-leave policy either.

yeah well I like the MP work for the dole scheme but as others have alluded too,they haven't really explained how they are going to achieve this.

[OY636]

Think I might just vote for Bill and Ben and see what happens. If anything at least it would make it more intresting

[fixed_truth]

I'm tempted to vote Progressive but they need to get over 1.6% of the vote to get another seat - which is unlikely. So Greens it is!

[SpaceCowboy]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

You may not be a slave to any individual but many would argue you are a "slave" to society, corporate greed, etc.

Pay attention to when you use the phrase "it's obvious". It typically means you have an underlying assumption in your belief system.

lets put it this way: you assume you can breath that air that you share with me. looks like its time for me to claim the earths atmosphere.

also, i am not slave to society - less so to corporate greed. the same cant be said for most people tho.

[Lightspeed]

I'm not sure how this shows that it is inherent in the universe that humans are have the undeniable right to govern their bodies.

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by SpaceCowboy

also, i am not slave to society - less so to corporate greed. the same cant be said for most people tho.

you pay taxes, you work for money, you labour for others (to get money from others), you probably conform (or at least think you do ) to current fashion, you're represented by different numbers in different systems, you abide to many many rules ...

of course they all have benefits, but for a slave doing what's being asked also has benefits.

[SpaceCowboy]

yea, i know. i conform to societies standards and expectations, because if i dont, i will be ridiculed and called a lazy no-hoper. all this for wanting to stop working, buy some land, and get away from it all.

what i mean is that in my mind, i am not a slave. i have freed my mind from that, now i just need to get myself into a financial situation to set the rest of myself free. its only a matter of time.

trust me, ive thought about this at LENGTH.

[Lightspeed]

Sure, but this does not mean that this is inherently your right. It's quite conceivable that people could be raised believing that the State has the fundamental right to govern over your body and mind. And that this is the most rational way for humanity to progress.

[SpaceCowboy]

yes, LS, but i wasnt replying to you just above, but rather to madmax.

as for rights, they are, in their present form, a philosophical concept, not ordained upon us by a deity, but rather logically constructed. the only reason religious connotations are attributed to them is because ancient people couldnt grasp concepts of logic or reason, and instead had their sky/water/tree/earth person/people tell them what was acceptable. they may have been similar to what we accept today, but that only proves that its common sense, not some underlying godly principle.

[Lightspeed]

I don't think human rights are logical at all. For them to be logical there would have to be some purpose to our existence, of which there is none inherent to the universe.

Rather human rights as defined by the UN are about who we want to be, not based on rationale, but rather our beliefs of what is "good".

Common sense is another way of saying "I can't explain it."

[SpaceCowboy]

im not a philosophy major. if you really want to be soundly beaten in this arguement, i suggest you find one, because i guarantee he will rip your arguement a new one. all i can tell you is what is apparent to me.

there is a purpose to our existance - to subjectively experience it from our own points of view. if your actions prevent me from experiencing my existance how i would like, assuming my point of view does not affect anyone else, then you are violating my rights. and that is that.

[Lightspeed]

It sounds like you just said you don't know what you're talking about... which seems pretty accurate.

[JP]

Wait is lightspeed trying to compare human rights to being religious?

[SpaceCowboy]

lol @ lightspeeds holier than thou attitude. obviously this is a hard topic to nail down, and what i said was im not good at arguing with someone who has a fairy in his head. you can try to prove god all you like with your "rights dont exist" bullshit, when the reality is that they do.

that said, anyone here actually studied this? id be interested in hearing someone better at debate than me giving some good arguements.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by JP

Wait is lightspeed trying to compare human rights to being religious?

No. I am simply pointing out that human rights are a concept created out of our collective beliefs about what is "right", not logical conclusions. Sure, logic maybe involved in the process of deciding human rights, but it is not the fundamental nature of these concepts.

[SpaceCowboy]

no, your belief in a deity does not mean you can decide to attribute the fundamental nature of the concept of a right to something as abstract as feelings and beliefs.

put it this way: person 1 sees person 2 for the first time. which one lords over the other?

the answer is: neither. they are equal.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by SpaceCowboy

thats because it IS common sense. and it IS everyones right to govern their own body, no matter what anyone else thinks. these are fundamental RIGHTS, and the law should reflect this.

This is what I disagree with. SpaceCowBoy suggests here that the right of self-governance is something that is above the human experience, that regardless of us, "no matter what anyone else thinks", self-governance is a fundamental of our existence. That regardless of culture, society, circumstance or law, this is something that always has and always will exist.