Here comes Sue Bradford again with her bid to repeal section 59 of the Crimes Act. While she now concedes there will have to be changes to her bill, one can only ask why then would we not change the current legislation rather than repeal it. Her bill does not contain the words mother and father, as the current legislation does.
Every parent of a child and, subject to subsection (3) of this section, every person in the place of the parent of a child is justified in using force by way of correction towards the child, if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances.
And you say, but I didn’t see mother and father there either.
If there can be a person in place of a parent, then what is a parent?
The answer is a mother and a father.
Loose section 59 and you will empower the state parent of the Family Court. This state wants legal ownership of our sons and daughters.
Extract from the above stuff link:
The bill passed its first reading before the election with the help of Labour, but its continued support is not guaranteed. Whip Darren Hughes said a decision on further support would be made after the committee reported, though Labour agreed some reform was required.No surprise that Sue Bradford’s private members bill coincides with the Government’s agreement with the United Nations to repeal this law during 2005.
note steeling is not a spelling mistake, just an obscure meaning.