Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | ... | 268

1139 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 456
Inactive user

#1981205 21-Mar-2018 19:20

Rikkitic:

rjt123:

Thank you, but 1 constitutes an anomaly not a "usually".

I can come up with a few more 'anomalies' if you like. They may be American, but the principle is the same. Religion seems to be the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Values are a matter of personal quality, not some mystical aerosol. Someone with values has those regardless of any religious gloss. Religion has nothing to do with it.

I agree with your comment about Cappill, but he was not the norm. Being American and Religious? Well there is a very different (and scary) story.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1981229 21-Mar-2018 20:42

rjt123:

I'm not particularly interested in the them, not because I don't want to know, but rather because it's well known that many people abuse a outward appearance of religion as a cover for terrible crimes or offences.

What I'm trying to say is essentially the same as your sentence above, that values are a matter of personal quality, therefore look underneath the religious gloss and see what the person is.

However, in saying that, if somebody's view is based on a religious belief rather than a whim, it is more likely to remain the same than to change to suit fickle public sentiment.

E.g. if say euthanasia mattered to me and I knew that it was likely to come up in the next term of government, I would vote for a candidate that I thought would vote in line with my perspective. I would rather that politician remained constant in their stance than vacillated, swayed by changing "progressive" views.

I think we are in basic agreement. I don't agree that religious belief, even when sincerely held, confers extra moral authority or conviction. Someone who is fickle, will be fickle anyway. Religion doesn't change that. Someone who is genuine, will be genuine regardless of belief. My problem is with those who cynically use religion as a device to leverage their credibility. People either are authentic or they are not. For me, religion has nothing to do with it, either positive or negative.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981250 21-Mar-2018 22:08

rjt123:
Geektastic:

rjt123:

Geektastic:

I think we have more than enough evidence that religion and politics are a bad mix!

Any person should be judged on their personal values, not by their religion. Our perception of a particular religion will likely not be totally in accordance with that individual's values (think jihadist's vs. mainstream muslims).

A politician who subscribes to any religion is more likely to hold to their values than those who don't and who are more easily swayed by public debate, political lobbying etc. I consider that to be more important than a politician who claims honesty, integrity, transparency etc as their values fails to live by them when they are elected into office.

Jacinda, English or any other leader should be judged by how I personally consider their values to align with the direction I feel NZ needs to go, without having to put any particular 'brand' to them. Jacinda's values are Jacinda's values, they don't need to be labelled as Mormon.

Or is it OK to stereotype?

I do not consider that belief in supernatural myths is a positive trait in anyone, much less in politicians.

You misconstrue what I said. Furthermore your post indicates a very one-sided view that fails to take into account numerous good works done in the name of religion. E.g. salvation army.

There is a fine line between discussion religion objectively as it relates to politics and discussing religions specifically and directly. A slur against Christianity was uncalled for and and unnecessary.

I'll happily apologise to god as soon as he shows up.

gzt

18750 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7881

Lifetime subscriber

#1981259 21-Mar-2018 22:40

rjt123: if somebody's view is based on a religious belief rather than a whim, it is more likely to remain the same than to change to suit fickle public sentiment.

E.g. if say euthanasia mattered to me and I knew that it was likely to come up in the next term of government, I would vote for a candidate that I thought would vote in line with my perspective. I would rather that politician remained constant in their stance than vacillated, swayed by changing "progressive" views.

There is no shortage of Christians who are in favor of additional end of life choices, and on the basis of their religious beliefs. Your strange idea that all true Christians are against this in all circumstances is basically false.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1981263 21-Mar-2018 22:46

Geektastic:
I'll happily apologise to god as soon as he shows up.

I saw an interesting video the other day on LinkedIn. A barber was talking to a client, saying he couldn't believe God existed given all the bad things in the world etc. The client left the shop and saw a man with long hair. He took him back into the barbershop and said I don't believe Barbers exist, "look at this man's hair". The moral of the story, if you don't look for a barber or don't want a barber you could assume they don't exist, if you don't look for God, you won't find him.

I'm not trying to convert you to any religion. But to say religion has no place in politics has the counter argument that atheism has no place either #helenclark.

Religion has shaped history, and will shape the future. Like it or not. It is an intrinsic part of our culture and to pretend that it doesn't exist in society and therefore shouldn't influence government at all is very 'head in the sand' opinion.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1981266 21-Mar-2018 22:56

gzt:
rjt123: if somebody's view is based on a religious belief rather than a whim, it is more likely to remain the same than to change to suit fickle public sentiment.

E.g. if say euthanasia mattered to me and I knew that it was likely to come up in the next term of government, I would vote for a candidate that I thought would vote in line with my perspective. I would rather that politician remained constant in their stance than vacillated, swayed by changing "progressive" views.

There is no shortage of Christians who are in favor of additional end of life choices, and on the basis of their religious beliefs. Your strange idea that all true Christians are against this in all circumstances is basically false.

Sorry...?🤔
Where did I reference 'christianity' into that example? I was quite deliberate in not specifying any religion, or religion at all.

Too often people assume any reference to 'religion' defaults to Christianity.

In this case your assumption that I assume all Christian's to be anti-euthanasia is basically flawed. (Btw I wasn't trying to subtly bring up the euthanasia bill, I imagine there will be a separate thread for that.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1981267 21-Mar-2018 22:59

and the topic is Jacinda Ardern.....

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1981268 21-Mar-2018 22:59

and the topic is Jacinda Ardern.....

gzt

18750 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7881

Lifetime subscriber

#1981270 21-Mar-2018 23:05

rjt123:
gzt:
rjt123: if somebody's view is based on a religious belief rather than a whim, it is more likely to remain the same than to change to suit fickle public sentiment.

E.g. if say euthanasia mattered to me and I knew that it was likely to come up in the next term of government, I would vote for a candidate that I thought would vote in line with my perspective. I would rather that politician remained constant in their stance than vacillated, swayed by changing "progressive" views.

There is no shortage of Christians who are in favor of additional end of life choices, and on the basis of their religious beliefs. Your strange idea that all true Christians are against this in all circumstances is basically false.

Sorry...?🤔
Where did I reference 'christianity' into that example? I was quite deliberate in not specifying any religion, or religion at all.

Too often people assume any reference to 'religion' defaults to Christianity.

In this case your assumption that I assume all Christian's to be anti-euthanasia is basically flawed. (Btw I wasn't trying to subtly bring up the euthanasia bill, I imagine there will be a separate thread for that.

Your post followed a mention of Bill English and an earlier mention of his professed Catholic affiliation. I'm glad we agree.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1981272 21-Mar-2018 23:09

gzt:
rjt123:
gzt:
rjt123: if somebody's view is based on a religious belief rather than a whim, it is more likely to remain the same than to change to suit fickle public sentiment.

E.g. if say euthanasia mattered to me and I knew that it was likely to come up in the next term of government, I would vote for a candidate that I thought would vote in line with my perspective. I would rather that politician remained constant in their stance than vacillated, swayed by changing "progressive" views.

There is no shortage of Christians who are in favor of additional end of life choices, and on the basis of their religious beliefs. Your strange idea that all true Christians are against this in all circumstances is basically false.

Sorry...?🤔
Where did I reference 'christianity' into that example? I was quite deliberate in not specifying any religion, or religion at all.

Too often people assume any reference to 'religion' defaults to Christianity.

In this case your assumption that I assume all Christian's to be anti-euthanasia is basically flawed. (Btw I wasn't trying to subtly bring up the euthanasia bill, I imagine there will be a separate thread for that.

Your post followed a mention of Bill English and an earlier mention of his professed Catholic affiliation. I'm glad we agree.

I'm glad we do too...
Apparently this thread has got off topic.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#1981326 22-Mar-2018 08:54

This piece from Stuff today is particularly insightful.

Its worth reading in full (rather than me just quoting a select few snarky soundbites ;-)

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/102475250/prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-promised-intervention-but-is-delivering-uncertainty

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

mrfte

83 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 32

#1981333 22-Mar-2018 09:16

Main issue being, they had not done their homework on policies (or principles) prior to elections despite having 9 years to do so. They were probably thinking they had lost the plot anyway...

Saw a couple of Ardern's facebook videos. I can empathize with her but she seems overwhelmed by everything.

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981346 22-Mar-2018 09:56

I had notification this morning that the changes to the OIA regs are now being pushed out, with the Select Committee now reporting 31 May instead of 20th Feb.

Also, they have now extended the scope to include forestry interests, whilst admitting that without overseas investment they stand little chance of succeeding in their billion trees thing, so the OIA regime for forestry will be a 'light touch checklist'..!

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1981360 22-Mar-2018 10:24

6FIEND:

This piece from Stuff today is particularly insightful.

Its worth reading in full (rather than me just quoting a select few snarky soundbites ;-)

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/102475250/prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-promised-intervention-but-is-delivering-uncertainty

The conclusion seems like a fair call to me. I think Ardern is trying to be seen to take her climate change prioritisation seriously. I think she genuinely wants to change the way things are done in this regard. Whether she is going about it the right way is another matter.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981362 22-Mar-2018 10:33

Riikitic. Are you happy with the Greens having both a Social and Greens Focus or would you prefer them to be Greens focused only? If social and greens, what do you see differentiate Labour from Greens in 2.5 Years time? Labour has always been the "social" party.

1 | ... | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | ... | 268