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 | ... | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | ... | 268

17690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981077 21-Mar-2018 15:46

Pumpedd:

I am appalled that the PM took no action on this until Bridges told the media of Jones hypocrisy. She has come out now, but once again too little too late.

This all started with Jones actually threatening an ANZ exec in a north airport.

This guy was dishonest in the last government by watching porn on the tax payer and he is showing that he is nothing but a bully again. He needs to lose his Minister position ASAP. I guess the PM likes him as he runs round the country throwing millions out mainly to IWI organisations. This is going to come crashing down.

He looks like a scruffy yob. I am amazed anyone would want him in their cabinet - or indeed in public office at all. He's just a policy wonk with no real world experience and strikes me as just the kind of fellow who, when denied something he wants, would say "Don't you know who I am?"

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
30228 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981083 21-Mar-2018 15:57

Someone I know who worked with him over a number of years personally says he is very smart and very lazy.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1981088 21-Mar-2018 16:10

networkn:

Someone I know who worked with him over a number of years personally says he is very smart and very lazy.

He certainly is a gifted orator, but not sure about his integrity.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981108 21-Mar-2018 16:42

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?

networkn

Networkn
30228 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981113 21-Mar-2018 16:50

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?

That's a *great* post.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
17253 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1981121 21-Mar-2018 17:03

rjt123:

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.

Are you seriously maintaining that politicians who profess religious affiliations are above hypocrisy? Usually it is the politicians who most loudly proclaim their beliefs who are the most brazen sinners. I see no connection at all between religious claims and moral behaviour. This is the sheerest nonsense.

Which is not to say that a politician who is genuinely religious cannot behave honourably, but then you are unlikely to hear about the religious part because such an individual will not be boasting about it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981123 21-Mar-2018 17:04

networkn:

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?

That's a *great* post.

thank you. mis-representation or misconstruction of religion is a topic I am passionate about because the most vocal generally demonstrate the least understanding, thus unfairly casting it in a bad light.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981126 21-Mar-2018 17:21

Rikkitic:

rjt123:

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.

Are you seriously maintaining that politicians who profess religious affiliations are above hypocrisy? Usually it is the politicians who most loudly proclaim their beliefs who are the most brazen sinners. I see no connection at all between religious claims and moral behaviour. This is the sheerest nonsense.

Which is not to say that a politician who is genuinely religious cannot behave honourably, but then you are unlikely to hear about the religious part because such an individual will not be boasting about it.

Note, I said more likely, no mention of infallibility. What I was indicating was simply that a politician who has a religious reason to support or oppose a law is less likely to be swayed in their opinion than somebody who’s stance is governed by the fashions of the day. I’m not saying it’s a good or bad thing, depends how you value constancy of principle or opinion. Obviously someone who is prepared to change their opinion when presented with research or facts is better than a person who doggedly holds to their opinion for poor logic.

Usually it is the politicians who most loudly proclaim their beliefs who are the most brazen sinners.

Any facts or figures on that? Or making unfounded assumptions skewed by personal feeling?

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981138 21-Mar-2018 17:47

Someone once said: " my word is my bond"

We've since found out she places little value on her words and is happy to back-track on multiple promises.

A verbal agreement isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
17253 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1981141 21-Mar-2018 17:58

rjt123:

Any facts or figures on that? Or making unfounded assumptions skewed by personal feeling?

Graham John Capill

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Geektastic

17690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1981184 21-Mar-2018 18:15

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.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981187 21-Mar-2018 18:21

Rikkitic:
rjt123:

Any facts or figures on that? Or making unfounded assumptions skewed by personal feeling?

Graham John Capill

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

And note i also said:
"Any person should be judged on their personal values, not by their religion."

If their values they practice conflict with what they profess, judge them by what they do. People took Jacinda at her word, now they have an opportunity to compare her principles with her actions.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981194 21-Mar-2018 18:36

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.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
17253 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1981195 21-Mar-2018 18:40

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.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1981199 21-Mar-2018 18:57

Rikkitic:
rjt123:

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

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'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.

1 | ... | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | ... | 268