ACT's David Seymour - i like his style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

The tax system. Not many households paying net tax in NZ

---

Could that be because so many are not being taught how to use the marbles they have ?..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RTM

Thank you Iceman. Yes, the tax system. I’m sure the article is on the money.

---

Yes a good article and on the money.
I must admit I like the balance we have in NZ.
Would like more to help poverty but it will not be helped by increasing taxes .
We need to increase economic activity to provide aid(not money) to help lift families-especially kids in adverse circumstances affecting their health and futures .
Banning oil and gas exploration is just one of the many current policies that will backfire.
I guess Jacinda had to pacify the greens

Congrats to d seymour getting this through by a decent majority. Im sure NZ will agree.

Vickers proud after euthanasia vote

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

Congrats to d seymour getting this through by a decent majority. Im sure NZ will agree.

Vickers proud after euthanasia vote

---

Doctors aren't keen to perform it. It goes against their ethics. The palliative care speciallists don't want it either. So the professionals who deal with these issues everyday have been ignored by an MP (and all those who voted for it) who is only in parliament by an accident of MMP.
Much like abortion. The vast majority of the country's abortions are done by a handful of people, bloodsoaked to the elbows. Overseas abortionists have high turnover and suicide rates. Conscience finally gets to them in the end. I wonder whether Seymour has one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

Congrats to d seymour getting this through by a decent majority. Im sure NZ will agree.

Vickers proud after euthanasia vote

---

Speak for yourself because a lot of NZ doesnt agree, most medically related people dont for a start, add to that the many different disability groups etc etc.

Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.

---

I would argue religious conviction is a totally valid reason. Or are people of a religious persuasion not allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs?

No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.

---

It's very rare that pain can't be managed in this day and age and I've seen a lot of people with terminal illness die over the last 30 yrs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.

---

Totally disagree. The amount of "suffering" or "discomfort" does not even come into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackcap

I would argue religious conviction is a totally valid reason. Or are people of a religious persuasion not allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs?

---

The Bill has nothing to do with religion. Not one iota. People of a religious persuasion are still allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs

That statement may now be written:

People have the ability to maintain a view, & now also make a choice, that aligns with their beliefs, their situation and themselves...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonu

Doctors aren't keen to perform it. It goes against their ethics. The palliative care speciallists don't want it either. So the professionals who deal with these issues everyday have been ignored by an MP (and all those who voted for it) who is only in parliament by an accident of MMP.
Much like abortion. The vast majority of the country's abortions are done by a handful of people, bloodsoaked to the elbows. Overseas abortionists have high turnover and suicide rates. Conscience finally gets to them in the end. I wonder whether Seymour has one?

---

Given that a Doctor or Medical Professional risked being stuck off if they voiced their belief, it's misguided to cast that statement upon those that you seemingly speak on behalf of...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t.rexjr

The Bill has nothing to do with religion. Not one iota. People of a religious persuasion are still allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs

That statement may now be written:

People have the ability to maintain a view, & now also make a choice, that aligns with their beliefs, their situation and themselves...

---

That is the point I am trying to make. If people of religious persuasion and view think that euthanasia is a good thing they can vote accordingly. If they think it is a bad thing they can vote accordingly. (of course there are many other variables at play when people make decisions but that is up to them)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joshuatree

Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.

---

And there is the voice of bigotry.

"Pretending"? Protecting the vulnerable is the height of compassion. Ignoring a persons secular arguments because they also happen to be religious? Bigotry, pure and simple.

To vote, protest or rally against something, demanding your belief (secular or not) upon others when the outcome does not effect you is the epitome of bigotry.