The proposed changes to the Human Rights Act are not progressive, they are regressive. They undermine biological reality, jeopardise fairness and risk creating new injustices in the name of solving old ones.
There’s no good reason why a bunch of friends in what amounts to a private place, or similar, shouldn’t be able to enjoy a few drinks. I’d say the police are bored with nothing better to do. Or maybe they’ve been looking at the UK and thinking “If it was only like that here…”
Some of those surveyed talked of the anxiety about their work and not being open with their peers or friends about their involvement.
With the hotels remaining open, we are now due for yet more protests, yet more anger, and yet more public resentment over this issue. In the long-run this makes a political resolution, in the form of a change of government, much more likely.
Judicial restraint is not a partisan demand. It is the condition for legitimacy. Without it, the apex court becomes less a guardian than a threat – and the ecosystem begins to fail.
In this judge’s application of the law, the very clear message the ban is meant to send has been muddied and weakened.
Putting the nation at risk to prop up a dangerous and highly destabilising law that was promoted by a party that is now openly advancing anarchy no longer makes sense.
This bill is a threat to not only the vulnerable, but to every member of our community.
A small swing toward freedom now means that the next small swing toward freedom will achieve more – likely following the next general election.
Brittany’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week may be just beginning.
Convicted sex offender cleared to work as store Santa, teacher.
Predator Santa exposes sickening failure in child protection.
Family First urges MPs to reject these amendments and encourages MPs to simply look at the developments in Canada and elsewhere to serve as a warning of where this obsession will lead.
New Zealand’s highest court fires another interracial ballistic missile at democratic government.
This legal development occurs against the backdrop of ongoing debates about the integration of Islamic practices within Western legal frameworks.
