A Letter to Murray McCully - he replies

The reply to my original letter is posted here as a PDF MurraryMcCully or as a picture below,

This is a response to a letter I wrote to my MP, who had changed his mind about supporting the "same sex marriage" bill, one of ony 4 MP's to do so in the negative way.



I'm not convinced it's a form reply.

I've let his secretary know by way of a reply what I think .

Erica

Thank you for your reply.

Please, if you would be so kind, and should the Minister care to know,  tell him that, should he be standing at the next election, he will not be receiving my vote, as he has enjoyed in the past.

Of course there are more pressing matters of Economy, Welfare, Education, Health and Security but he had it in his grasp to be someone who actually did something for everyone, and not because he has a fear and loathing of the real meaning of equality, and was cowered by sanctimonious religious bigotry.

You'll recall I've been married 25 years, I've no axe to grind, no flag to fly, but to take a stance that it's all equal except for some is morally bankrupt, and frankly he's disappointed one time to many.

It might only be one vote, but it might make a difference.

Related articles

• A Letter to Murray McCully (pdubyah.com)

The facination of the media for Redemption

re·demp·tion:

• 
  
  An act of redeeming or the state of being redeemed.


• 
  
  Deliverance; rescue.


• 
  
  Theology. deliverance from sin; salvation.


• 
  
  Atonement for guilt.


• 
  
  Repurchase, as of something sold

One of the online media sites in New Zealand,  Stuff.co.nz, uses "redemption" at the drop of a hat.

A quick search returns About 2,590 results on their website which is a little on high side don't ya think?

Redemption and Sport return 2,090 results !! which is a little on the high side don't ya think ?

The other online site The New Zealand Herald returns only about 1,000 results. Redemption and sports gets a paltry 70 results.

So either the Journalists at Stuff are a Pious bunch who have some intimate knowledge of the religiosity of the people they are writing about,  or someone at these media outlets doesn't think "Redemption" means what they think it means.

In the context that the media use it, mostly, it's for sport. And what they don't divulge is what it is that they are seeking or  receiving or asking redemption for?

A Redemption from what wrong or misdeed that they've done, aside from being an abject failure at their earlier attempt at something. They are mostly professional sportspeople, they've been paid, or are getting paid to do what they do. It's not like they have to give the money back for their failure.

Are they seeking to apologise and show they are worthy of adulation and adoration, and the cash that they comes with it, and to prove that we should throw more money their way?

Worst cases are they don't get paid as much next time, or they don't get another opportunity. Either way it's not a redemptive situation is it?

Sure as an individual it could be that they are trying to redeem their good name then, regain their cachet with their adoring public, from who they crave admiration, seek redress to the bad publicity that comes with some act or other on or off the sporting field. But that does not excuse the media for running over 2000 stories of redemption under any circumstance that I can think of.

If I'm wrong however I'll seek redemption at the earliest opportunity

Related articles

• College Football Powerhouses That Will Experience Redemption in 2012 (bleacherreport.com)


• Redemption Is Near by Roger Edwards (thebarnabascenter.wordpress.com)


• The Redemption. (crittyjoy.com)


• The Redemption Story (catherinekaputa.typepad.com)


• Best of 2007: The Best Look of Redemption (fabsugar.com)


• Redemption (feministperspective.wordpress.com)

13th July : Today the NZ Stuff website ran another story about redemption and sports 

 

It's Electioneering time.....

That time every 3 years in New Zealand when we get to cast our collective say on what bunch of hypocrites governs us for 3 years, which is more like 2 years when all is said and done.

NZ National Party , having acquired a set of books from the outgoing NZ Labour Party of 9 years they've managed to walk into a couple of unexpected items, such as the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) and an Earthquake, and a bit of a boat wreck. They've dropped the tax rate for the higher income earners - much to the disgust of the socialist left and greens, and raised the GST rate, again much to the disgust of the Labour and Green party. That's about all they've done though it's not really been a time of forward thinking but one of introspection.

The Labour Party have campaigned hard on how badly the National Party are doing, that's their whole mantra. Look what National did isn't it bad. Dropping the tax rate - bad - because it's only "rich pricks" who benefit - bad bad bad, and raising GST, that's bad because it only punished the lower-income earners, double plus bad. The only policy shambles they've come up with is a Capital Gains Tax system, A tax on the rich, and at the end of a property bubble, which makes no sense. it might be an income generator in a few years, but it isn't a fix for anything.

The Green Party are content to bag everyone about everything and clearly only want to target "rich pricks" with various incremental taxes, you earn more you pay more - for a Christchurch recovery fund- that makes no sense at all- it isn't "fair" as they'd like you to belive, it's targeted at the rich - who allegedly can afford more, somehow.

I don't have any time for the Māori party - a separatist movement  - along with the Mana party, they're not really sure what they are for or against, as long as it bags whitey and "the crown"

Couple of other things come to mind, the Labour party want to have a raise in the minimum wage, and an even more complex comparative wage standard in certain industries - yet they don't want minimum standards of education for our children. That seems like madness.

So with only a few weeks ago it'll be sling some mud time, see what sticks, then credit the voters with enough sense to pick and choose.