• Home
  • About
  • Objectives
  • Membership
  • Donations
  • Activities
  • Research Reports
  • Submissions
  • Newsletters
  • Contact

SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

  • Censorship
    • Censorship & New Technology
    • Film Ratings
    • Films
  • Crime
    • Rape statistics
    • Television Violence
    • Violence
    • Youth Crime
  • Enforcement
  • Family
    • Anti-smacking Bill
    • Families Commission
    • Marriage
  • Gambling Addiction
  • Political Advocacy
  • Pro-life
    • Abortion
  • Prostitution
  • Sexuality
    • Child Sex Crimes
    • Civil Unions
    • HIV/AIDS STIs
    • Homosexuality
    • Kinsey Fraud
    • Porn Link to Rape
    • Pornography
    • Sex Studies
    • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Other
    • Alcohol abuse
    • Announcement
    • Application For Leave
    • Broadcasting Standards Authority
    • Celebrating Christian Tradition
    • Children’s Television
    • Complaints to Broadcasters
    • Computer games
    • Film & Lit Board Reviews
    • Film & Lit. Board Appointments
    • Human Dignity
    • Moral Values
    • Newsletters
    • Newspaper Articles
    • Recommended Books
    • Submissions
    • YouTube

“Change the marriage law and they will return” – Stephen Rainbow – Board member NZ Aids Foundation

August 1, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

NZ Herald: Gay equality could draw home expats and boost economy, writes Dr Stephen Rainbow, chairman of the board of Outline, a gay counselling service, and board member of the Aids Foundation [a charity registered with the Charities Commission on 28 March 2008 – Reg. No. CC22230]

At a time when New Zealand is losing 1000 people a week to the rich pickings of Western Australia, has anyone thought that legalising gay marriage might be one way of attracting people back?

Researchers have often observed the disproportionate number of gay Kiwis living in Australia’s cities. The reasons they have gone there are fairly obvious and are to do with the larger pool of potential “mates”, a result of the size of the gay populations and the resulting facilities and infrastructure in places such as Sydney and Melbourne. But these Kiwis are among the very people this country most needs as we struggle to build a prosperous economy.

While we know far too little about gay people (at least Australia, unlike New Zealand, has a question on sexual orientation in its Census) it would be a fair assumption that the gay Kiwis living in Australia would be the kind of people who could bring back with them the creativity and ingenuity our economy needs.

An economist friend remarked recently that the future of New Zealand’s primary sector lies in Auckland. He was referring to the fact that the ideas for turning agricultural produce into value-added products for export will come from the hot-house of ideas and innovation that are largely concentrated in Auckland’s CBD. It is no coincidence that the head office of Fonterra is in downtown Auckland.

Now, given that Australia’s Labor Prime Minister is an outspoken opponent of gay marriage and that our Prime Minister made clear on RadioLive yesterday that he will vote for it, can we not turn this into a competitive advantage for New Zealand?

The recent Australian Census revealed more than 30,000 same-sex relationships. Chances are a reasonable percentage of them are Kiwis. If these people have the potential to contribute creativity and innovationto our economy, then attracting them back through measures such as legalising same sex marriage is not just as the right thing to do, but could boost our struggling economy.

Legalising gay marriage not only permits the act itself, it also sends out a strong signal that gays are valued and equal members of society.

Central government legislative changes would reflect the Auckland Plan (and let’s face it, Auckland is where most gays are and where most returning gays would want to live) which explicitly acknowledges gay people as an important part of Auckland’s diversity.

This is critical because international cities guru Richard Florida describes gays as “the canaries in the mine” of the creative economy that successful global cities depend on for their prosperity and success.

From this perspective it makes sense to attract gay people to Auckland – including from the gay Kiwi diaspora in Australia – as one of the ways to build the world’s most liveable (and prosperous) city.

Attracting gays back to New Zealand by removing the final impediments to full equality – the right to marry and to adopt – then becomes one of the planks for developing our economy. Apart from being the right thing to do, it also ensures that the law keeps up with what is already happening. For removing the legal impediments to gay equality are not necessarily about promoting gay marriage or adoption but ensuring that the choices – to adopt, for example – that gay couples are already making are recognised by the law.

Attracting gay Kiwis back from Australia may not replace the 1000 people a week leaving for West Australia, but it may attract back a critical mass of talented Kiwis who – as gay people generally do – make a disproportionate contribution to the places where they live.

Source: NZ Herald 31 July 2012. Change the marriage law and they will return. By Stephen Rainbow

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10823298

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality

Parliament to vote on gay marriage bill – Fairfax NZ News

July 26, 2012 by SPCS 2 Comments

Gay marriage could be allowed in New Zealand after Labour MP Louisa Wall had her Bill drawn from the Members’ ballot today.

The Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill would enable same sex marriages and would have implications for gay adoption.

It is likely to be a conscience vote.

The Government has further battles on its hands after Labour had four out of five bills drawn from the Members’ ballot.

The Members’ ballot is drawn every time the progression of bills on Members’ night makes room for Parliament to debate further legislation.

MPs can only have one bill in their name in the ballot.

Today’s ballot was considered a record because it will see five new bills introduced to Parliament.

See full story: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7354142/Parliament-to-vote-on-gay-marriage-bill

The Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill

Click to access MarriageDefinitionofMarriageAmendmentBill_1.pdf

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage Tagged With: gay marriage bill

“Say NO to ‘gay marriage’ Christians must stand firm” – call to readers of Challenge Weekly (owned by charity)

July 12, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Challenge Weekly Newspaper, owned by a legal entity that was incorporated in 1975 and registered with the Charities Commission as a charity on 30 June 2008, has devoted half of its recent front page to a report on a ‘survey’ it carried out concerning opinions on two draft bills being prepared by two MPs on ‘gay marriage’. On page 4 it has a report republished from UK Christian Today: “Pro marriage couple receive hate mail: Online bulling for traditional stance [taken on marriage].” (Challenge Weekly 9 July 2012)

The entity owning Challenge Weekly, Challenge Publishing Society Ltd , incorporated under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1908 on 30 January 1975; was granted charity status (Charity Reg. No. CC34094) under the second head of charity law – “advancement of education”. The newspaper it owns reports:

“Marriage between a man and a woman is the general consensus of the majority of people Challenge Weekly approached for comment on what appears to be growing support for “gay marriage”.

“Green Party MP Kevin Hague and Labour MP Louisa Wall both plan to draft bills supporting ‘same-sex marriage’ and a TVNZ poll showed majority support for a legal change to allow “gay” marriage. Another poll conducted in June by Herald-Digipoll, of 750 people, saw over 50 per cent of respondents in support of legalising gay marriage.

The report then goes on to reflect the views of three well-known Christian leaders on the proposed bills: former National Party MP Rev Graeme Lee (who says he is “outraged“), leader of the Conservative Party Colin Craig (who says he is “opposed“) and former MP Gordon Copeland (who says he is “concerned“).

Mr Colin Craig is reported as saying:

“This debate is purely and simply about who can use the word marriage. There are many interested parties in this debate. Traditional marriage between a man and a woman has significance culturally, historically, religiously and morally for many New Zealanders.”

[Comment: The Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc. (“SPCS”), a registered charity (CC20268) has as one of its objects: “To promote the benefits of lasting marriage, strong family life and wholesome personal values as the foundation for stable communities”. Naturally SPCS will be taking an active interest in the ongoing debate on the legal definition of the term “marriage”. Prime Minister John Key has called on the public to engage in constructive debate on the issue, a call made following President Barack Obama’s recent declaration of his ‘revised’ stance on the matter. It is noteworthy that Challenge Publishing Society Ltd, a registered charity, has taken such an active interest in this subject, even though it is controversial, and has pitched its call to its readership – “SAY NO”.

Reference:

Challenge Weekly, July 9, 2012 Vol 70 Iss 25. pp. 1, 4.

Form speaks out

http://www.challengeweekly.co.nz/component/content/article/39-top-stories/2375-forum-speaks-out-.html

Forum to confront ‘sex ed’

http://www.challengeweekly.co.nz/component/content/article/39-top-stories/2333-forum-to-confront-sex-ed-.html

 

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage, Moral Values Tagged With: Charities Commission, Colin Craig, gay marriage, Gordon Copeland, Graeme Lee, Kevin Hague, Louisa Wall, Marriage, registered charity

Parents warned about sex education and promiscuity: Family First “NZ Forum on the Family” speaks out

July 12, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Challenge Weekly Newspaper, owned by a legal entity that was incorporated in 1975 and registered with the Charities Commission as a charity on 30 June 2008, has devoted its front page to a report on the Family First NZ “Forum on the Family” held in Auckland on 28 June 2012 and attended by about 200 delegates, many from a “national network of family-focused organisations and lobby groups”.

The entity owning Challenge Weekly, Challenge Publishing Society Ltd , incorporated under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1908 on 30 January 1975; was granted charity status (Charity Reg. No. CC34094) under the second head of charity law – “advancement of education”. The Family Forum that this charity’s newspaper reported on, is run by another registered charity – Family First NZ ( Charity Reg. No. CC10094)- registered by the same Charities Commission on 21 March 2007. ( Note: The Charities Commission was deregistered on 1 July 2012 and is now part of the Department of Internal Affairs).

“Forum speaks out: Parents warned about sex education” is the bold headline on page one of Challenge Weekly (2 July 2012, P.1).

The report details findings presented by a keynote speaker Dr Miriam Grossman – “a leading whistle-blower on the dangers of political correctness in her field of child and adolescent psychiatry, [who] informed attendees that what New Zealand children are being taught in the classroom is neither medically accurate nor includes everything they need to know.”

She is reported as having said: “Sex education is a social movement which aims to change society; it’s based on ideology, not health.”

Dr Grossman believes that sexual education promotes sexual licence [PROMISCUITY & PERMISSIVENESS] rather than sexual health.

“Family Planning seems to argue that it is on the same page as parents but this simply is not true. Kids are being told that it’s up to them when they have sex and sex education introduces students to high risk behaviours. All this is coming from a world view.”

Both Dr Grossman and Family First’s national director Bob McCoskrie felt it was important to point out that Dr Grossman has challenged representatives from Family Planning [FPA] or Rainbow Youth to a debate on national radio, but has had no response.

[New Zealand Family Planning Association Inc. was registered as a charity (CC11104) with the Charities Commission on 13 September 2007. Rainbow Youth Inc. was registered as a charity (CC24284) by the Commission on 13 May 2008].

It is noteworthy that a leading medical expert has in effect advanced one of the objects of the Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc (“SPCS”): “To focus attention on the harmful nature and consequences of SEXUAL PROMISCUITY …” It is also noteworthy that a registered charity – Family First NZ has given such prominence to this issue at its annual Family Forum event. Finally it is noteworthy that another registered charity – Challenge Publishing Society Limited has seen fit via its newspaper to give such prominence to this message.

The Society (SPCS) was registered as a charity with the Charities Commission on 17 December 2007.

References:

Challenge Weekly. July 2, 2012 Vol 70 Iss 24, P. 1.

www.companies.govt.nz

www.charities.govt.nz

www.spcs.org.nz (“Objectives” Tab)

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Family, Moral Values, promiscuity, Sexuality Tagged With: Dr Grossman, Dr Miriam Grossman, Family Planning, Family Planning Association, FPA, NZ Forum on the Family, permissiveness, promiscuity, Rainbow Youth, sex education, sexual licence, sexuality education

Why we should stop teens looking at internet porn – The Telegraph – Opinion by British doctor Max Pemberton

July 11, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Internet porn is hazardous to teenagers, argues British doctor Max Pemberton. Their brains aren’t built to make the connection between impulse and consequences. Dr Starmer’s comments are timely, coming just after a 14-year old British boy … was found guilt of raping a 4-year old girl. The judge [at sentencing, stated] that the boy had been “sexualised by the corruption of pornography”.

Why we should stop teens looking at internet porn (Opinion piece republished from The Telegraph by The Dominion Post, Opinion, 11 July, 2012, p. A13.

Computers have radically altered the way that humans interact, and inevitably some view the changes with suspicion. That doesn’t make those people Luddites, because there are times when it seems right to question certain changes in society brought about by technology. Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said last week he was worried about new research that suggests that teenage relationships are becoming more abusive. He blamed this trend on the ready access to internet pornography.

Was he being an old fuddy-duddy? It’s an important question because it has serious ramifications for ideas surrounding censorship and choice on the internet. If correct, the research he referred to means that technology is having an adverse effect on the younger generation, altering aspects of their behaviour towards each other as sexual beings.

Starmer’s comments are timely, coming just after a 14?year-old boy was freed and given a three-year supervised community order after he was found guilty of raping a four-year-old girl. The judge justified the sentence by saying that the boy had been “sexualised by the corruption of pornography”.

Can this be correct? Can we really blame pornography? As uncomfortable as it makes me, I agree with the judge’s decision and Starmer’s concerns – and it’s all because of a bit of brain just behind our forehead called the prefrontal cortex. This blob of neurones is what makes us more than just animals. It’s involved in a dizzying range of functions that most adults take for granted. It is the seat for impulse control and delaying gratification; foreseeing and judging consequences of behaviour; predicting outcomes; forming strategies and planning; modulating emotions; inhibiting inappropriate behaviour and initiating appropriate behaviour. It’s involved in expressing our personality and orchestrates our thoughts and actions.

It is, in short, not just the part of the brain that makes us human and integrates us socially, but it also makes us, us. And when considering the impact of viewing graphic pornography on youngsters, this bit of the brain becomes very important.

Over the past few years, there have been various scare stories claiming that the internet alters the developing brains of children. This is largely piffle – no such clear, objective evidence exists. Playing Super-Mario isn’t going to turn a child’s brain to mush.

But that doesn’t mean all is well in cyberspace. The very danger of youngsters being exposed to sexually graphic films and images actually has nothing to do with the internet changing their brains, but with the fact that their brains are changing of their own accord anyway. If you’re under 25, you’re not going to like the next bit. But don’t blame me, blame your brain. The prefrontal cortex is the last part of the brain to develop fully and is still developing well into a person’s twenties. That is why teenagers behave the way they do.

With an immature prefrontal cortex, they can understand that a type of behaviour is dangerous or wrong, but they lack the neural circuitry to modulate these thoughts and process them the way an adult does. If parental instruction is missing and their only point of reference is gratuitous pornography, many youngsters will develop a warped, distorted understanding of sex – sometimes with tragic results.

While an adult can view such images and, usually, understand that they are a fantasy and not a blueprint for human relations, children and teenagers struggle with this. It’s actually not their fault; their brains simply aren’t fully formed. We’d never expect a newborn baby to tell us what it wanted for supper, and that is because those parts of its motor cortex and the speech areas of its brain haven’t developed yet. It’s the same with complex social and moral development in older children. Just because teenagers look and sound like adults, we should not assume they think like them.

There is therefore a genuine, scientific reason why we should ensure that graphic – both sexual and violent – content is carefully restricted. This isn’t about being puritanical, reactionary or patronising. It’s just accepting the science. The inevitable conclusion is that there should be an opt-in clause to view adult content on the internet. Though I loathe the idea of restrictions, in the case of pornography we do teenagers a disservice if we don’t place constraints on what they can view online.

I know this won’t make me popular with teenagers. But when their prefrontal cortex develops, they’ll understand.

Source:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/women_shealth/9385158/Whatever-Victorias-Secret-model-Miranda-Kerr-says-dont-be-a-pain-about-epidurals.html

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Porn Link to Rape, Pornography, Sexual Dysfunction Tagged With: internet porn, the corruption of pornography

« Previous Page
Next Page »
SPCS Facebook Page

Subscribe to website updates:

The Pilgrim’s Progress

Getting "The Pilgrim’s Progress" to
every prisoner in NZ prisons.

Recent Comments

  • John on The term ‘Homophobia’: Its Origins and Meanings, and its uses in Homosexual Agenda
  • SPCS on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Anne on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000

Family Values & Community Standards

  • Coalition for Marriage
  • ECPAT New Zealand
  • Family Voice Australia
  • Parents Inc.

Internet Safety

  • Netsafe Internet Safety Group

Pro-Life Groups

  • Family Life International
  • Right to Life
  • The Nathaniel Centre
  • Voice for Life
(Click here for larger image)

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.