SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

Good News: Steve Crow – his porn empire shrivels

by Leave a Comment

Media Release: 11 July 2009 (updated)

No. 1 Story http://business.scoop.co.nz/2009/07/13/update-on-steve-crow-and-porn-empire-collapse/

“I’m quite happy for you to call me a pornographer [and] a sleazeball, whatever you want to call me. But keep it factual.” Steve Crow (Quoted in NZ Listener 2004).

FOUR of Steve Crow’s porn companies of which he was sole director have gone belly up. Critics of his hard-core putrid porn promotion will be crowing loudly, but creditors, including about 30 New Zealand companies, will not be. The shrivelling of his now anaemic porno empire has left him impotent he claims to recompense any of his many unsecured creditors who are owed at least $714,000. In addition his companies owe at least $323,753 to the IRD. The debt will probably increase once the final liquidator’s reports are completed.

Crow says ‘I don’t have any obligation to recompense creditors of the liquidated companies” (Dominion Post 8/07/09). On TV One’s Close Up “Porn Industry Going Bust?” – he tried to downplay the debts, saying that most of the money was owed to creditors outside New Zealand who were still acting benevolently towards him. Surrounded by busty porn stars and with his new girfriend Rachel Whitewell at his side, his message was – its business or bust!

Lloyd J. Hayward of accountants Meltzer Mason Heath is the liquidator appointed for all of his three failed companies.

The first company, Vixen Direct Ltd, an importer and distributor of hard-core porno sleaze, had its name changed by Crow on 1 May 2009 to Z4K74D Ltd (Co. No. 514464), just before the liquidator was appointed on 27 May 2009. [Read more…]

BIG NEWS Report: Barnardos asks kids about smacking, and lies about the research”… Why? In order to promote their VoteYes Campaign?

by Leave a Comment

Barnardos have been interviewing New Zealand children by phone to see what they think about getting smacked. The question they asked:

Do you think that adults who are taken to court for hitting a child should be let off if they say they were disciplining the child?”

……. The kids had to push 1 if they should be let off 2 if they think they should not be let off, 3 if they don’t know and 4 to hear the question again. Just over half said they should not be let off. Many probably didn’t understand what ” let off” meant- ……..Nor is it clear whether “adults” included strangers.

They interviewed stressed kids who called the What’s Up hotline, a hotline for kids to talk about anything they wish, including abuse. While the kid was waiting to speak to a real person, they were given an automated message with the above question. That’s a little like asking turkeys on the 15 December whether they are looking forward to Christmas. There was only a 10% valid response rate. [Read more…]

Abortions Authorised on Mental Health Grounds a Farce – Dr Margaret Sparrow

by 1 Comment

Media Release 19 June 2009

The Abortion Law Reform Association, [ALRANZ] on 16 June issued a media release in response to the release by Statistics New Zealand of the abortion statistics for 2008. Dr Margaret Sparrow, President of ALRANZ stated:

 “We would like to see the abortion law reflecting what happens. We totally agree with the anti-abortion groups who say that it is ridiculous that 98 per cent of abortions in New Zealand are done on mental health grounds, because that is patently a farce.”

Dr Sparrow was for many years the Director of the Parkview Abortion facility in Wellington and during this time terminated the lives of thousands of unborn children, her statement must be taken very seriously. Dr Sparrow is stating clearly that certifying consultants are using mental health grounds to authorise abortions to provide abortion on demand, abortion on demand is unlawful. The Crimes Act requires that doctors must have good faith in their belief that the continued life of the unborn child represents a serious threat to the mental health of the woman. The failure of doctors to have good faith renders the abortion unlawful. Dr Sparrow’s statement indicates that many unborn children are being deprived of their lives unlawfully. This is a serious injustice and a violation of the right to life of unborn children. It also undermines the rule of law.

The government has a grave responsibility to protect the lives of its future citizens who are the weakest and most defenceless members of the human family. What action is the government taking to ensure that the lives of unborn children receive the full protection of the law?

Abortion, the violent dismemberment of a child in the womb is the ultimate in child abuse. New Zealand has one of the highest rates of child abuse in the world. The government is sadly opposed to the national referendum on smacking, holding that it is a criminal offence to allow a light smack on a child as part of good parenting. The message the government is giving is that it is acceptable to kill a child in the womb but unlawful to smack the child after it is born. The Society for the Promotion of Community Standards challenges the Prime Minister, John Key to tell the community what action his government is going to take to stop the unlawful violence and child abuse imposed on our unborn children in our public hospitals, sanctioned by his government and funded by the taxpayer?

Anti-Smacking Law ‘Has Made No Difference’ – Law Society

by Leave a Comment

Media Release Family First – 21 May 2009

Family First NZ says that the Law Society has admitted that the anti-smacking law has made no difference to NZ’s unacceptable rate of child abuse. Chair of the Family Law Section of the Law Society Paul Maskell was asked on a radio interview this week whether the law has done anything to reduce child abuse from the perspective of the legal profession. He responded ‘we haven’t noticed any change at all…The change in law really has made no difference’. He agreed that abusers don’t even know what the law is and don’t really care. [Read more…]

Did the ‘anti-smacking’ legislation reduce Child Abuse?

by 1 Comment

A Growing list of child homicides in New Zealand suggests that the repeal of section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961 has had no positive impact whatsoever on reducting the incidence of child abuse and child homicides in New Zealand. If anything the problem has become worse. The legislation, championed by Green MP Sue Bradford, that criminalises every parent that uses any form of force “for the purpose of correction” must be repealed. The latest shocking report of yet another child homicide must cause all decent-minded citizens to cry out “Enough is enough! We must fix this disasterous problem!” [Read more…]