Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Stephen Riddell's avatar

This is a crucial point in our modern political discourse. I've been reading your articles for a bit and while I've disagreed with some of your points (probably for the same reasons I've never voted National), you are civil and articulate in outlining your positions. This article is no different and you hit the nail on the head with your title "Respect to be respected".

The strangest thing for me in this debate is that David Seymour has repeatedly defended his position in hostile media interviews, but most of his opponents have addressed sympathetic media while parroting simplistic ideas about racism that don't address his core constitutional arguments. Ironically, the most substantive arguments against the bill that I've seen have come from Winston Peters and Shane Jones who sit on the same side of the house as Mr. Seymour.

I was hoping to see some genuine arguments in the house about the bill, but instead was dismayed to see the chaos that unfolded. How can we have a civil society if the example set by our elected representatives is that throwing tantrums and refusing to engage in good faith debate is an acceptable way to deal with complicated issues?

Expand full comment
Chris Galloway's avatar

I totally, totally support this Simon. Well said.

Expand full comment
19 more comments...

No posts