Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 15, 2012 at 2:30pm

The real reason for compulsory employer-pay superannuation: Is to continue to effect the psyche of the employee into an employee mindset instead of an apprentice employer mindset. Very few employees seeing the unfair dismissal laws and compulsory superannuation employer contribution will ever want to become an employer. The enemy of socialism is marriage, family and small business. When a Government causes employees to abandon their desire to learn to treat the business as their own and to adopt an attitude of ‘entitlement’ instead of accelerating a desire to be ‘profitable’ be assured of that Governments intent. The Gillard Government has the intent of destroying Small Business and ensuring the growth of the Woolies and the West Farmers. The Gillard Government will attempt, using borrowings, to buy the votes of the inane to remain in Government. And/or hope that the time they have had destroying Australia will be sufficient to justify the establishment of an AsianAustUnion. The difference between Liberal and Labor is simply the degree of the intent. The Liberals don’t really want Australia to become part of Asia and still hold socialist policies to cut off their own nose.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by peter cvek on June 18, 2012 at 10:10am

... The sad fact that the difference gap between Liberal and Labor is swiftly eroding brings me to the following.. A true story.. As proprietors of a General Store in a small Gippsland hamlet some four years or so ago, my wife and I would cater for an organized " bike run" which was held annually.. Our little hamlet was a formal watering stop on the bike run, and it was a day we, naturally, looked forward to every year due to the business stimulus it created for us.. Now on this particular occassion there was four of us serving customers; my wife and myself, and two female staff members... A number of the riders had suffered falls on the journey, and one tall and stately man of close to 60 years of age, came in with bleeding to his hand asking for assistance... Whilst in the throes of serving a packed shop, I instinctively instructed one of our female assistants, Jan, to get the first aid box out and see to the wound.. No sooner had Jan responded with an equally instinctive affirmative, than a loud voice yelling out " discrimination!" rang out through the shop for all to hear, directed at myself.. The protagonist, a fiesty vixen of the civil service bent, had planted both her palms on the counter infront of me ( whilst I was serving others) and glared venomously into my eyes.. The injured man, who was obviously well acquainted with the woman, with a great degree of shamefacedness intervened and tactfully directed her away from the scene, and thanked us all for tending to his wounds, thereby averting what could have been an embarrassing, if not ugly, scene for all, for the woman was about to file a complaint against me to the anti-discrimination board for issuing a directive to my own "female" staff, and for not tending to the wounds myself... All were soon back on their bikes, and Jan and I both looked at each other in disbelief at what could have happened... Had her colleague not intervened, and had she succeeded, our business would have been closed down or at the leased fined beyond our ability to pay.. The simple reality in Australia is that we have a de facto tyranny; a " silent tyranny" which is perpetrated through draconian and unnatural and unjust anti discrimination laws by our illegal star chamber courts, and enforced against anyone who wants to remain a reasoning, discerning, human being... Neither side of the political spectrum are willing to repeal these horrific tyrannical anti discrimination laws, which spell " hari kari" to freedom in Australia, and beyond...

Peter Cvek

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Malcolm Fenton on June 18, 2012 at 3:08pm

Thanks for that Peter. I came across a far worse incident than that just recently relating to the teaching profession. As I am very sure it will be censored from this discussion I will send it to you directly. Ditto anyone else who is not afraid to see how quickly things are deteriorating.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on June 20, 2012 at 7:22am

Big government's social re-engineering campaign is gaining speed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rae Billett on June 20, 2012 at 9:36am

I am sick of this whole gay 'marriage' so called 'discussion'. The gay movement and the Greens want to normalise these unions by marriage to normalise themselves. And the Government are using it AS A DIVERSION! Where and who did they ask about gay marriage and what were the questions. Ask the right questions, get the right result....and thus it has always been.

 

But, in this 'discussion' they hardly ever mention the long term repercussions on the children from these associations. They also never mention that homosexual associations between gay men are not given to monogamy, in fact quite the opposite, they change partners often. So I can only imagine that the lesbian side is at the bottom of this. Two brides?  

 

I will say it again I don't want my grandchildren thinking this is normal from an age when they have no idea about sexual matters and I cannot bear the thought of small children from those associations being bullied about having no real mother or no real father, just two of each.....tell me that's normal!

 

I do not believe gay partnerships should be allowed to undergo IVF just to fulfil some fantasy of a so called 'love' association or 'soul mate' ideation. That does not last in many real life monogamous marriages and it won't last in these either. That will upset many, but I don't believe singles should have IVF either.

 

IVF should not be available to any other than heterosexual couples. There's a politically incorrect statement.  But you know I don't give a fig, there are enough bad partnerships for kids to cope with now.

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 20, 2012 at 10:52am

Hi  Rae, sort of puts new meaning into childrens' play of "Mothers and Fathers". You also say "IVF should not be available to any other than heterosexual couples." This statement is correct, and very worth fighting for. So many wothwhile marrieds who have applied to adopt are rejected on a variety of reasons such as age difference and age and yet  homosexual apologists and propergandists seek a system that place defensless children into the lifestyle of homosexuals.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 20, 2012 at 11:25am

Hi Beverly, I understand that 300 same gender couples took advantage of the Qld Governements 'equality' legislation. Caeser married his horse.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rae Billett on June 20, 2012 at 2:38pm

I have no time for polls at all. The minority groups say when pushing this or that 'burning issue', that over 50% or 60% of those polled agree with whatever they are pushing.

 

Sorry I just don't buy it.

If you ask 20 people do you agree with same sex marriage in inner Sydney say around Paddington you may get 7 you might get 10.....but ask that same question of a thousand people over a demographic of a few thousand kilometers, including country areas and see what you come up with.

 

Just like the carbon dioxide tax...and the Combet quote about 'most of the people understand and want a carbon tax and an emissions trading scheme". Who did they ask that one, 10 or 20 bankers in inner Sydney or perhaps some Green yummy mummies sipping latte's in Marrickville and Balmain, wives of said bankers?

 

They do this because they want the general public to feel they are out of step with the majority. They're not, it's manipulation by minority groups.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rae Billett on June 20, 2012 at 3:11pm

Sure does James but that's what they want everyone to accept.

james darby said:

Hi  Rae, sort of puts new meaning into childrens' play of "Mothers and Fathers". You also say "IVF should not be available to any other than heterosexual couples." This statement is correct, and very worth fighting for. So many wothwhile marrieds who have applied to adopt are rejected on a variety of reasons such as age difference and age and yet  homosexual apologists and propergandists seek a system that place defensless children into the lifestyle of homosexuals.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on June 21, 2012 at 8:38am

Rae, Good point about pseudoscientific polls being used to manipulate public opinion. Polls taken in gay bars are about as scientific as the global warming scam.

Rae Billett said:

it's manipulation by minority groups.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 21, 2012 at 12:07pm

The ingrained fake belief of "euality" instilled into all school leavers, places the regimented into a mindset devoid of  the capacity to observe truth, reason and logic and also to unable to accept the knowledge  of the experienced and wise. I did write a paper about this and am happy to repost it here if anyone wants to see it. It is about three pages.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Malcolm Fenton on June 21, 2012 at 3:54pm

"There was a lot of moosh written in the last two decades about the "blank slate", the idea that since each child is theoretically equal under the eyes of the law, each must, by extension be equal in all things and that such a possibility could not obtain unless each child was, from birth, equally capable - environmental influences aside - of succeeding in all things.

This is a magnificent and majestic theory and would be borne by all -  save those who had ever had, observed, or seriously thought about children."

 

- recent post on a popular website.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• …
• 15
• Next ›
• Page