Last month I posted a reprint of an old article I wrote—Smacks of Denial—in light of the citizens’ referendum in New Zealand about parents’ right to physically punish their children. 88% of Kiwis voted “No” to the skewed question, “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?” For some years now, Sue Bradford, the architect of the so-called “anti-smacking bill” has been labelled an “extremist” by Kiwis who wish to “correct” their children.
But today we read of threats received by Bradford that claim she, “should be the first candidate for a political assassination” in NZ. I wonder, are those 88% of Kiwis who advocate “a smack as part of good parental correction” happy to tell their children about death threats to Bradford? No doubt those 88% of Kiwis find it extreme that I should connect them to those death threats. But when will those 88% of Kiwis realise that what they perceive to be normal and what they perceive to be extreme is as skewed as their citizens’ referendum? New Zealand: far short of 100% Pure.