To: Rt. Hon Helen Clark
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Re: Inquiry Term of Reference No.1 and Term
of Reference No.2
Dear Ms Clark,
I must be dreaming! I went to the webpage:
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/ViewDocument.cfm?DocumentID=18980
and read the terms of reference of the Commission of Inquiry into allegations
against Police officers about their sexual conduct, and into the Police
investigations into their sexual conduct. What makes me think I'm dreaming
is the second term of reference.
The second term of reference is as follows:
"They will also investigate police standards
and codes relating to police personal behaviour, including sexual
conduct."
That proposal may seem fairly harmless to the uninitiated, but many
of us are aware that this particular term of reference exists purely
because you happen to dislike male police officers having group sex
with a female. Presumably, you would think it perfectly moral for two
female Police officers to have sex with each other.
My questions to you are:
- What part of your job description has to do with providing moral
leadership for the country ?
- What mandate do you have to usurp this role from religious leaders,
etc. ?
- What moral -- as opposed to political -- authority do you dream
that you have in the country ?
- What credibility do you or the Commissioners have to lay down moral
guidelines, given that:
- You yourself know that you are widely believed to have got married
purely in order to scotch rumours about your sexuality ?
- You have obviously been a strong supporter of equal rights for homosexuals
and lesbians in all relevant respects;
- You have recently made prostitution legal in this country; and
- You have long been in favour of killing unborn children if that
suits the lifestyle of the mother -- and in total disregard for the
rights of the father.
My point is not so much that you are wrong to
have taken those actions or stances. My point is that they are all very
divisive, polarising moral issues, and many of your fellow-citizens
believe that your stance on each of these issues is highly immoral.
Not to put a fine point on it, the Lesbian Feminist movement, as apparently
represented by your policies, seems to have moved from a position of
flying in the face of conservative, religious, heterosexual morality
to a position of daring to impose atheistic, Lesbian Feminist, anti-male
moral standards on the rest of Society ! Specifically, why is it acceptable
for police officers -- in your view -- to be practising Lesbians and
homosexuals, but not acceptable for them to practice group sex in their
private lives ? You take my breath away with your arrogant presumption
!
It is noticeable how the liberalisation of the marriage laws has been
limited to including de facto couples and same-sex couples, because
that suits the monocultural Lesbian Feminist agenda. A multicultural
approach would have included polygynous (one man + several women) and
polyandrous (one woman + several men) relationships in the liberalisation
process. I can see no reason why the line should be drawn where you
have drawn it, apart from racism or Feminist Supremacism.
What legal sexual activities go on between consenting
adult police officers in their off-duty hours is absolutely none of
your business !
The first term of reference reads as follows:
"Commissioners Justice Bruce Robertson
and Dame Margaret Bazley will inquire into police conduct, standards
and procedures when receiving and investigating allegations of sexual
assault and abuse made against the police."
There are many issues to raise under this heading, but I will raise
just one here:
Why is alleged rape special ? I myself, and lots of other men, have
been mistreated by the Police. Why do our experiences not merit inclusion
in this Inquiry ? Is it because you are an anti-male sexist ?
