Smacking and marriage

Tomorrow is a Member's Day at Parliament, and both Sue Bradford's Crimes (Abolition of Force as a Justification for Child Discipline) Amendment Bill and Larry Baldock's Marriage (Gender Clarification) Amendment Bill are likely to be up for the vote. The first would remove the defence of "parental discipline" from the crimes act, allowing parents to be prosecuted for assaulting their children; the second would not only define marriage in exclusively heterosexual terms, but also license active discrimination by government against the unmarried and hitched, so that it can dictate preferred social arrangements rather than simply setting a level playing field and letting people make up their own minds how they want to live. Fortunately, it looks like it will be voted down; while the usual regressive forces of National, NZ First, United Future and the Maori Party have lined up behind it, Labour, the Progressives and the Greens will be voting against, and they have the numbers to kill it. The same grouping has also indicated that they will support the anti-smacking bill to Select Committee, so that the issues can get a thorough airing.

The timing on this couldn't be better for United Future; this vote will allow them to again accuse the government of "social engineering" and whip up their support base ahead of the election. Which was I suspect the point of Baldock's bill all along...