No idea and it should have no bearing. But thats not how the left operates.
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
Think protest is born out of left wing politics rather than right wing
In Aotearoa New Zealand, the right to protest is guaranteed under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This right is rooted in the freedoms of peaceful assembly, association, and expression. However, these freedoms are not absolute and can be limited in certain circumstances.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
- Guaranteed Rights:
The right to protest is a fundamental part of New Zealand's democracy, allowing citizens to express their opinions and hold the government accountable.
- Constitutional Basis:
The right is enshrined in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.
- Freedoms Involved:
Protesting is a manifestation of several rights, including freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association (the right to meet and organize with others), and freedom of expression.
- Limitations:
These freedoms are not unlimited. They can be restricted to protect other people's rights, maintain public order, national security, and public health.
- Examples of Protest:
Protest has played a significant role in shaping public opinion and influencing government decisions on various issues, such as the 1951 waterfront dispute, the 1981 Springbok Tour, and the Treaty of Waitangi.
- Organizing a Protest:
Protesters may need to obtain permission from local authorities for protests, particularly in certain areas or if they involve a large gathering.
- Potential Restrictions:
While the right to protest is protected, there can be limitations. For example, throwing objects during a protest may be considered a criminal assault.
- Importance of Peaceful Protest:
Social protest, when occurring through nonviolent means, is a key manifestation of human rights.
- Historical Context:
The right to protest has a long history, and restrictions on protest have existed alongside governments.
- Constitutional Basis:
It's actually kinda funny eh. I saw Shane Jones in person once, a few years ago, and resisted the temptation to give him an earfulStuff
www.stuff.co.nz
Getting a bit tit for tat this one with the free speech union earlier today saying this guys employer has no right to take any action, now Winston saying his language isn’t free speech and comfortable with a dismissal from his employment
It was stupid of him to do it wearing company gear. However, I find it a bit naff that corporates hand out these lame lanyards for people to wear and some of them mandate you to wear them so security can eyeball you as an employee when entering the building
I actually think he should be entitled to say whatever he likes, regardless of what he's wearing. The only thing I think he's guilty of is a bit of stupidity and rudeness to others that wanted to listen
If stupidity or rudeness was a crime, Winston would have been convicted long ago
Shane Jones stood up in parliament the other day and proclaimed that bottom trawling has little or no effect on the seabed in the Haurakei Gulf
How does he get away with this shit
Especially since he sat completely the other side of the fence only a couple of election cycles back. He’s a good example of how slimy and spineless they are
Is that a reference to T&T's deceptive country of origin labelling practices?
Oh right haha, Rick's savage
Appropriate with some of the allegations about some politicians practices back in the 70’s and 80’s
there’s not a single person in there that isn’t completely full of shit.
bewildering that some still think there’s a good side and a bad side.
That's not what I meant. His employer punishing him for ideological non conformity.
And old mate wasn't protesting.
Exercising his right to free speech/protest, you can take your pick
You mean his employer is punishing him for not conforming to the prevailing centre-right ideology, or whatever Winston is claiming to represent now?
-
Thread is read by:
