What better way to fulfill our Society’s charitable aims of “promoting moral and spiritual welfare” among this sector of society, than to supply a high quality and easy-to-read book to each of our 8,800 prisoners: one that promotes spiritual and moral values! During the year our Society has been helping get a copy of The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan – in a modern English version – to every prisoner. Already over 800 have been distributed with the help of the NZ Prison Chaplaincy Services. This book is arguably the most published book in the world – second only to the Bible and is acclaimed by some reputable scholars as “the greatest allegory ever written” (see www.pilgrimsprogress.co.nz ).

Our involvement in this project has come about in part as a result of research the Society has carried out into the needs of prisoners in the area of literacy and rehabilitation. A number of our members have been involved for many years in prison ministry and are still actively involved.

The Society’s objectives (see www.spcs.org.nz ) include:

“To encourage self-respect and the dignity of the human person made in the image of God” and promote “wholesome personal values as the foundation for stable communities”.(extract from SPCS Constitution available in full on line at www.charities.govt.nz & www.societies.govt.nz). See Mattew 25: 36-40.

View the brochure below if you wish to financially support the project

The Society’s Web blog aims to stimulate rational reflection on, and reasoned appraisal of, a wide rage of issues affecting families and society. Since human opinion is always corrigible and meaningful assertions imply conditions under which they may be falsified, the web blog opinion piece articles are written in the belief that truth is ultimately independent of opinion. The opinions and views expressed in such web log articles do not necessarily wholly reflect the Society’s stance. They are simply deemed to be worth publishing for readers to consider, evaluate, respond to, etc. A careful effort is made to ensure that no article is published that promotes or defends any viewpoint that is contrary to, or might undermine or negate, our Society’s objectives.

Copied from www.spcs.org.nz/activities/

The Society’s objectives have been registered with the Registrar of Societies. See www.societies.govt.nz (Inc. Soc. No. 217833. Incorporated 26/09/07) or viewed at www.spcs.org.nz/objectives/

This statement appeared in a special “note” attached to a Charities Commission job vacancy advertisment for “Manager, Monitoring and Investigations Team” – first published in the Dominion Post on Wednesday 16th November. (applications close midday Monday 28 November 2011).

There has been an open call for public submissions to the Government Administration Select Committee which is considering The Crown Entities Reform Bill – a call made prior to the dissolution of parliament on 20 October 2011. If enancted into law, it will disestablish the Charities Commission and the registration and deregistration of charities will be carried out by a new independent decision-making board of three people. (The Commission was established under The Charities Act 2005).

The Society’s Web blog aims to stimulate rational reflection on, and reasoned appraisal of, a wide rage of issues affecting families and society. Since human opinion is always corrigible and meaningful assertions imply conditions under which they may be falsified, the web blog opinion piece articles are written in the belief that truth is ultimately independent of opinion. The opinions and views expressed in such web log articles do not necessarily wholly reflect the Society’s stance. They are simply deemed to be worth publishing for readers to consider, evaluate, respond to, etc. A careful effort is made to ensure that no article is published that promotes or defends any viewpoint that is contrary to, or might undermine or negate, our Society’s objectives.

Copied from www.spcs.org.nz/activities/

The Society’s objectives have been registered with the Registrar of Societies. See www.societies.govt.nz (Inc. Soc. No. 217833. Incorporated 26/09/07) or viewed at www.spcs.org.nz/objectives/

Right to Life, has resolved to seek leave of the Supreme Court to allow an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal stated in its judgment of 1 June 2011 on the appeal of the Abortion Supervisory Committee and the cross appeal of Right to Life that the unborn child did not have a right to life.The Appeal Court also overturned the judgment of Justice Forrest Miller in the High Court in 2008 which found that:

”The Committee does in fact have the power to require certifying consultants to keep records and report on cases they have considered.” He also stated, “There is reason to doubt the lawfulness of many abortions authorised by certifying consultants. Indeed the Committee itself has stated that the law is being used more liberally than Parliament intended.”

Right to Life supports the dissenting opinion of Justice Arnold in the Court of Appeal, who stated that, “it is implausible that Parliament would have intended to preclude the Committee from keeping under review the way in which they performed their role.”

 Right to Life seeks to appeal on the following matters:

·         The legal recognition of children before birth as human beings endowed at conception by the Creator with human rights, the foundation right being a right to life.

·         Recognition that the Abortion Supervisory Committee has the statutory  power and duty to review the performance of certifying consultants so that they may be accountable for the lawfulness of the abortions they authorise.

·         Recognition that abortion counsellors should be independent of abortion providers.

·         The overturning of the costs awarded by the Court of Appeal to the Abortion Supervisory Committee.

The right to life is the foundation of a civilised society. It is an indispensable guarantee of the individual worth of the person within it. The first duty of the State is to protect the right to life of all its members including its unborn children. To deny the right to life of unborn children is a violation of its human rights and a grave injustice.

Human life begins at conception and the new human being is endowed by its Creator with human rights, the foundation right being a right to life, these rights are inalienable and universal. From conception the new human being is entitled to the respect and protection due to the human person. Right to Life contends that unborn children as members of the human family are entitled to the protection of the New Zealand Bill of Rights, section 8 titled, Right not to be deprived of life. which states,

“No one shall be deprived of life except on such grounds as are established by law and are consistent with the principles of fundamental justice.”

Right to Life contends that this is the justice issue of our era. The Royal Commission on Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion, in its report to Parliament in 1977 stated that:

“The unborn child as one of the weakest and most vulnerable forms of humanity should receive protection.”

Justice Miller, in his judgment of 9 June 2008, stated that:

“the rule according human rights only at birth is founded on convenience rather that medical or moral grounds.” And “A legal right to life would be incongruous in such a law, for it would treat the unborn child as a separate legal person, possessing a status fundamentally incompatible with induced abortion, far from modifying the born alive rule, the abortion law rests on it.”

Right to Life commenced these proceedings as a Judicial Review of the Performance of the Supervisory Committee in 2005 in the High Court in Wellington. In the event that leave is granted to appeal to the Supreme Court, it is anticipated that the appeal may be heard early in 2012.

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life New Zealand Inc.

To the Red Cross: redcross.org.nz/donate or via grabone.co.nz/christchurch as the Red Cross site has been crashing.

To the Westpac Canterbury Care Fund in partnership with the Salvation Army: either at branches nationwide or to the account no. 03-0207-0617331-00

To the Salvation Army Earthquake appeal: salvationarmy.org.nz or 0800 5300 00.  For more go below:To the Rotary New Zealand World Community Service: rnzwcs.org

To the Christchurch Earthquake Support Fund in ASB branches or online (account no. 12-3205-0146808-00).

To Christchurch SPCA’s Pet Emergency Fund: spcacanterbury.org.nz or to the Westpac account 03-0802-0586429-00

Vodafone users can donate to the Red Alert Canterbury Earthquake Appeal by texting Quake to 333 to make a $3 donation to Red Cross Canterbury Earthquake Appeal.

(Source of contacts: Citylife Independent Herald Wednesday March 2, 2011).

Family First NZ has laid an official complaint with the Broadcasting Standards Authority over a disgraceful TV3 Nightline news story (ref. 1) broadcast on the day before Christmas Eve which trivialised and made light of child sex abuse. [Family First NZ is a registered charity with the NZ Charities Commission and its objectives are supported by SPCS].

“It was broadcast only 24 hours after it had been revealed (ref. 2) that the horrendous case of child abuse of a West Auckland 9 year old that had shocked the nation also involved sexual abuse by a CYF caregiver. It was also introduced by the presenter with the pun ‘a touching Christmas story’,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

“It was crass, completely inappropriate, and offensive to many people who would have been shocked, revolted and upset by the revelations of severe and long-term abuse of a nine year old which was in the news.” “This continues the disturbing trend of sexualising news items and coverage which Family First has been highlighting to the BSA. Other examples include full frontal nudity, sexual comments relating to MP Shane Jones’ credit card use, and Close Up’s story on the porn industry which TVNZ subsequently apologised for (ref. 3).”

“The lame defence offered by the broadcaster will be ‘it’s after 8.30pm – we can do what we like’ – but it was school holiday time so children would be viewing later, it was supposed to be a news programme, and most disturbingly, it made light and was completely offensive about a serious issue which was also currently very strong in the mind of the nation and media,” says Mr McCoskrie.

“It is time that the BSA stopped turning a blind eye to the sexualisation of news items, and the trivialisation of horrific and sensitive issues such as child abuse and pornography.”

“TV3 should hang their head in shame for such offensive and insensitive programming, but unfortunately this type of programming is part of an industry-wide trend which the BSA have failed to tackle – and families are the losers.”

References:

1. http://www.3news.co.nz/Former-Shortland-St-star-finds-special-Christmas-role/tabid/418/articleID/192288/Default.aspx

2. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10695892

3. http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/issues/close_up

The script included:

I’ll tell my dad you tried to touch me.

What – I didn’t touch you.

Yes you did, you touched me down there.

That\’s bullsh*t you f*ckin liar kid.

And the actor concluded in an almost humorous and light hearted manner:

I didn’t really… touch her

ENDS

For More Information and Media Interviews, contact:

 Family First: Bob McCoskrie – National Director Mob. 027 55 555 42

See Media Release Wednesday, December 22. 2010

New Chief Censor appointed: Minister of Internal Affairs Nathan Guy has announced the appointment of Dr Andrew Jack as Chief Censor

http://nathanguy.co.nz/index.php?/archives/518-New-Chief-Censor-appointed.html

Venue: Connolly Hall, Guilford Tce.
(off Hill St), Thorndon, Wellington

Date: Monday 8th June

Members’ Only AGM: 6.45pm – 7.20 p.m.
Followed by Free Public Address
(All welcome)
7.30 p.m. to 8.15 p.m.

GUEST SPEAKER

John Terris Q.S.O. ANZIM

Topic: “Media Matters in Society”

John James Terris is a New Zealand politician who initially represented the Labour Party in the NZ parliament. In that capacity he held the positions of Acting Speaker, Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees of the House of Representatives from 1984 to 1990

He represented the electorate of Western Hutt in Parliament from 1978 to 1990 when he was defeated by National’s Joy McLauchlan, one of a number of losses contributing to the fall of the Fourth Labour Government.

He was later the politically independent Mayor of Lower Hutt, from 1995 to 2004. He is the only person ever to have been both MP and Mayor in the Hutt Valley where he has lived since 1965.

His early working life was in radio and television and he is an ordained Anglican priest.

He is currently the President of Media Matters in NZ, (www.viewers.org.nz)an advocacy group which campaigns against gratuitous sex and violence in the electronic media. He is a member of the Hutt Mana Charitable Trust and patron of a number of community groups in the Hutt area

He is a writer, publisher and broadcaster. His autobiography “Being Who You Are” (Steele Roberts) was published in 2004. He is a member of the Queen’s Service Order and a holder of the 1990 Medal.

Source: Wikipedia

The Society was today granted leave by the Secretary of Internal Affairs, Mr Brendan Boyle, to apply to the Film and Literature Board of Review to review the classification of the computer game Grand Theft Auto IV (unedited US version). The game was classified R18 by the Chief Censor’s Office.

The Secretary acknowledges in his decision dated 21 July that he received the Society’s application seeking leave, on 27 May 2008 and states in par 18-20:

“I found no evidence in the application to suggest that it was vexatious … I then considered whether the application for leave was frivolous (trivial, needless or unfounded, or so untenable that it could not succeed) under the Guidelines… I found that the application for leave from the SPCS appeared to be tenable in that it could possibly succeed. The application was therefore not frivolous. It is also my view that the SPCS has established an arguable prima facie case for the application to be considered by the Board.” (Full decision available http://www.dia.govt.nz).