Friday, August 06, 2004
Bigamy is legal in New Zealand
Did you know that bigamy is effectively legal in New Zealand? I certainly didn't, until I started doing some research for a submission on the Civil Union Bills. It comes about through an amendment to the Administration Act made in 2001. This Act governs what happens if a person dies without making a will (intestate).
According to Section 77(C), if a married person goes into a de facto relationship (or a series of de facto relationships) without dissolving the marriage -- and dies without making a will -- all the de facto partners have a claim on the dead person's estate equal to the surviving married partner.
So, the de facto partners are equal in law with the married partner. You're talking here about another relationship being legally equal to marriage, so you're making bigamy legal.
The whole mess will be further entrenched in the companion Bill to the Civil Union Bill, which goes by the innocuous-sounding title Relationships (Statutory References) Bill.
Our politicians seemed determine to hand lawyers a machine to make money. I wonder if it's because so many of them are lawyers themselves?
Did you know that bigamy is effectively legal in New Zealand? I certainly didn't, until I started doing some research for a submission on the Civil Union Bills. It comes about through an amendment to the Administration Act made in 2001. This Act governs what happens if a person dies without making a will (intestate).
According to Section 77(C), if a married person goes into a de facto relationship (or a series of de facto relationships) without dissolving the marriage -- and dies without making a will -- all the de facto partners have a claim on the dead person's estate equal to the surviving married partner.
So, the de facto partners are equal in law with the married partner. You're talking here about another relationship being legally equal to marriage, so you're making bigamy legal.
The whole mess will be further entrenched in the companion Bill to the Civil Union Bill, which goes by the innocuous-sounding title Relationships (Statutory References) Bill.
Our politicians seemed determine to hand lawyers a machine to make money. I wonder if it's because so many of them are lawyers themselves?
"Hate Speech" laws proposed
The NZ parliament is asking whether more "hate speech" legislation is needed.
Last year, the government added a nasty amendment to the Sentencing Act, so that punishment is more severe if the perpetrator carried out the crime on the basis of the victim's race, sexual orientation, etc. How this is supposed to be determined, and the potential for witch-hunts, are among the most obvious objections, but still it went through.
More "hate speech" laws raise up the ante even further, particularly if sexual orientation is included. Half the submissions to the government on the proposed Civil Union Bills would probably be ruled hate speech -- not because they are hateful or vitriolic, but simply because their authors hold genuine views about the damaging consequences if the Bills are passed. This is already happening in the USA and Europe, where people are being jailed for speaking against homosexuality.
The stifling of reasonable dissent is a hallmark of totalitarian governments, and most be resisted here to the utmost.
The NZ parliament is asking whether more "hate speech" legislation is needed.
Last year, the government added a nasty amendment to the Sentencing Act, so that punishment is more severe if the perpetrator carried out the crime on the basis of the victim's race, sexual orientation, etc. How this is supposed to be determined, and the potential for witch-hunts, are among the most obvious objections, but still it went through.
More "hate speech" laws raise up the ante even further, particularly if sexual orientation is included. Half the submissions to the government on the proposed Civil Union Bills would probably be ruled hate speech -- not because they are hateful or vitriolic, but simply because their authors hold genuine views about the damaging consequences if the Bills are passed. This is already happening in the USA and Europe, where people are being jailed for speaking against homosexuality.
The stifling of reasonable dissent is a hallmark of totalitarian governments, and most be resisted here to the utmost.
Babies bouncing back?
New Zealand has had a welcome turnaround over the last 12 months in the number of babies being born. According to Statistics NZ, 57,890 babies were born in the year to the end of June, a 5.4% increase on the previous 12 months. The overall fertility rate also took an upward turn, taking us back nearly to replacement level.
The major trend consolidated in these figures, is that women are having their babies much later than they once did. In the 1970s, the main childbearing group was women in their early 20s -- now it is women in their early 30s.
Statistics NZ does not hazard a guess at why the upturn this year (a response to the World Cup Rugby defeat, perhaps?? If you can't beat them, outbreed them.) The consolidation of delayed childbearing, though, seems to indicate that it might be more a blip on the horizon, rather than change in overall trends.
New Zealand has had a welcome turnaround over the last 12 months in the number of babies being born. According to Statistics NZ, 57,890 babies were born in the year to the end of June, a 5.4% increase on the previous 12 months. The overall fertility rate also took an upward turn, taking us back nearly to replacement level.
The major trend consolidated in these figures, is that women are having their babies much later than they once did. In the 1970s, the main childbearing group was women in their early 20s -- now it is women in their early 30s.
Statistics NZ does not hazard a guess at why the upturn this year (a response to the World Cup Rugby defeat, perhaps?? If you can't beat them, outbreed them.) The consolidation of delayed childbearing, though, seems to indicate that it might be more a blip on the horizon, rather than change in overall trends.
Thursday, August 05, 2004
British children to be vaccinated against drug addiction?
I can't decide whether the following is satire or true. If true, it is a deadly serious issue with ramifications that should send chills up the spine.
The UK newspaper The Independent on Sunday claims that a radical scheme to vaccinate children against future drug addiction is being considered by British ministers. (Note: the article is listed in Google News, but can only be accessed by subscription to The Independent.)
Under the plans, doctors would immunise children at risk of becoming smokers or drug users with an injection. The scheme could operate in a similar way to the current nationwide measles, mumps and rubella vaccination programme.
Childhood immunisation would provide adults with protection from the euphoria that is experienced by users, making drugs such as heroin and cocaine pointless to take. Such vaccinations are being developed by pharmaceutical companies and are due to hit the market within two years.
Simon Pound has a lengthy blog critiquing the article, and while I don't agree with all his positions, he raises some critical issues which should concern every person, eg: "This is, if you'll pardon a touch of hysteria, the kind of condescending and controlling evil wrapped up in professed good intentions that informed eugenics and the Holocaust."
I can't decide whether the following is satire or true. If true, it is a deadly serious issue with ramifications that should send chills up the spine.
The UK newspaper The Independent on Sunday claims that a radical scheme to vaccinate children against future drug addiction is being considered by British ministers. (Note: the article is listed in Google News, but can only be accessed by subscription to The Independent.)
Under the plans, doctors would immunise children at risk of becoming smokers or drug users with an injection. The scheme could operate in a similar way to the current nationwide measles, mumps and rubella vaccination programme.
Childhood immunisation would provide adults with protection from the euphoria that is experienced by users, making drugs such as heroin and cocaine pointless to take. Such vaccinations are being developed by pharmaceutical companies and are due to hit the market within two years.
Simon Pound has a lengthy blog critiquing the article, and while I don't agree with all his positions, he raises some critical issues which should concern every person, eg: "This is, if you'll pardon a touch of hysteria, the kind of condescending and controlling evil wrapped up in professed good intentions that informed eugenics and the Holocaust."
Wednesday, August 04, 2004
That immoral Mozart!
Did you know that the music of Mozart and Beethoven is immoral?
Sheik Said Al-Zayyati, a TV talk-show host in United Arab Emirates, has spoken out against the "immorality" of cell phones that play Beethoven and Mozart music in Muslim mosques.
"This immorality has even penetrated mosques, and therefore we are ask all those who use these devices and bring them into the mosques to be God-fearing. My brother, why don't you put just [makes imitation of simple cell-phone ring] and that's it."
Did you know that the music of Mozart and Beethoven is immoral?
Sheik Said Al-Zayyati, a TV talk-show host in United Arab Emirates, has spoken out against the "immorality" of cell phones that play Beethoven and Mozart music in Muslim mosques.
"This immorality has even penetrated mosques, and therefore we are ask all those who use these devices and bring them into the mosques to be God-fearing. My brother, why don't you put just [makes imitation of simple cell-phone ring] and that's it."
Monday, August 02, 2004
Microsoft wants you - and you might not be able to do a thing about it!
The future of computing, in the Microsoft vision, is that they have total access to your computer, and there's nothing you can do to stop them. (Well, actually there is, but will you be prepared to pay the price?)
The groundwork was laid when Microsoft introduced what it called "secure computing". What this actually means is that when you purchased Windows, and related products such as Word and Excel, you gave Microsoft the right to enter your computer and to decide whether you can use the programs you have bought. If you don't believe me, look carefully at the Terms of Agreement. You cannot use programs such as Word until you have registered them, and Microsoft can decide at any time to terminate your use. They do that by entering your machine and shutting down the program. I am not making this up!
The next stage in this Microsoft dream was unveiled today in this news story. "Microsoft, which is challenging market leader Google in the online search market, has demonstrated for the first time a search engine that looks for information on computer hard drives as well as information on the Web."
If that doesn't scare you, it should.
It's not just Microsoft, either. If you are an Xtra customer (ie, Telecom), you gave Telecom the rights to any digital material you produce. Yep, they can take anything you compose on your computer or put up at a website hosted by Xtra, and use it any way they want. You have already signed away your rights. (Did I say, you must read the fine print?)
There are ways to opt out of this, and surprisingly one option is free! But it comes at a huge emotional cost.
Option 1: Dump your PC and switch to a Macintosh. This is not free, but you get a far better operating system, which is almost virus-immune.
Option 2: Keep your PC, but instal the Linux operating system, which is free. Not only is the operating system free, but there are thousands of free programs, including equivalents to Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint and the rest.
Freedom resides in your hands!
The future of computing, in the Microsoft vision, is that they have total access to your computer, and there's nothing you can do to stop them. (Well, actually there is, but will you be prepared to pay the price?)
The groundwork was laid when Microsoft introduced what it called "secure computing". What this actually means is that when you purchased Windows, and related products such as Word and Excel, you gave Microsoft the right to enter your computer and to decide whether you can use the programs you have bought. If you don't believe me, look carefully at the Terms of Agreement. You cannot use programs such as Word until you have registered them, and Microsoft can decide at any time to terminate your use. They do that by entering your machine and shutting down the program. I am not making this up!
The next stage in this Microsoft dream was unveiled today in this news story. "Microsoft, which is challenging market leader Google in the online search market, has demonstrated for the first time a search engine that looks for information on computer hard drives as well as information on the Web."
If that doesn't scare you, it should.
It's not just Microsoft, either. If you are an Xtra customer (ie, Telecom), you gave Telecom the rights to any digital material you produce. Yep, they can take anything you compose on your computer or put up at a website hosted by Xtra, and use it any way they want. You have already signed away your rights. (Did I say, you must read the fine print?)
There are ways to opt out of this, and surprisingly one option is free! But it comes at a huge emotional cost.
Option 1: Dump your PC and switch to a Macintosh. This is not free, but you get a far better operating system, which is almost virus-immune.
Option 2: Keep your PC, but instal the Linux operating system, which is free. Not only is the operating system free, but there are thousands of free programs, including equivalents to Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint and the rest.
Freedom resides in your hands!
