Prebble Richard: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Prebble Richard: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18649] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 I must comment on the point made by Dr Worth. I am not quite sure why he attacked Mr Choudhary or why he thinks Mr Choudhary should support the bill. If we have a look at one particular clause he referred to—the clause that bans the importation of certain publications—then we have to ask what the publications are and how much wider they are. The reason I rise is that the Minister Phil Goff has suggested to us that the only sort of material that will be caught is child pornography which I am sure Mr Choudhary is opposed to as much as any other member of the Committee. 
The reason I think Mr Choudhary ought to be worried about the bill—and I do not think this point was in the minds of those promoting it but they might subsequently move on it—is that we all know what it is actually designed to do. It is all about a particular video—I think it is a video which is put out by some fundamentalist Christians and gives their views on homosexuality. The video is directed at young people. There may be many people in this Chamber who find that material strongly objectionable. I have not seen it myself but I say to members that for this Committee to put through a censorship bill that is actually aimed at fundamentalist Christians is very very unwise. The reason it is unwise is that Christianity is a faith that believes in martyrdom. The idea that Christians will be put off by being martyred by Mr Goff is highly unlikely. If one wants to know how it fits I point out to them that it encourages young people to treat or regard themselves or others or both as degraded dehumanised or demeaned. 
I am sure that this Living Word video if it were a good Southern Baptist sermon most certainly did talk about sin degradation and the like. I have heard many such sermons in my life. But it is a mistake for the Labour Party—which is actually a lifestyle fascist—to believe that it has the right through this legislation to tell parents and churches how they can raise their children even if we strongly disagree. I find it objectionable that the Minister has allowed himself directed by that small group of fanatics within the Labour Party to put through a bill that he tells the public is all about child pornography when we know it is a bill that will enable the censor to censor material put out by fundamentalist Christians. I may disagree with that material—I may not; I have not seen it—but I strongly oppose this Parliament taking that power. 
I say to Mr Choudhary that if they can do that to material put out by Southern Baptists I am sure they can also do it to material put out by the mullahs in Saudi Arabia. There are no doubt nutty people in New Zealand—there were nutty people who objected to the Living Word video; why on earth they went to the censor about it I have no idea—who are just as capable of looking at material used in the Muslim school right next to Mangere airport and deciding that that also encourages people to treat or regard themselves or others as being degraded because of the things it probably says about masturbation or the like. That is what legally this bill does. 
The Minister might think it is a joke. He might think he is being funny because he is managing to put through a measure driven by that group of fanatical women in the Labour Party caucus who regard anyone opposed to homosexuality as engaging in hate speech and who think that people are not allowed to be opposed to homosexuality. Now I voted in favour of the homosexuality bills but I am most certainly in favour of people being able to say what they think about sexual matters. I think they should be able to put up their views. I say to the Minister that this bill is actually not about child pornography and we all know that. This bill is actually about allowing the Labour Party to engage in censorship.