Free to worship
So, if I gather a group of like-minded friends, and we develop a philosophy - call it a religion if you like - we can go off into some isolated or fenced-in place;
then run a business that sells goods on the open national and global market and make huge profits. We can then jump through a few bureaucratic hoops, call ourselves a charity, and our lives will be tax-free.
Plus, we could make our own societal rules about who has rights, and who doesn't.
How come New Zealand is condoning the smoke and mirrors surrounding the practices of exclusive religious sects?
It is time to re-examine what is defined as a charity for tax purposes. Looking at the current definition, I don't see how Gloriavale and the Exclusive/Plymouth Brethren fit. They look after their own, are profit-making, and appear to care about no one outside of their communities.
New Zealand taxpayers are subsidising and condoning tax avoidance and myopic, misogynistic lifestyles in the name of charity.
Vicki M Carpenter, Grey Lynn.
Anthemic advice
Regarding the racist attack on the Chinese New Zealander in Albany on Sunday (NZ Herald, July 25), I remember singing the second verse of our National Anthem in high school:
"[Those] of every creed and race gather here before thy face, asking thee to bless this place, God defend our free land.
"From dissention, envy, hate and corruption guard our state.
"Make our country good and great. God defend New Zealand."
It needs to be more widely known.
Sue Newman, Beach Haven.
Useful laws
Jarrod Gilbert (NZ Herald, July 25) stresses the importance of reducing the demand for meth, and speaks positively of Te Ara Oranga, which uses police operations to identify those with drug problems.
He also points out the huge profits currently made by gangs and tells us this profit ensures any imprisoned dealer is quickly replaced.
So Te Ara Oranga only identifies users after they've committed crimes, and arresting dealers is pointless.
Wouldn't it be better if users could be identified, and helped, at the point of purchase, before they commit crimes? Wouldn't it be better if users didn't have to interact with criminals, and criminals didn't get wealthy?
The above could be achieved by decriminalising all drugs and selling them in government-run shops. Unpalatable, yes, but pragmatic and helpful.
Those of us who don't take drugs don't need to be protected from them. Those who do take drugs don't care that they're illegal.
The current drug policies cause more harm than do the drugs themselves.
Chris Elias, Mission Bay.
Walking the talk
I couldn't help but be amused at the irony about the Brian Tamaki-organised protest (NZ Herald, July 25).
He is reported as saying "New Zealanders have lived so long in privilege and comfort" and that the people against him were arrogant and selfish, with no care for anything but "their money, pleasures and narcissist interrupted small lives".
This from a self-proclaimed Bishop who has formed his own Church, for goodness sake. A man who owns (or owned) a high-range Tesla and who tithes his congregation 10 per cent of their income.
Rather than organising protests, as a result of which many who can't afford it will be fined for being pedestrians on a motorway, he should put his tithing practice on hold until his parishioners are able to cope better with all the increased prices that are occurring.
Melanie Corbett, Westmere.
Freedom demands
I would wager some of Brian Tamaki's "self-entitled dickheads" he inconvenienced on the motorway would have been nurses and doctors on their way to the hospital or first responders to a mental health emergency
His attitude and language do not become a man of such "high standing" in a "church".
Does the attitude come from his congregation no longer able to pay the tithes to keep him in the luxury he has become accustomed to?
Maybe he should move to a place more in line with his expectations. China comes to mind
Ainsley Dermody, Invercargill.
Sauce of problem
Considering the number of people getting convicted for drink-driving these days, I wonder how many bars, managers and bar-people have been fined or lost their jobs for serving intoxicated patrons?
It seems to me that, once again, we have an ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.
J McCormick, Gisborne.
Digital dilemma
I agree wholeheartedly with Jim Carlyle (NZ Herald, July 26) complaining about the closure of many bank branches, insurance offices and most government departments, making it impossible to have face-to-face contact with a real person to resolve an issue. His comment, "You must do everything online in the new age. Good luck, oldies" is right on the ball. But to make matters worse, if you try to contact any of these organisations by phone, you invariably get a recorded voice repeatedly reciting a lot of irrelevant nonsense, interspersed with a jingle-jangle of "music". Additionally, we're now told that conventional currencies are on the brink of extinction, so if you have any money stashed in the bank, it will lose its value due to rampant inflation, and could be converted into cryptocurrencies. Forgive me for being cynical and old-fashioned, but at age 96, having lived most of those years in a real world, I am convinced that life was more agreeable when we were not dominated by all this digital stuff.
Jack Waters, Taupō.
Rues of engagement
The story on Auckland Transport pushing back on a parking strategy (NZ Herald, July 26) notes "AT is on the back foot with Māori" and "lack of engagement with Māori".
Well here's a bit of surprising news: Add Pākehā, Chinese, Indian, African, Norwegian and all the others that live in Auckland to the list.
The only people AT engages with are the "Yes-men".
Randel Case , Bucklands Beach.
Running rugby
New Zealand and world rugby is at an important "collision" crossroad. A clash of styles is ruining the game.
Contrast the attractive ball and footwork skills of the All Blacks with the brutish bulldozing of the Irish. Existing rules largely favour the latter's style of play.
Referees, faced with differing game plans are incapable of making the necessary compromises to the different styles of play that allow the game to flow freely.
Taken together with the critically urgent need to do something about concussion injuries it is more likely that rugby's rules will have to swing toward moderating dangerous heavy contacts.
An even balance of the rules promoting a more open, less brutish contact style of play can then be restored, with rugby running out the winner.
To cap all this, reports that fans are hoping the All Blacks lose against the Boks if it leads to a coaching change are deeply concerning. We can only hope that the inevitable collision does not result in serious injury to our beloved game.
Larry Mitchell, Rothesay Bay.
Try the Warriors
John L Vague in his letter(NZ Herald, July 26) wishes for a faster, more exciting game of rugby with fewer players. John, the answer to your prayers is on at Mt Smart this Friday night. I look forward to seeing you in the stands as the Warriors take on the Melbourne Storm in the greatest rugby code of all — rugby league.
Shane Hogan, Russell.
Must be dreaming
The defence team for the importer of 600kg of methamphetamine, states (NZ Herald, July 26) "He is also a person with hopes, dreams, aspirations". How could any legal team dream this nonsense up, when his only aspirations were to wreak havoc on society, in the hope to get his share of the $60 million haul?
Does this legal team understand the ramifications of peddling these highly addictive and crippling substances to our society?
I would almost go as far as to call this an insult to the taxpayer, who ultimately foots the bill and has to pay for the damage to families, communities, livelihoods, and all the crimes connected with substance abuse.
René Blezer, Taupō.
Short & sweet
On Luxon
Christopher Luxon reacts as the opposition should by finding flaws in the Labour Government's decisions, but is unable to give workable, thought-out solutions. Rosemary Balme, Howick.
On rugby
The All Blacks depart for South Africa on Friday and I would like to wish Ian Foster and his team all the very best. A clean sweep will give you a clean slate, Ian. Gary Stewart, Foxton Beach.
Perhaps Matt Heath should be the new ABs coach? He could start off by telling everyone not to be such big crybabies, everyone loses in life at some point. Emmett Hussey, St Johns.
On Labour
It is good to read that not all people have lost their sense of humour. Mark Nixon (NZH, July 25) suggests that if you want something done, get a Labour Government. The people on the housing waitlist for example might not agree. A J Petersen, Kawerau.
On Tamaki
Brian Tamaki seems to have no self-awareness. C C McDowall, Rotorua.
On Barnett
Michael Barnett wrote most eloquently (NZH, July 25) about his accomplishments. A nom de plume would have muted the trumpeting. James Gregory, Parnell.
The Premium Debate
Divorce 'warfare' of legal tactics in marriage break-ups
My husband used a barrister's threat of court to extract another $50k out of his already very generous settlement he got after suddenly abandoning me for another woman. It was just more acid in an already vicious wound. It's history now (three years ago, thankfully I've moved on) but it became clear at the time our divorce laws provide little justice when one party has been severely wronged in a marriage dissolution. Jane E.
Get a prenuptial. I'm amazed at the number of my friends and family who haven't.
I realise lawyers' fees can be costly for a prenuptial, yet the cost of not having one could be much greater. Steven W.
Men face just as many issues with women not allowing fathers to see their children, in my opinion this should take precedence over money. Geoff C.
Lawyers need to be made accountable in these processes where they are actually taking advantage of the client rather than working towards fair solutions for all - this is a culture that needs to change. Nicola P.
We live in a society where a great many relationships start in adult years and one party brings considerably more major assets into the relationship than the other. This is both the male and the female in the new partnership. We need our laws to respect that fact and not work actively to oppose it as they do now. I'm sure we all know of a situation like this where one party in a relationship came into it with a house and existing children and after two years a new partner claims half of that for themselves despite making no contribution at all. It affects both genders, not just women. Richard C.
The only people who make money out of a divorce are the lawyers. A system that simplifies the process is needed. Kathy M.