Some Women Just Aren't Maori Enough

It's a recurring theme recently: religious affiliations being viewed as barriers to basic rights to participation within society.  First there was John Campbell's robust (ahem) attempt to suggest Maori MP'should not have made themselves available to the Destiny Conference on account of the beliefs of the organisation.  This was roundly refuted by MP's who understand the principle of access to the democratic process and the right to freedom of religion.  I wonder why the pro abortion activists are not more active against those naughty Catholics and their right to life rhetoric (actually most Christian denominations).  Then there was the public outcry over funding to the social services are of Destiny Church - again, what relevance does a particular belief system have where social good is being achieved?  People seem to miss the point that it is precisely Christian faith that motivates many Christians to be active in the community.

And now the Maori Women's Welfare League is trying to bar Destiny members from establishing branches and Hannah Tamaki from running for the presidency.  All this on the grounds that the organisation itself is non-sectarian.  Which it is (and I have read the Charter which you can access at the charities register).  But non-sectarian does not mean people of faith cannot be involved.  It does not even mean that a group of people from the same church are barred from setting up a branch as long as anyone is allowed to join.  And I've not heard anything to suggest that branches started by Destiny members are exclusive.

The irony in all this?  The creed of the League is profoundly theistic in orientation!  It just seems that some women aren't the right kind of Maori.