Must not speak the truth about homosexuals in Britain
We read:
"A would-be Tory MP from Scotland has been suspended after describing gay people as not "normal”, it was disclosed today. The comments made by Philip Lardner on his campaign website were branded “deeply offensive and unacceptable” by a party spokeswoman.
Under the heading "What I believe in", the North Ayrshire and Arran candidate had written: “Homosexuality is not ’normal behaviour’.”
The comments have now been removed from the website but the gay news service Pink News said Mr Lardner, a primary school teacher, declared his support for parents and teachers who do not want their children to be taught about gay rights.
The section, which was removed from the website this afternoon, said: "I will always support the rights of homosexuals to be treated within concepts of (common-sense) equality and respect, and defend their rights to choose to live the way they want in private, but I will not accept that their behaviour is 'normal' or encourage children to indulge in it."
Source
18 comments:
Not NORMAL!!! Gee you reckin. They go far behond not Normal.
But the fact is that homosexuals are NOT "normal". What does "normal" mean? It means "being approximately average or within certain limits." When looking at the number of heterosexuals versus the number of homosexuals in the united States, heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by almost 10 to 1. How many standard deviations is that away from the mean? Simply put, it means that the number of heterosexuals is very far from normal.
Tolerance is no longer enough; embrace is now mandatory.
BTW, does this mean it is now illegal (or soon will be) to encourage one's own children toward heterosexuality?
Why would children need to be encouraged towards heterosexuality if they were already that way inclined, and pointless if they were not? Better still "leave those kids alone".
What the heck is "not-normal" in Scotland?
It's a place where men are men and the sheep are nervous.
Bunny - I think that is Wales!
Folks, let's face the facts.
If homosexuality is genetic, then it is a genetic defect because it does not fit within the normal order of biological beings. Homosexuals cannot, repeat, cannot procreate without a heterosexual act. Homosexuals do not account for the majority within a species. Homosexuality is very rarely seen elsewhere in the animal world. Why, because it it not normal.
If homosexuality is not genetic, then it is environmental, and again, it is not normal behavior in a heterosexual society, which is what the world-at-large is and has been throughout history.
The fact is that homosexuals are people who refuse comply with the social order and then expect equal treatment for their non-compliance.
"refuse to comply with the social order", not be treated as equal - you are advocating a fascist society.
In biological and sociological terms, homosexuality may be playing a useful part, not least in population control. It is very dangerous for eugenically-minded people to wish to restrict variation in population as that could ultimately have a negative affect on survival capability; and as regards human society and culture, the affect is not always through reproduction, but in cultural legacy too (think Michelangelo or Alexander the Great and many other famous homosexuals).
It is ironic however, that if homosexuality has a genetic component, then it is probably spread because society has pressured homosexuals to perform heterosexually and thus pass on their genes!!
Having mentioned Michelangelo and Alexander the Great, a more contemporary and relevant example re those using computers here, was the pioneer of computer science, Alan Turing, who was also instrumental in cracking German codes during WWII, but was prosecuted for being homosexual which was then against the law in Britain and as a result he committed suicide. This is an example of indirect eugenics (causing the elimination of homosexuals) that has a negative affect on society re what those persecuted individuals could achieve for the benefit of society as a whole.
Actually, homosexuality DOES occur in the animal world, and it's not as rare as people think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
Of course, we shouldn't define normal based on animals. I mean, for the Black Widow spider is "normal" to kill her mate after copulating.
As for teaching gay rights, well, if it's a history class and I have to learn about the abortion wars, segregation, slavery, the English colonies, why not gay liberation?
As long as history is not politicized, the original sources are studied and opposing points of view presented, what's the damage?
"Queers are like mules, they cant breed."
---They don't need to breed, we breed for them. If I ever have kids there's no way I can control their sexual orientation. What am I supposed to say? "Hey Bobby Jr, if you don't like big tits I'm gonna kick your ass!"
On the other hand, gays do breed sometimes, with surrogate mothers, or in the case of lesbians, sperm donors.
Don't forget "bi-sexuality" where people can be both homosexual and heterosexual depending on circumstances. Perhaps that is the "norm" and it is culture and personal experience that pushes individuals one way or the other, either permanently or temporarily.
Interesting point Anon, and one that may have great merit.
As for gays, it should be quite obvious to everyone that what they truly want is to be deemed, either via the SCOTUS or congressional legislation, a "special class" of citizen, with protections and advantages above and beyond those afforded to others. That's one of the reasons the overwhelming majority of people are against their radical agenda and kidd-glove treatment.
Even though they've made great strides in becoming that special class, (see: hate laws, which were invented to protect them) thanks to leftist politicians, it is not enough for them, so they will never stop demanding. The very last thing they want is equality.
As for gays, it should be quite obvious to everyone that what they truly want is to be deemed, either via the SCOTUS or congressional legislation, a "special class" of citizen, with protections and advantages above and beyond those afforded to others.
I think the word we need to start using is "privileged". Homosexuals seek to become a privileged class. Muslims seek to become a privileged class. Race baiters try to make blacks and Hispanics into privileged classes. The Democrats in Congress passed the Obamacare bill with special privileges for themselves, specifically exempting themselves from being subject to the bill. There is little more abhorrent to people than seeing certain groups carve out special privileges for themselves that are denied to everyone else. They can easily recognize such injustice when they see it.
@7:33 AM - If otherwise useful members of society also decide to rape or be child-pornographers they would be breaking the law and should be penalized for assault and abuse. Homosexuals who only have sex with other adults do not commit a crime or hurt anyone else directly, even if you think it is a "sin". Greed is a "sin", envy is a "sin" and many more practices which are not crimes or punishable.
@8:49 PM, the funny thing is that at one time, homosexuality WAS illegal. The problem is that the Left forced the issue in the name of civil rights, and politicians who valued their re-election over the sentiment of their constituents caved to the pressure. The result is that what was once considered illegal and abhorrent to the majority of society became legal and now we must all accept it. Sorry to burst your Utopian bubble, but many of us will do whatever it takes to change the laws back to what they were meant to be.
@1:14AM - the point I made was that homosexuality (legal or otherwise) does not compare with crimes such as rape and child-abuse, as it does not involve exploiting another person when it is between two consenting adults, hence the reasen it was seen as quite reasonable in many countries to de-criminalize it under those conditions (and hence I don't see my point as being a burst or utopian bubble - sorry!)
Bobby said...
Of course, we shouldn't define normal based on animals. I mean, for the Black Widow spider is "normal" to kill her mate after copulating.
Actually that is normal in humans as well, it is just done at a much slower rate over many years...
Post a Comment