We used to lead the world in industry and invention, literature and exploration, but now all that our castrated politicians can think of making Britain world leaders in is unholy matrimony.

This is an illustration of what happens when a culture descends into hedonism: pleasures and comforts take over from hard work and genuine family life and child-raising. Time starts running out for that society. Already, the fertility rate of British women is below the replacement figure. We are literally becoming extinct!

The Equalities Minister, Lynne Featherstone announced at the LibDem Conference yesterday that,

…in March, this Government will begin a formal consultation on equal civil marriage for same-sex couples.

This would allow us to make any legislative changes before the end of this Parliament.

We will be working closely with all those who have an interest in the area to understand their views ahead of the formal consultation.

I replied,

I “have an interest in the area”. A very great interest. Marriage is between one man and one woman. This is the definition and always has been and no government has the legitimacy to change the meaning.

Changing the definition of ‘marriage’ will have a wide-ranging influence on the rest of society. Marriage has been getting undermined for the past few decades to the point where the majority of British children are now born out of wedlock.

This obviously has a destabilising effect on society and legitimising same-sex unions will add to the devaluing of marriage in people’s minds and increase problems in the community.

I urge you to consider the views of everyone in this country because a change of this magnitude effects everyone.

And I really do urge everyone to get involved, because this is not just a matter for homosexuals, this is a massive shift in society’s value system being proposed and will affect us all. Marriage will be further devalued and communities will become more fragmented. Your children will be subjected to homosexual propaganda at school and in the media on an unprecedented scale.

Apparently, “the Government has indicated it is committed to changing the law to allow gay marriage (sic) by 2015″ So, like the Scottish bunch, they appear to have made their decision even before the consultation process has started.

That’s “democracy” for you.

Ms Featherstone continues,

The consultation will only cover civil marriage for same sex couples – not religious marriage.

For now. As I wrote a fortnight ago, Tory MP (yes, Tory MP) Mike Weatherley has written to David Cameron and seems to be suggesting that churches that refuse to bless the union of man and man/woman and woman should forfeit the right to perform all marriages.

But like everything else, it’s salami tactics at play. Homosexuality was legalised for two people over 21 in private. Then it was 18; then 16. Civil Partnerships were introduced. And when Section 28 was done away with, we were assured that it would not lead to homosexuality being promoted to children. Now, Stonewall sends out its propaganda on DVD to every school in the country and teachers even encourage primary school children to wear frocks to ‘discover their feminine side’.

Imagine the new levels of child abuse they will be permitted to get away with if same-sex ‘marriage’ is legalised.

When societies descend into hedonism and decadence and throw morality out the window, they decline – and that’s why ‘gay marriage’ is unknown in history as far as I am aware.

Rulers and governments weren’t THAT naive in the past.

When I try to explain the homosexual agenda, many normally sensible people cannot understand the damage it is doing. They think I am overreacting to what is, essentially, an “equality” issue. But homosexuals already have equality. What they crave now is for the whole of society to be re-engineered around them and for everyone to accept their behaviour as normal and thus for all opposing views to be silenced. The way they are trying to achieve this now is through using teachers to indoctrinate children.

Stonewall have sent out ‘teacher training packs’ to staff at primary schools,

Children as young as five should learn about gay relationships in schools and boys should be allowed to express their feminine sides by dressing in frocks or becoming cheerleaders, according to a Government-funded initiative.

The new pack was created by the gay rights organisation Stonewall with the help of a £25,000 grant from the Government’s teacher training body, the Training and Development Agency for Schools.

This is taxpayers’ money being used to make children question their gender and role.

And notice the veiled threat:

Schools and local authorities are urged to use the material to demonstrate they are complying with the Equality Act 2010, which obliges public bodies to promote equality.

Many people still defend Stonewall and the homosexual lobby with the old argument that what goes on in the bedroom is nobody else’s business, and that it doesn’t affect them, but things went well beyond that stage years ago. What Stonewall does affects each and every one of us because they are very effectively changing the norms of society.  We have already seen how they also threaten freedom of speech, freedom of association and the property rights of those who disagree with them.

One of the scariest ways this agenda impacts on us all can be heard in the video, and that is the teaching of children to resist the values of their parents and grandparents. We have witnessed the same agenda when it comes to encouraging children to seek contraception and abortion behind their parents’ backs. The State also wants children as young as five to be given sex “education” with no opt-out for the parents.

The State owns your children now. They have assumed the role of surrogate parent.

One of the teachers in the DVD says that some of the boys “really loved wearing the dressing-up dresses and it went on for several weeks.”

Are the parents told? Told – not asked, obviously. But are the parents being told that their sons are parading about in dresses while at school?

So creepy.

One very popular tactic apologists use when trying to justify same-sex acts is by alleging that some animals are homosexual and insisting that humans ought to take behavioural lessons from dumb animals. One of the picture books being promoted to teachers is “And Tango Makes Three,” about a penguin chick raised by two male penguins. It was based on a true story from New York’s Central Park Zoo, however, one of the “gay penguins” found a female mate. It seems that the penguins weren’t homosexual, just lonely.

But don’t expect a rewrite of the book for future editions. School isn’t for learning the truth, it is about indoctrination and being confused about right and wrong.

This is all about changing the perceptions, instincts and values of the next generation. This is a very serious re-engineering of society. Please do not underestimate what is going to happen when future generations reach adulthood with these negative views on family life and whose brains have been hardwired to accept state propaganda as the final word.

And as I keep saying, this is not about religion. Homosexual acts have been taboo all over the world because normal family bonds are what keep the community strong. The weaker these bonds have become in the UK, the more society has become fragmented.

Stonewall are by no means the only culprits, but the longer they are permitted to pervert the minds and souls of the next generation, the worse this fragmentation will become. That’s why everyone will pay the price. What else can we expect for treating children so appallingly?

How much worse will you let it become before you too speak out against it?

Stonewall - using your children to re-engineer society in their image

H/T – Video noticed and title pinched from here.

Cllr Chris Windows (Tory) said that he thought it was wrong to allow “a certain actor” (i.e. Sir Ian McKellen) to become a potential role model to impressionable young people based on his sexuality.

Whether you agree with him or not, and of course I do, he is surely entitled to express his opinions in the council chamber without being abused with shouts of “disgusting” and “bloody disgraceful, that is”.

But of course Stonewall think they are allowed to bully the general public as do their supporters who, unfortunately, seem to include most politicians who have either bought into the “homophobic bullying” scam or are too afraid to disagree. Notice that Cllr Windows didn’t get any support.

The soppy leader of the Labour Group begins her response with, “Oh dear… oh dear”. She goes on to say that with comments like Cllr Windows’ young people are going to be put off “coming out” while they’re young. More on that later.

Alex Woodman (Lib Dem) said: “I wholeheartedly, unequivocally condemn the outrageous homophobic remarks by Cllr Windows. He should be utterly ashamed of himself.”

Chris Windows came back and explained, amid some further heckling, that he didn’t like undue pressure being put on youngsters. This is what concerns me too. While all those right-on councillors are busy condemning Chris Windows, they are obviously unaware of the damage promoting homosexuality to teenagers could do. A large number of children have some experience of same-sex desire, so putting pressure on them to “come out” early is grossly irresponsible and has been linked to increased teen suicide.

But this is a tribal thing. Stonewall clearly care about their “own” and nobody else.

Psychiatrist Dr. Jeffrey Satinover says,

[W]ithout any intervention whatsoever, three out of four boys who think they’re gay at age 16 aren’t by 25. So if we’re going to treat homosexuality as a state, 75% of ‘gays’ become ‘non-gay’ spontaneously. That’s a statement which I consider ludicrous, but if you accept this tacit proposition—that being gay is an actual state, like being short or being tall, black or white—then in three out of four people that condition changes itself spontaneously. . . That’s with no outside intervention, just the natural processes of development.

So what do we do about this alleged epidemic of “homophobic bullying”? Lie to kids and tell them that homosexual and bisexual behaviour is normal and acceptable or seek to stop ALL bullying and stop interfering with youngsters while their hormones are playing up?

Of course, the latter is the more sensible and sensitive option, but it is not “right-on” for Labour and Lib Dem politicians, and an increasing number of Tory ones too, who desperately want to get brownie points from Stonewall.

Gary Hopkins was one of the councillors who invited Stonewall in because their “research” showed there “was a problem” in the Council and also “unacceptable levels of homophobic bullying in schools which needed to be addressed.”

Stonewall speaks and everyone jumps: councillors, the police, businesses – all itching to be seen to be toeing the line. They don’t understand teenagers – they have just been manipulated to jump to attention when the words “equality and diversity” are uttered and anyone who can still think for themselves and say, actually maybe that isn’t such a good idea, is immediately branded “disgusting” and “homophobic”.

Cllr Chris Windows has been suspended from the Tory Party over the “incident”. Philip Lardner, the Tory candidate for North Ayrshire and Arran in this year’s General Election was also suspended simply for stating on his website that he believes in traditional sexual morality.

If you want to get anywhere in politics these days, you need to leave your brain in a box on top of the wardrobe and your conscience out for the bin men.

Everyone’s favourite Tory, Boris Johnson, wrote this a few years ago:

If gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men, or indeed three men and a dog.

But this was him leading the 2008 London “Gay Pride” parade.

This is probably what Chris Windows must now do to try and regain the “respect” of his fellow councillors. Meanwhile, Stonewall continues to get access to children to peddle their lies and gain recruits when they are at their most vulnerable.

Just a decade ago, seven out of eight voters in Brian Souter’s private referendum in Scotland wanted to keep the Clause that protected schoolchildren from being subjected to the promotion of homosexuality. Mine was by far the majority view. I am certain that had we known then how far things were to go (and we were assured that removing the Clause would not lead to homosexuality being promoted) the poll would have been even more in favour of keeping this safeguard in place.

Most Tories still fall over themselves to praise Maggie Thatcher, when introducing Section 28 was one of her governments’ finest achievements, but now many have succumbed to the all-controlling Marxist philosophies their heroine abhorred.

Stonewall – stop perverting the minds and souls of the youth.

Tories – stop being cowards and closet socialists.

The shows they watched included the popular soaps and talent shows, but they also hoped to find “positive portrayals” of homosexuals and bisexuals in The Gadget Show, Football Focus, You’ve Been Framed and Blue Peter.

Yes, Blue Peter.

Or maybe they chose these programmes specifically because they didn’t expect to see any mention of sexuality (of any sort) and so this would make their “findings” look better for them.

As I wrote on Anna’s blog, because homosexuals know that their behaviour is disgusting, the activists hope that the day will come when every single voice of dissent has been silenced forever and they can finally sit back and stop feeling dirty and guilty. They think that if we all accept them (via ‘education’ and mass media indoctrination), they will finally be able to accept themselves.

But my recent blog post which offers a cure for homosexual desire suggests that homosexuals will never be able to accept themselves in their current condition.

So what does this have to do with legalised paedophilia?

Consider this…

The law permitted two “consenting adults” over 21 of the same sex to engage in indecent sexual behaviour in private.

Over the following 40 years, the age has been reduced from 21 to 18 to 16 (i.e. legalised pederasty now).

The media has been instrumental in making all of this appear acceptable and will do so also with paedophilia.

There are already various people talking about children’s “sexual rights” and calls for the age of consent to be reduced further, including by Peter Tatchell.

There have been plans to change the law in N. Ireland (drawn up in London for the provincial guinea pigs) which would have enabled 13 year olds to legally have sex with each other (and an 18 year old man could legally have sodomised a 15 year old boy) and in 2008 Scotland’s children’s commissioner argued for much the same thing.

21 – 18 – 16 – 13 – ?

How low can this agenda get?

As Ed Balls again tries to push through his legislation which would compel all primary schoolchildren to be indoctrinated with sex ‘education’ from the age of 5 and the aforementioned Children’s Commissioner said that the Scottish Government should consult 8-year-olds on changes to the law on underage sex because it “affects” them and as parental rights are constantly being undermined (e.g. no opt-out for the proposed 5 year olds’ sex ed) then things will continue to get worse.

“Children’s rights” are at the expense of parental rights which in fact means that the State is assuming all the rights.

You may remember the fuss last year when the NHS in Sheffield issued a leaflet encouraging schoolchildren to have sex or masturbate twice a week to help their cardiovascular system.

The Mail also reminds us,

[The leaflets] came to light just a week after it emerged that teenagers who took part in a £6million Government initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies were more than twice as likely to fall pregnant as other girls.

The scheme tried to persuade girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.

Standard Government-issue advice. No wonder we are where we are. While waiting for my recent doctor’s appointment, I had a good look at the posters on the walls. A number of them were directed at youngsters and reminded them of the confidentiality they are entitled to, i.e. the State can know, but not the parents or legal guardians.

When the media have done their ‘job’ once again of re-engineering the opinions of the masses, multitudes will be convinced that children should be having sex because it is a) their ‘right’ b) a healthy choice (with free contraception and abortion if required) and c) none of the parents’ damned business anyway.

England’s last remaining Roman Catholic adoption agency has won a lifeline in the High Court today over laws which could force it to consider homosexuals as parents.

Leeds-based Catholic Care is battling for its life because its policy of not placing children with unmarried couples may breach Labour’s homosexual equality laws.

Today’s High Court ruling gives the agency a glimmer of hope, but it must still argue with the Charity Commission for the liberty to act according to its religious ethos.

That’s what we have been reduced to in this country: having to go to court in order to justify your adherence to traditional values.

The case centres around Labour’s Sexual Orientation Regulations which were controversially introduced under former Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

He’s the good Catholic boy, remember.

The regulations outlaw sexual orientation discrimination in the provision of goods or services.

Since the regulations were introduced all but this last one of England’s Roman Catholic adoption agencies have either closed or cut their ties with the church.

However, the regulations give some charities the right to restrict their services to one sexual orientation group. A charity can do this if it is attempting to act within its stated aims as set out in its trust deed.

This is a benefit to some homosexual charities that wish to restrict certain services, for example counseling services, to help homosexuals only.

I think the expression is hoist by their own petard.

Catholic Care wants to use this legal right to restrict its adoption services to heterosexual married couples only.

To do this, it needed to clarify its trust deed with the Charity Commission. But in 2008 the Commission refused to allow the clarification.

Is this the same Charity Commission which considers ASH a charity, despite practically none of its funds coming from voluntary donations? Ditto for some of the other fake charities.

Catholic Care then appealed to the High Court, arguing that the Commission’s interpretation of the right to restrict services was too narrow.

Today the High Court agreed with Catholic Care and ordered the Charity Commission to reconsider its decision in light of the court’s judgment.

This does not necessarily mean Catholic Care will be permitted to restrict its services to heterosexual married couples, but it does offer the group some hope.

The ruling was welcomed by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Leeds, Rt Revd Arthur Roche.

He said the judgment confirmed that Catholic Care was correct in its reading of the law and that the exemption could apply “to any charity subject to it being in the public interest”.

The bishop said: “We look forward to producing evidence to the Charity Commission to support the position that we have consistently taken through this process: that without being able to use this exemption, children without families would be seriously disadvantaged.

“The judgment today will help in our determination to continue to provide this invaluable service to benefit children, families and communities.”

But the ruling was slammed by secularists and homosexual activists.

They are incensed that some of us refuse to kowtow to their selfish whims.

Jonathan Finney, head of external affairs at Stonewall, said: “It’s unthinkable that anyone engaged in delivering any kind of public or publicly funded service should be given licence to pick and choose service users on the basis of individual prejudice.

“It’s clearly in the best interests of children in care to encourage as wide a pool of potential adopters as possible.”

He is either stupid or a liar, because it is in the best interests of children to be placed with a stable married couple. This prejudice is for the benefit of the children. Plenty of potential parents have been discriminated against by local councils when it comes to the placement of children. Reasons include they go to church, are too fat and have too many books. I don’t remember Stonewall being worried about children being denied good homes then.

But, of course, this was done to engineer a perceived shortage of suitable parents in order to help make the case for homosexual adoption: “better being with a “gay” couple than in a home”.

And Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “It is unfortunate that the court has enabled Catholic Care to exploit what was obviously an error in the drafting of the equality legislation. The loophole this created was never intended to be used this way.

Don’t you love them? It was only ever intended to be used to attack people of conscience; people who do not toe the line; those of us who refuse to believe the gospel according to Karl Marx.

“If the Charity Commission reverses its previous decision – as the court is asking it to – we can look forward to a tidal wave of similar challenges from bigoted Catholic organisations who are determined not to accord any rights to gay people at all.”

I dearly hope he is right and not just Catholic organisations. If we want a country worth living in then people must be allowed to exercise their conscience. If not, then we will be living in a Marxist nightmare. We are very quickly getting there. And homosexuals will no longer get special treatment once their status as the elite’s pets is ended. When they have fulfilled their mission as social engineers, they will be as despised as most of the rest of us are just now, if not more so.

Then they will cry out for help from the people whose consciences they tried to destroy.

My inital comment on the subject was in reply to someone called Bovved, who praised the ‘charity’s’ tireless fundraising. I replied,

NB: the Fakecharities website:

When I noticed that this simple comment had been removed, I added this one:

This has also been removed.

Maybe they don’t want the wider public to realise how much influence a few big business and government-sponsored, unelected people meeting in a room have over the rest of society.

P.S. And they haven’t approved my ‘Real Street’ logo.

The trailer for the film FIT is a slick production designed to confuse humanity in the minds of children who trust the grown-up world to tell them the truth.

As I commented on The Guardian’s website,

I wonder when people are going to get wise to Stonewall’s tactics. The blueprint for a ‘gay’ America, “The Overhauling of Straight America” starts just like this trailer,

“The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion. Ideally, we would have straights register differences in sexual preference the way they register different tastes for ice cream or sports games: she likes strawberry and I like vanilla; he follows baseball and I follow football. No big deal.”

Why is this so-called charity receiving public money to peddle their propaganda to children? I think it is terrible that Stonewall is manipulating vulnerable children into believing that homosexuality is just another of those things, like skin, eye and hair colour.

Is it true that encouraging children to identify with a sexuality at an early age leads to suicidal feelings?

Does anyone care, or is this warped sense of ‘equality’ all that matters anymore?

As usual I was pretty much a lone voice crying in the wilderness. Such has been the conditioning to accept homosexuality as normal and harmless, Guardian readers fail to understand that there is an opposite side of the coin where teenagers are troubled by the pressure to identify with a sexuality when their hormones are all over the place and they have many other things to be concerned about, like exams.

From the article Which Gay Teens Attempt Suicide?

The researchers say that suicide attempts appear to be related to “coming out” at a younger age, gender atypicality, low self-esteem…

Two key points can be inferred from these studies. First, that treatment for Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood (GID), which is now under strong attack from within the psychological profession, may indeed be therapeutic for prevention of suicide attempts in adolescence. Gay and feminist advocacy groups have been lobbying for deletion of the diagnostic category.

In contrast, clinicians such as Kenneth Zucker and Susan Bradley believe that it is ethical and therapeutic to help children become more comfortable with their biological maleness or femaleness (Gender Identity Disorder and Psychosexual Problems in Children and Adolescents, 1995, New York: Guilford Press) and to alleviate the emotional and family problems often associated with childhood gender nonconformity.

Second, since early gay-self-labeling is associated with attempted suicide, it seems unwise to encourage young people to label themselves as gay during the volatile teenage years. The teen years serve as a transitional phase when affectional, emotional and identification needs can be eroticized. “No service is done to our children by offering them lifestyle options before they are properly able to make informed choices about them,” says Dr. George Rekers, professor of neuropsychiatry and a specialist in psychosexual disorders at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine.

This really is a shocking indictment of Stonewall’s tactics and needs to be addressed urgently.

Someone calling himself danny360 insults me and adds,

Ask a hundred gay people, a million, ten million. Every single one will tell you they did not choose their sexuality, because it is NOT a choice, any more than height or skin colour. It is NOT a ‘lifestyle option’.

This is a very common and ignorant belief and the one which Stonewall wishes to perpetuate with its film. Peter Tatchell writes in an article entitled Homosexuality isn’t natural that sexuality is far more complex than people think:

Many studies suggest social factors are also important influences in the formation of sexual orientation. These include the relationship between a child and its parents, formative childhood experiences, family expectations, cultural mores and peer pressure.

This new film will affect the three factors I have highlighted. I consider this to be child abuse by a state-funded organisation.

And don’t expect the Tories to have any sense of proportion either. They have recently apologised for Section 28 – the legislation that protected children from this sort of propaganda.

A hard-hitting message is being sent out by Stonewall over the next fortnight to coincide with pupils returning to schools: ‘Some people are gay. Get over it!’

Five hundred display panels and 20 major railway station advertising screens will feature this slogan in at sites in England, Scotland and Wales.

The truth is that all bullying is reprehensible. Of course, Stonewall gets access to schoolchildren under the pretext of ‘homophobic bullying’. I find this most objectionable because children tend to be either unable to grasp the subject or else are at that age where hormones are running wild. Plus, of course, children’s minds can be easily manipulated.

This campaign timed with the start of a new school term to encourage the idea that it’s everyone’s responsibility to tackle homophobic bullying – both within the school gates, and in the wider world.’

Sorry, but I just do not buy this. If I see a kid being bullied in the street, do I say, ‘excuse me, is this homophobic bulling going on?’ If the answer is ‘no’ I’m supposed to walk by and if the answer is ‘yes’ I’ve to become furious and demand an end to such barbarity.

Talk about discrimination!

A sign of bullying? Hard to believe they just want to go about their business peacefully

My last post gave evidence that not only is homosexual behaviour a choice, but that Peter Tatchell recognises that it is a choice.

One in five therapists has had to deal with people with unwanted homosexual attraction. I wonder how many children’s minds Stonewall leave needing healed.

Stonewall’s The Teachers’ Report is a document I have just discovered. It deserves more than a glance. For instance, a primary school teacher says:

Children need to be taught to value gay relationships.

Another primary teacher states:

When a child said another child was “gay” I explained that one in ten people were gay, meaning that three children in the class would grow up gay. I also explained that there was nothing wrong with being gay – that it is a natural fact of life.

What right does she have to implant her idea of morality into children because of a political agenda? Plus, she is still using the highly discredited Kinsey ten percent. Where are the parents in all this? Are they even aware of what is going on?

A report in today’s Times, “Disadvantaged children failed by British system, warns OECD,” says that the UK performed worse than average in the study of overall child well-being and was poor regarding ‘risky’ behaviour including sex and alcohol, but:

The UK ranked fourth out of 25 countries for children’s school satisfaction, with ”relatively low” rates of bullying.

If you ask me, Stonewall consistently demonstrate that they are the real bullies.

Let’s talk about rights.

What about the right of confused teenagers to be free from Stonewall’s propaganda?

What about the rights of parents?

What about the right of children not to be pressured into identifying with a sexuality at a young age, which, some believe, actually increases the likelihood of suicidal thoughts.

It seems to me that the only ‘right’ that Ben Summerskill and Stonewall are interested in is their own ‘right’ to live a deviant lifestyle and recruit others into it, especially schoolchildren.

No wonder they are so keen on sex ‘education’ starting at age five.

UPDATE 6.0PM – Just seen this via Reddit: Pigs halt Coventry woods gay sex trysts. This is what children are, in effect, being led into. Imagine these open air homosexual orgies, but multiplied as time goes on as more people are led to believe that this behaviour is normal. You can imagine what Sir John David Michaelis was referring to when he wrote: Whoever, therefore wishes to ruin a nation, has only to get this vice introduced.

This is very serious now. We are seeing normal family life becoming more and more strained and sidelined, while casual liaisons and ‘recreational’ sex are being sold to youngsters. Western civilisation is crumbling and will continue to unless we reverse this tragic situation and let children know the truth.

Sorry to write about homosexuality again (methinks thou dost protest too much. Yeah, whatever), but this takes the biscuit. Apparently, this month is lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans Pride month and the US President wants to get in on the act – so to speak.

Let’s have a look at what the Pink News says (I only buy it for the Spot the Ball competition, honest).

Obama wrote, “My administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives.”

Now this reminds me of what Ian McKellen, actor and a co-founder of Stonewall, said when paying tribute to Stonewall’s ‘fantastic team’. He recalled: ‘We were part of a historic initiative, that little group in which gay men and women took things into their own hands.’ He shared with the 540 guests that he had visited Tony Blair on behalf of Stonewall three months before his election as Prime Minister. ‘I reeled off Stonewall’s demands, and he nodded, wrote them down and put a tick by them all. Then he said we will do all that.’

Obama: “At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalise homosexuality around the world.”

Trouble is that for many peoples around the world sodomy is considered an abomination, so I wonder how he intends getting around this. Killing another million in the name of ‘democracy’?

Obama: “Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security.”

I wonder if his ‘hate’ laws will be the same as ours. The Home Office’s definition of a hate crime is: Any incident, which constitutes a criminal offence, which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by prejudice or hate.

So we now have the situation where if someone slaps someone else for being bisexual then their sentence will be harsher than if that person had slapped someone for, say, swearing.

Identical injuries, but unequal punishments.

Also, a criminal offence just has to be “perceived” by the victim “or any other person” to have been motivated by ‘prejudice’ or ‘hate’.

This whole area proves that equality is not being engineered, but then some animals always were more equal than others. As I have said many times before – there is no equality – there is only a hierarchy of ideologies.

The powers that be have decided that people involved in unnatural carnal practices have to move up the ladder at the expense of everyone else (except the powers that be of course).

Obama: “We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.”

Nice move, Mr President – mention HIV/AIDS and nobody will dare rock the boat. But if Obama is really interested in reducing HIV/AIDS, why is he promoting the behaviour that causes it?

Don’t tell me, I know. It’s called social engineering.

The President said that Pride is commemoration of the “events of June 1969. Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born.”

Good old Sixties – when society started falling apart at the seams.

US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, who was the President’s main rival for the Democratic nomination last year, also issued a statement in support of Pride Month.

“At the State Department and throughout the administration, we are grateful for our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees in Washington and around the world,” she said.

Oh really? Surely being good at their job is all that is required. Unless there is political mileage to be gained from singling them out as being extra fab.

“They and their families make many sacrifices to serve our nation. Their contributions are vital to our efforts to establish stability, prosperity and peace worldwide.”

Heck, who needs heterosexuals; these guys rock! Human extinction? Who cares?

“Pride Month is marked by hundreds of events and parades across the United States.”

Sure it is. Normal folk just try to get on with their lives, but maybe our contributions are not considered “vital” or that we “make many sacrifices”.

This whole thing is an insult to decent Americans.

I dearly hope that those people currently involved in homosexual or bisexual behaviour can appreciate that:

a) They are being used to change society into an unequal and repressive place for everybody, them included.

b) No behaviour is compulsory.

If it is any consolation, I believe that the social engineers hate us all equally and their crimes are against all of humanity. As for me, I try not to get roped into hating anyone. If that does ever happen, then ‘they’ will have won. They will also have won if I stop publishing my opinions for fear of being wrongly accused of something.

————-

If you read all that: congratulations. Please contact me for your prize.