Frank Davis teases us with the statement, Smoking Is A Disease, and gives some opinions of those allegedly in the know. He then presents his own very valid points,
But I think that to claim that smoking is a disease is to twist and deform language.
And if smoking is a disease, then what other behaviour might not also be described as a disease? Why not Drinking Is A Disease? Or Eating Fast Food Is A Disease? Or Reading The Daily Telegraph Is A Disease? Or Voting Conservative Is A Disease? Once smoking is classed as a disease, then any behaviour that might be construed to be compulsive or addictive can also be called a disease, and clinics and therapies set up to treat the patients.
And, in fact, this is exactly what is happening. It’s not just smoking, but it’s also drinking and over-eating. Why not reading the Telegraph, and voting Conservative?
Dissent becomes disease. And exactly this happened with dissidents in the late Soviet Union. They were sent to mental institutions, and injected with drugs in an attempt to “cure” them.
In our new version of the Soviet Union, it’s not just a few dissidents here and there who are incarcerated in lunatic asylums, but entire social groups. No need for closed institutions. Our towns and cities have become open prisons in which social groups like smokers and drinkers and fat people are subjected to continuous assault and harassment.
If we are to be made truly equal then we must all be made the same: think the same; do the same; earn the same. It’s communism, isn’t it? If we cannot be made the same through legislation and fear then we must be told we have something wrong with us. The good news is that we can be “cured” and then be considered “normal.” If we don’t present ourselves for “treatment” we can always be sectioned under the Mental Health Act and forced to be cured.
For some time now, the idea that shyness is an illness which should be treated, has been doing the rounds. In 2008 the BBC asked, Is being shy an illness?
Most of us are shy to some degree, but acute shyness is one of the most under-recognised mental health problems of the modern age, say some. So when is being shy an illness?
Like a great many people, shyness has been one of my bugbears over the years. Perhaps I should have been offered this “therapy”:
Walking down a busy high street with your cheeks painted like a clown isn’t normal behaviour for most people. But it’s precisely what is being prescribed for one group of people who desperately want to feel more normal.
Whatever floats your boat, I suppose. But what is “normal?” Are normal children the ones who insist on designer trainers? The young girls who are allowed to dress like the anorexic whores produced for them by the music industry? Are they normal? Or the foul-mouthed boys whose “role models” are rappers?
Is everyone else is a “square?”
When I was at primary school, many, if not most, of the boys (and some of the girls) collected stamps. I expect any self-respecting kid would keep this hobby a deadly secret these days. I don’t know any child who collects stamps today, not even the ones I know from church. I found it was a great way to find out about the world. Stamps teach you about geography, history, fauna and flora, famous people, not to mention more technical subjects like the various printing processes which have been used through the years. I still remember the year Shakespeare was born because the 400th anniversary of his birth was commemorated in a set of five stamps issued in 1964. Okay, I was involved in the stamp trade in one way or another between 1982 and 1991, but the fact is that it is an effective teaching tool and probably one reason it has lost favour.
Despite having been able to do things which others cannot, like tackling politicians and speaking in a packed church, I am shy. I would prefer not to be, given the choice, but a disease? Why can’t people just be different? Smokers and non-smokers, fat people and thin people (and even those who have the “correct” body mass index), the extraverted and introverted – all living in perfect harmony, like it used to be, more-or-less.
But harmony never was the point of political correctness and other government interference. Division and control is the agenda (division for control).
It’s when children are being used and damaged that especially angers me. The Telegraph reported last week that,
Children are being prescribed mind-altering “chemical cosh” drugs for conditions such as shyness and mild social anxiety, behaviour experts have warned.
So it isn’t just the children with seriously bad behaviour who are being drugged up,
Speaking to the Times Educational Supplement, Mr Traxson there was growing use of drugs to treat conditions such as shyness.
According to latest figures from the NHS, some 650,000 children aged eight to 13 are now on drugs such as Ritalin, which is used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
It represents a seven-fold increase on the 92,700 pupils put on drugs in 1997 and it compared with just 9,000 children given prescriptions in 1990.
But Mr Traxson claimed that medication was only helpful in around one-in-five cases.
What has gone so badly wrong?
Have parenting skills declined that much? Certainly, the family unit has been under fierce attack. This “equality” has meant women leaving their young children so they can have a “career,” usually sat at a checkout/sewing machine/word processor, while the kids are being looked after (to one degree or another) by a private company or the state. The “sexual revolution” started with the controlled music and film industries and has been promoted by government and now brought us to the place where it is thought that the majority of children of British mothers are now born out of wedlock.
Where are children getting their a) learning, b) morals and manners and c) beliefs from these days?
The nurseries, schools and universities – and television – i.e. largely the State.
The State has become, as intended, a surrogate parent. A very bad one. One that teaches lies, doesn’t discipline and doesn’t prepare youngsters to be strong and independent adults.
The most important thing is that the umbilical cord is never cut.
Children are being moulded to be model citizens: to accept their own enslavement, to have sex where there is no love or commitment and constantly worry about whether they are “normal” – in fact, worry about everything, which is perhaps the main reason British children are reckoned to be the unhappiest in the Western World.
This is very strange when we consider how much of this social engineering has been done for the cheeeldren.
Can we all agree that it is obviously more than a conspiracy theory that the traditional family has been under malicious attack because it provides the basis of a free and civilised wider society?
And what about the conscience? Even this can be diseased nowadays, apparently. Bizarrely, if your “moral compass” isn’t working very well, you might, for example, be given a seat in the House of Lords and a place in the Cabinet. You might “earn” many millions of pounds as “socialist” politicians. And a very corrupt conscience is a prerequisite to being Prime Minister these days.
And what disease would you attribute to Jacqui Smith – the former Home Secretary whose expenses paid for her husband’s blue movies – after agreeing to present a Radio 5 Live documentary called Porn Again?
On the other hand, people who do care about decency and morals and have integrity (surely a mental condition in itself these days as it is so at odds with this Brave New World) are increasingly being seen as abnormal, even though what they believe was mainstream as little as five or ten years ago.
Same sex attraction was a mental illness up until the 1970s. I think it is fair to say that pressure from militant homosexual groups rather than genuine new medical insight was the reason it was taken off the list of psychiatric conditions, but then we live in an age where evidence is carefully selected or fabricated to support the agenda being promoted, such as we see with second/third hand smoking and manmade climate change.
People like Peter and Hazelmary Bull and Francis and Susanne Wilkinson believe in traditional sexual ethics. They also run bed and breakfast establishments from their homes. An explosive combination these days. Two men or two women are welcome to stay, but in separate beds. Double beds are reserved for married couples.
But, they are now forbidden by law to have traditional moral standards – on their own property. The Bulls were fined £3,600 last week for refusing a double bed to Stonewall members Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy.
Who has the disease in this case? The Bulls, for having the integrity to maintain their standards, or Messrs Hall and Preddy, for taking an elderly couple to court because they want the right to act as they see fit on someone else’s premises?
Look at it this way. Most people can quickly recover from the trauma of being deprived of a double bed for a couple of days, however a compromised conscience can scar a person for years – maybe even a lifetime. Perhaps some people are too carnally-inclined to understand this – or too self-absorbed and “proud” to care.
It is heartening to see that a lot of people support the Bulls in this case because of the sheer unfairness of it, and the implications to everybody’s freedom generally.
However, the bottom line for many people is that the Bulls were breaking the law and it seems like they were. “It’s the law of the land and they broke it. They deserve to be punished.”
If people were consistent they would accept that in many other countries same-sex behaviour is against the law. Of course, homosexuals don’t have the same reverence for laws they don’t agree with.
The media seem to be presenting this as a “Christians vs Gays” battle, but it is so much more than this. It is about freedom of conscience, freedom of association and property rights. The government and the courts are saying that we don’t have these most fundamental rights and freedoms anymore.
This is so important it is worth repeating: The government and the courts are saying that we don’t have these most fundamental rights and freedoms anymore.
But apologists for the Establishment will equate refusal to give homosexuals a double bed with putting up a sign saying, “No blacks. No Irish.”
I don’t know if they genuinely believe they are the same thing or just hope to get away with making an unhelpful comparison. And what do black and Irish people think always to be associated with ‘gays’ when they tend to be as much against their behaviour and propaganda as anyone else?
But I think it’s like Frank was saying when dissent becomes disease. Some of us are dissenting and a lot of people don’t seem to know how to cope with this. Apparently, the Bulls are also now victims of a wider hate campaign on the internet, with bogus reviews appearing on travel websites from people who claimed to stay at their B&B over the winter, when they were closed.
And despite Mr Bull recovering from major heart surgery and despite being found “guilty” in court, they are being inundated by requests from homosexuals for double rooms.
I know who I think are the ones with mental illness. I believe the original diagnosis was right all along.
Homosexuals try to justify their sexual behaviour by the standards of animals – not that animals have standards. I am not saying this to be unkind, but this is no argument for a rational person to try to make. Nobody else seems to.
Beliefs like the Bulls and myself and many others have must be eradicated in the quest to remove all personal freedom in the name of equality. It has reached very serious and sinister levels when you read that children are to have homosexuality and bisexuality promoted to them in geography, English and science lessons.
Do you remember when Labour abandoned Section 28 and we were assured that it wouldn’t lead to homosexuality being promoted in schools?
Who was mad enough to believe them? Not the seven out of eight Scots who voted to keep the Clause.
Were they all mentally ill, the majority who voted to keep the protection?
No, not mentally ill, just not toeing the line; not conforming fast enough, but there were plenty of quangos, fakecharities, publishers and broadcasters to change the nation’s perceptions and realign people’s “moral compasses” to point due south. I’m sure if this same poll were conducted today, there would be far less support for Section 28. Not because there is more tolerance in society now compared with 2000 because there is clearly less, but due to the success of social engineering.
The “gays” might think they are winning battles. The anti-smokers might too. The anti-fat, salt and sugar brigade too, and so on. What they are achieving is the replacement of personal responsibility, conscience and freedom with group think. If you are outside of that there is something wrong with you and nobody is going to come to your aid as you are carted off to a gulag – a corrective labour camp – until you are “well.”
If you swallow the poison of political correctness, you will get sick.
But in this age where everything has been turned on its head, it’s those of us who haven’t been poisoned, or who are taking the antidote: de-programming themselves, who are the diseased.
You just want to live a peaceful life according to your values? No can do – the State doesn’t own you then.