The Moral Case Against Equality Before The Law by Rev. Rory McClure
Feminists do not want the law to treat women equally to men. No sane or compassionate person would want men and women to be treated the equally before the law. Thankfully, our legal system does not practise equality before the law and hopefully it never will.
I know this sounds offensively absurd, but bear with me. You will agree with me. In the 2007 the Labour Peer, Baroness Cortson wrote the Cortson Report which made the case for maintaining and expanding the unequal status of women before the law. In it she recognised that women have “vulnerabilities.. which fall into three categories. First, domestic circumstances and problems such as domestic violence, child-care issues, being a single-parent; second, personal circumstances such as mental illness, low self-esteem, eating disorders, substance misuse; and third, socio-economic factors such as poverty, isolation and unemployment. When women are experiencing a combination of factors from each of these three types of vulnerabilities, it is likely to lead to a crisis point that ultimately results in prison.” She goes on to argue that women must be punished less severely than men for the same crime because, “The biological difference between men and women has different social and personal consequences.”Read more
Yesterday, on Sadine Nine’s Breakfast Show on BBC Radio Essex, our Honorary President Godfrey Bloom spoke in a two-way debate on “women’s rights”, employment legislation, and freedom of contract in a free society. The debate was separated into two halves. If you would like to like to listen to the debate, please click on the two audio links below.
In the first segment, Mr Bloom first speaks at 2:56:
In the second segment, Mr Bloom first speaks at 1:05:
I need to think more carefully about this. But it’s dawned on me that the Trump phenomenon is important, not because of Donald J. Trump, but rather in terms of a broader realignment of politics. Put simply, the left-right divide is pretty exhausted, appearing to reflect the politics of the Cold War. The new alignment is more Us v. Them, the People vs. the 1%, the Populists vs. the Establishment.
It’s “R & R for Megyn Kelly,” the Fox News channel announced last week on its website, followed by a gooey note from Kelly herself. Why was FNC broadcasting the vacation schedule of the Golden Goose that henpecked Donald Trump? Had Kelly been licked into shape by Trump? Was she off to lick her wounds?
Since the testy exchange between Trump and Kelly, at the first prime-time Republican debate, in Cleveland, Ohio, the anchor’s eponymous TV show, “The Kelly File,” has covered the meteoric rise of Mr. Trump sparingly. Perhaps Kelly has come to view herself as a kingmaker. Perhaps she thinks that should she choose not to report about a newsmaker; he’ll somehow fade into obscurity. Read more
James Delingpole has written an appropriately snarky piece, published on Breitbart, about feminist activist Caroline Criado-Perez receiving an OBE. Previously, Caroline C-P had advocated putting the face of a woman (other than the Queen) on the next edition of 10-pound notes. She was successful in her campaign, and soon we will be reminded of Jane Austen every time we spend some cash in the old-fashioned, physical way. As long as it’s still legal to do so. C-Ps only other achievement on record is that she complained publically in 2012 when the Radio 4 Today programme had only male interviewees on the subject of teenage pregnancies and breast cancer.
Anyway, as soon as the Bank of England announced in 2013 that it had decided in favour of Jane Austen, all hell broke loose for Caroline, apparently. According to Wikipedia,