Tag Archives: homosexuality

LGBTs, Leftists and Libertarians


LGBTs, Leftists and Libertarians

By Duncan Whitmore

In a previous essay posted on this blog, the present writer explored the poisonous proliferation of identity politics in today’s political discourse. One of the themes of that essay was that identity politics has served to create false group identities which misrepresent the interests of the individuals who are supposed to make up those groups, solely for the purpose of being able to pit each group against other groups for political gain. The actual interests of the individuals within each group are served poorly, if at all.

Continuing on a similar theme, we will, in the present essay, examine how various minority groups that have been championed by the left – many of which, such as those characterised by race, religion or sexual orientation, have won genuine and much needed victories against prior legal repression – are being exploited by the left in the current culture war. Although libertarians are right to welcome a renaissance of traditional, local, cultural and religious values as bulwarks against the metastasising growth of the state, it is not minority groups (or the vindication of their rights) per se which are a threat to traditional cultures; rather, the genuine threat is the attempt by straight, white, middle class virtue signalling liberals to grant legal privileges to these groups in an attempt to attack and weaken what remains of Western civilisation. Far from having their own, long term interests preserved by allying themselves with the left, these minorities may well be leading themselves over a cliff edge if they are swept up in the backlash against leftism that is manifest in the resurgence of populism, nationalism, traditionalism and anti-globalism. Consequently, we shall why it is libertarianism that can allow minority groups to flourish, and why members of minority groups should become libertarians. Read more

Golly, that’s a relief then…


David Davis

The real breaking news that you’ve all been waiting for, for most of this year, is that Canterbury is “sufficiently gay”. Truly – Obama was Breathless in Boise, Idaho: Ahmadinejahd was apprehensive in Isfahan (Asfahan? Nah…doesn’t cut it) wondering who to hang next, Kevin Rudd was kuddling his Rolodex in Kookaburra…wondering when the call would come in….

Libertarians, if honest (and mostly we are) have no interest whatever in the sexual orientations of individuals with whom we don’t associate in sexual ways ourselves. If one’s body is one’s own property, as it must be – except in the eyes of GramscoFabiaNazis who wish to shape its destiny perforce – then what one does with it and with whom is a private matter entirely.

I would not have thought this needed re-stating, but Canterbury Soviet think otherwise.

The LGBT “communities” (or whatever word is used for them these days in PC circles) really really ought to  __fear__  the triumph of what we call The Enemy Class. They ought to remark on what happened to homosexuals in places like the Third Reich, Stalin’s USSR, Cuba, many many dark places in Africa post-Bandung, and elsewhere such as “Islamic” countries.

They really ought to want people like the LPUK to triumph in elections instead.

Sex and the Pope: perhaps he meant to say it for strategic reasons!


David Davis

If I was a serious Pope, such as Benedict XVI and John Paul II both are, and being either of those two gentlemen thus realising that uncertain trumpets are of little use, then I would view the current state of the Anglican Church with unease.

It’s like the deck-fittings and masts of a tall ship in a storm, which have come loose: and now they threaten the survival of the rest of the boat if not jettisoned.

Perhaps he means to “widen the rift” inside Anglicanism. It could be seen as a strategic risk on one hand, but also as a way to do some much-needed tidying-up too. The Asse-Hat has consistently made an arse of himself and the Church he’s supposed to lead, for some years. The C of E has been allowed to carry on behaving like a minority sect, so perhaps the Pope thinks it’s time it was one.

PUNTERPOINT…. A new concept for working towards human relations …


David Davis

The “Home” “Secretary”, who is described as a “Jacqui” “Smith”, has proposed that the ordinary and normal kind of prostitution, which is to say that men pay women for

(1) sex

and

(2) other (possibly related conditions, such as fetishism and wearing rubber suits or football shirts and things)

(3) or what must be totally non-sexual things in my view – such as what I believe is called “oral”, “golden shower”, “anal”, “69”, all that strange stuff in the Karma Sutra, and suchlike,

is to be discontinued. It is proposed by this droid and its people that it will be an offence for the man to offer reward for this sort of stuff. Now, as is the case with all “serious” crimes today, it is proposed and factored in that the following will happen, charge or no: the man will be of course named, shamed, hung, drawn, quartered, and then fined, so that his house can be torched, his wife can leave him, the local mob who read the News of the Screws can come round and throw bricks, and generally indulge in the sort of behaviour that Peter Ballz-a-Gotte can film for reality TV.

The idea is to make it an offence for a man to pay for sex with a woman “who is controlled by another for gain”. Well, there are some ways round this one, which will of course nullify the desired effect of the new legislation:-

(1) He could use an “independent escort”. Legally, the onus would be on the State to prove that the girl in question was not indepedent” – hard I would have thought, but they can threaten and push him about and get his DNA while they are about it, and probably manage to ruin his life I guess, which will create another single mother out of his wife/girlfriend, which will please the state-clientariat.

(2) All women who want to go “on the game” can set up as independents. Yep, that will really help to look after them, won’t it. I offer the idea of http://www.punterpoint.com to anyone brave enough or brazen enough to set it up. Perhaps the Russians would be interested, which will do a lot for the government’s statistics about “organised crime”, taking a chunk of it totally offshore, so that JS can say that “it has decreased”.

http://www.punterpoint.com , or http://www.punterpoint.ru if that’s what it is, can help “punters” get in touch with independent women, in the obvious way. Either a woman can put up her pic etc, giving contact details, or else a punter could put up a “want it now!” like on ebay, specifying his particular requirements (there could be a menu even) and his rough location.

This would have two beneficial effects:-

(A) It would fall within the legal area of the legislation, in that the woman undertakes that she is not “trafficked” or “being controlled”. Hard to do if all done in cash……..ah……………THAT’S what they want all our banking and mobile phone and internet records…..!!!!! Ho Ho Ho HO Ho ……..

(B) It would cut out the middlemen of what I believe are called “Parlours” (or, in Blackpool, “Houses” – it sounds much cosier!) and also the blokes called “Pimps”, whatever those chaps do. The real price of the various “services” would quickly settle at what the Market thinks they are worth. Stuff may become cheaper, or not – I have no idea but it’s worth a try.

(C) It would be a defence for the man, when his computer is seized, to show that he was looking for uncontrolled, untrafficked women!

The disadvantage is possibly for the women who would no longer be able to work in “Houses”: I would guess that a “House” offers some measure of protection and security against crazed, drugged, violent or obsessive “punters” (who could be barred and certainly kept out) in return probably for a cut of the dosh.

Let’s see what the reaction is to this one: if the “Jaqcqui” “Smith” (wish I could spell its name) comes out against this too, then we’ll know that the whole gamut is nowt to do with “protecting women” and everything to do with CRIMINALISING HETEROSEXUAL SEX ASKED FOR BY MEN IN PARTICULAR , and moving along the road to where the State authorises sex for procreation of “resources” only, on its terms – regulating in all respects when and with whom it takes place.

We shall truly have become their Farm Animals. Forget about banning or regulating cigarettes, alcohol, and driving: forget about being able to fantasy-act your fetishes (animals don’t have them so far as we can tell) – this one here, the human thing, sex with whom you want, when you want, providing yours around you allow it, is the really big stuff of Fabianazi control….you’ve really got people by the balls….(sorry.)

So, now, I think that people who might be actually interested in making the whole game safer for everyone involved, seeing as it will go on regardless (unlike drugs which are mmuch less natural and less intuitive as forms of behaviour) might like to tell the “Jaxcqui” “Smith” (I can spell “Smith” !!!! ) to go and see these people here and talk to them, about these issues here. I guess they know what they are going on about.

And, here’s what Iain Dale said, nearly three days ago now. I read it then – wish I’d said something earlier – l’ésprit de l’escalier….