Tuesday, November 13, 2007

David Cameron on the UK’s ‘moral collapse’

Cranmer just loves it when politicians turn to moralising. It strengthens the hand of those clerics who dare to politicise, and challenges directly the naïve assertion that religion and politics ‘do not mix’. It has become common parlance in Conservative circles that morality, like religion, belongs to the private sphere, and politics belongs to the public. It is therefore no business of the state to have either a religious or a moral stance on issues that are essentially private and subjective.

But as the leader of HM Opposition demands tougher sentences for rapists, he talks directly of the ‘moral collapse’ in the UK. He says: ‘Studies have shown that as many as one in two young men believe there are some circumstances when it's okay to force a woman to have sex.’ Cranmer is aghast at this statistic, which is unsourced, but if it has foundation it is certainly, as Mr Cameron observes, ‘an example of moral collapse’.

But his solution is profoundly flawed. He call for compulsory sex education in schools to drive home the message that sex without consent is a criminal offence. And he also demands a ‘widespread cultural change’ because society has become increasingly ‘sexualised’ over the past decade - during which time it has become ‘cool’ to treat women as sex objects. The three focuses should be, he suggests, conviction and sentencing, victim support, and changes in attitudes to women.

Sadly, he has either missed or purposely ignored what Jack Straw and his Ministry of Justice have recently concluded, and that is that pornography is profoundly harmful to society, and that there is now ‘a substantial body of mutually corroborative evidence of the harm of effects of extreme – or other – pornographic material’

The research reaffirms previous findings that there is ‘clear and consistent’ evidence that ‘exposure to pornography puts one at risk for developing sexually deviant tendencies, committing sexual offences, experiencing difficulties in one’s intimate relationships and accepting rape myths’.

In light of this authoritative research published by the Ministry of Justice, the director of Mediawatch-uk, founded by the late Mary Whitehouse, has written to the chairman of Ofcom’s Content Board, saying: ‘Ofcom has certain statutory obligations to protect members of the public from harmful material, as set out by Parliament in the Communications Act 2003. Failure to respond to the new evidence of harm could put Ofcom in breach of the law if it fails to take proportionate action to remove pornographic material from the airwaves.’ He also called for the revoking of al licences granted to satellite, cable, terrestrial and broadband television channels.

Yet nothing can be done about the internet, which is the most immediate source of unregulated pornography for young boys. Will the Ministry of Justice attempt to legislate in this area? Not likely. Will Mr Cameron propose tighter regulation? Even less likely, for this is deemed to belong to the private realm, and what one does alone in one’s bedroom is no business of the state…even if there is a causal link to sexually deviant tendencies, rape, or other sexual offences.

So while the politicians increasingly moralise in their private vacuum, it is down to the nation’s religious leaders to politicise in the public realm. At least then the sins of omission committed by one party may be complemented by the direct interventions of the other.

25 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps said religious leaders might care to bring a test case for 'incitement' against a publisher or website proprietor whose images were known to have been viewed by a convicted sex offender? Indeed, the culprit might himself be able to bring such an action. That might make some pornographers rather more cautious about the images they circulate.

Incidentally, Mr Nedsherry may have a word to say about the type of people often to be found in the higher echelons of the industry in question.

13 November 2007 at 10:05  
Anonymous Dave Bartlett said...

I was surprised by your assertion that research shows a causal relationship between pornography and rape, as I had just read of research that claims pornography reduces rape.

13 November 2007 at 11:52  
Anonymous moralpanix said...

I would be very happy to see a case for incitement of this sort. This is not because I think porn should be banned, but because I would hope to see the case fail for lack of evidence. There is no case to be made for such harm from porn, Jack Straw and his evidence notwithstanding.

Mr Cameron is supporting tighter regulation, in the form of the current Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, in spite of the fact that he can't show that it would reduce harm, or indeed that it wouldn't increase it.

13 November 2007 at 11:59  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Jack Straw is a twister of the first order, like all his fellow-gangsters. Why should we take any notice of anything he says?

13 November 2007 at 12:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would be surprising if there was not research 'confirming' no causal relationship between pornography and sex offending - doubtless funded by the 'Global Institute of Physical Wellbeing' or some such sham body created by the industry to protect its interests.

13 November 2007 at 12:22  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Proverbs 26:11


As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

13 November 2007 at 12:45  
Blogger Mukkinese said...

Tut! Tut!

Accepting the Rapid evidence assessment without any critical thought whatsoever?

If you actually read the document, you will see that no actual evidence is presented to show that pornography is harmful to those who choose to look at it or that it causes anyone, even those already convicted of a sex offence, to be more likely to commit crime.

The report was commissioned by the Home Office and two of the three authors are well known anti-pornography campaigners.

Added to that over forty academics have challenged the report as one sided and poorly researched.

Given the pre-existing beliefs of the authors, the fact that they were not able to show any credible evidence that pornography causes harm, and they must have looked very hard for such evidence. The report actually undermines the Governments case.

13 November 2007 at 13:05  
Anonymous Nick said...

The evidence offered by the government has been heavily criticised by many academics from a variety of fields: http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/acad_statement.html

The government is presently insistent on taking over the role of religious groups by championing their moral conceptions and regulating the consumption of pornography coercively with no evidence that this will actually tackle sexual violence. I urge you to oppose the government's legislation currently in the pipeline:
http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/summary0610.html

13 November 2007 at 13:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The research reaffirms previous findings that there is ‘clear and consistent’ evidence that ‘exposure to pornography puts one at risk for developing sexually deviant tendencies, committing sexual offences, experiencing difficulties in one’s intimate relationships and accepting rape myths’."

What previous findings are these and why have we never been shown them?

There is stronger evidence that the availability of porn actually causes a decrease in the number of sex crimes, than this so called 'meta-analysis' REA.

I too have read the Home Office report and the only evidence of harm presented was that "viewing violent pornography can cause some women 'distress'". Hmm...so we need to criminalise thousands, infringe basic human rights and probably cause a rise in sex crime, because 'some' women are to stupid to make the decision not to look at things that they find distressing to look at?

There are many things I find distressing to look at, so guess what? I choose not to look at them.
If the report is saying that some women are forced to look at extreme porn and that causes them distress, then this law would again seem to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I would suggest far more women would be distressed by the rise in sexual assaults and rapes that such laws probably bring about.

Why on Earth can't we just grow up and stop poking our noses into other people sex lives?

13 November 2007 at 14:19  
Anonymous Wallenstein said...

Apparently porn will make you blind...

(well, if we're peddling out-dated myths might as well add another).

13 November 2007 at 14:36  
Anonymous moralpanix said...

Anonymous said...
It would be surprising if there was not research 'confirming' no causal relationship between pornography and sex offending - doubtless funded by the 'Global Institute of Physical Wellbeing' or some such sham body created by the industry to protect its interests.

I'm not aware of any research funded by the porn industry. I do know of many pieces of research funded or conducted by US religious-right and anti-porn organisations.

The analysis that Jack Straw seems to be citing was made by three feminist academics. One is a Professor of Violence Abuse and Mental Health and another is Roddick Chair of Violence Against Women and Director of Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit.

The forty academics that Nick refers to, who have disagreed with these findings come from the fields of law, criminology, psychology, sociology, media and cultural studies.

I am not suggesting that violence against women and children aren't important areas of study. I am however sceptical about the objectivity of researchers whose starting position seems to be implied in the very names of the departments they head.

13 November 2007 at 14:49  
Anonymous nedsherry said...

Incidentally, Mr Nedsherry may have a word to say about the type of people often to be found in the higher echelons of the industry in question.

You can have it straight from the horse's mouth, if you like:

Triple Exthnics

Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography.


http://www.jewishquarterly.org/article.asp?articleid=38

In Blighty we have the likes of Richard Desmond:

In a faux-German accent, Mr Desmond asked if the Telegraph bosses - who also included managing director Hugo Drayton and printing director Bill Ellerd-Styles - were looking forward to being run by Nazis.

"That's not very helpful," Mr Deedes said, pointing out that Axel Springer - the German newspaper group currently bidding to buy the Telegraph titles - had a commitment to the state of Israel as part of its publishing philosophy.

When Mr Desmond said: "They're all Nazis", Mr Deedes replied: "That is thoroughly offensive. Could you please sit down so we can start the meeting?"

"Don't you tell me to sit down, you miserable little piece of shit," Mr Desmond said, before he launched what witnesses described as "a stream of foul-mouthed abuse, both personal and general".


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2004/apr/22/dailyexpress.politicsandthemedia1

His Grace writes:

But as the leader of HM Opposition demands tougher sentences for rapists, he talks directly of the ‘moral collapse’ in the UK. He says: ‘Studies have shown that as many as one in two young men believe there are some circumstances when it's okay to force a woman to have sex.’ Cranmer is aghast at this statistic, which is unsourced, but if it has foundation it is certainly, as Mr Cameron observes, ‘an example of moral collapse’.

Like the feminists behind that "statistic" and this Tory campaign, Cameron is interested in exploiting rape, not helping its victims. Melanie Phillips -- Zionist and highly Judaeocentric, but often v. sound elsewhere -- provides a good response:

The key reason the conviction rate has dropped is that behaviour has changed beyond all recognition. Sexual encounters are now often casual and often drunken. As a result, the crucial issue of lack of consent often can’t be proved either way. That is why so many police officers fail to bring charges and so many juries fail to convict in rape cases. The reason Britain’s conviction rate is lower than other countries is likely to be because Britain leads the world in its debauched and degenerate behaviour. The only way to bump up the conviction rate is to assume that men accused of rape are guilty and have to be proved innocent — which is broadly the government’s approach. In other words, load the legal dice against men and destroy the presumption of innocence, all in the cause of gender politics.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/

13 November 2007 at 16:06  
Blogger Homophobic said...

BECOME A HERMIT!!

13 November 2007 at 16:34  
Anonymous Sir HM said...

Take the celibacy option.

It's a lot less trouble, even without the rape accusations (no).

13 November 2007 at 17:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rubbish. The problem is not pornography or the internet. There have been more murders and assaults carried out in relation to the Bible and the Koran than in regard to any extreme sexual images, yet I cannot see Cameron or the government trying to convict people for possession of religious books!

There *is* a problem with violence on TV, which is quite a different issue. It appears to me that some want to criminalise honest,sensible, safe and caring BDSM practioners,(as an easy target group)whilst abdicating responsability for what is piped directly into the living room.

BDSM'ers also oppose rape :we are parents too and would not wish it upon our children.

How about allowing us to enjoy our sexuality,and to report rape as a crime,same as anyone else?

13 November 2007 at 18:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From David Lonsdale

Sexual immorality is not without consequences. Sin generally involves doing something against someone else. Sexual immorality damages the perpetrator, as Paul makes clear in Corinthians:


1 Corinthians 6:17-19 (King James Version)

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

13 November 2007 at 20:05  
Anonymous Bert Rustle said...

Nedsherry wrote “...Like the feminists behind that "statistic" and this Tory campaign, Cameron is interested in exploiting rape, not helping its victims. ... ”. The Ruling Class as a whole omits many basic statistics.

Regarding rape, who is raping whom? BBC radio 4 had a Saturday program earlier this year on rape, which did not address it. I would hazard a guess that the reports Cameron is referencing do not either. In the UK the statistics are not readily available to me. However the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs has produced a series of spreadsheets here . They are referenced in article by Laurence Auster in Frontpagemag.com The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States .

... In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.

What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man.

The Department of Justice statistics refer, of course, to verified reports. ...


The same pattern occurs with male rape. Human Rights Watch reports Male Rape in US Prisons .

...Past studies have documented the prevalence of black on white sexual aggression in prison.(213) These findings are further confirmed by Human Rights Watch's own research. Overall, our correspondence and interviews with white, black, and Hispanic inmates convince us that white inmates are disproportionately targeted for abuse.(214)

... African Americans typically face sexual abuse at the hands of other African Americans, and Hispanics at the hands of other Hispanics. Some inmates told Human Rights Watch that this pattern reflected an inmate rule, one that was strictly enforced: "only a black can turn out [rape] a black, and only a chicano can turn out a chicano."(215) Breaking this rule by sexually abusing someone of another race or ethnicity, with the exception of a white inmate, could lead to racial or ethnic unrest, as other members of the victim's group would retaliate against the perpetrator's group. ... The causes of black on white sexual abuse in prison have been much analyzed. Some commentators have attributed it to the norms of a violent black subculture, the result of social conditioning that encourages aggressiveness and the use of force.(217) Others have viewed it as a form of revenge for white dominance of blacks in outside society.(218) Viewing rape as a hate crime rather than one primarily motivated by sexual urges, they believe that sexually abused white inmates are essentially convenient surrogates for whites generally. ...



I am not aware why this pattern of crime should be markedly different in the UK; it is similar to the comparison of non-sexual violent crime. Such crime patterns are typically attributed to poverty; however I am not aware how rape can be so excused. Is this why it is largely excluded from public discourse?

14 November 2007 at 08:36  
Blogger AethelBald, King of Wessex said...

Mr Ned Sherry,

Thank you for your Melanie Phillips quote. I detest her, but now I also agree with her. It's an interesting feeling, like a bad cocktail.

Mr Bert Rustle,

America is not like Britain. In particular, US Blacks define a distinct parallel sub-culture to which there is no parallel here. You can get an idea of it in Tom Wolfe's A Man in Full and, from the other side, Eldridge Cleaver's Soul on Ice.

14 November 2007 at 10:46  
Anonymous Sir HM said...

Bert Rustle

There are ways of working with what British statistics are available. It's not entirely satisfactory, but ... well, take a look, if only at the method

http://tinyurl.com/y6ab3h

As it happens, the single worst London borough for sexual offences was Lambeth. Who lives there in large numbers?

14 November 2007 at 12:06  
Blogger AethelBald, King of Wessex said...

Sir Hm,

Reconquista' study does not control for income, class, etc., and is therefore easily attacked. It needs a professional job doing.

14 November 2007 at 12:37  
Anonymous Sir HM said...

Aethelbad

Are you claiming that income, class etc determine propensity to commit sex offences?

I agree it needs a professional job doing - but is one going to get done?

14 November 2007 at 12:48  
Blogger AethelBald, King of Wessex said...

Sir Hm,

My only claim is that the study appears not to have considered all the possible criticism that could be levelled at it. I offer income and class only as suggestions for the kinds of things that might need to be considered. It's dynamite stuff, but it might be wrong. Been there.

14 November 2007 at 13:35  
Anonymous Sir HM said...

I honestly do understand what you are saying, and I don't disagree.

But then, I also read the reports coming out of Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, France etc ... and they all say basically the same thing: too many Muslims do indeed take the Koranic references to possessions of your right arm, seriously.

And have you read the sexual offences statistics coming out of the USA? I don't really claim it's a racial problem, but I do think it's a cultural problem that must be addressed. But it wont be ... why do you think the Met crime statistics, excellent as they are, carry no racial/cultural details about perpetrators? And remember the hell that was raised a few years back when the Met let slip that 80% of street crime (i.e. muggings) was committed by black youngsters? Not hell raised against the perpetrators, but hell raised against the Met for letting the information out.

Have you seen the mugshots for the Met's 12 most wanted? Ditto West Midlands.

Multiculturalism has been a disaster and ought to be reversed. My guess is it will take a high-profile victim from the ruling elites before it starts getting seriously addressed by more than soothing words.

14 November 2007 at 15:09  
Anonymous Bert Rustle said...

AethelBald, King of Wessex wrote “... America is not like Britain. In particular, US Blacks define a distinct parallel sub-culture to which there is no parallel here. ...” As a counter to this statement, regarding black crime rates in Britain, the USA and indeed worldwide see Cross-national variation in violent crime rates

From the discussion:

"These results first corroborate predictions ... that Blacks average higher rates of violent crime than do Whites and East Asians and ... people
of East Asian descent commit relatively fewer acts of violent crime than
do those of European or African descent. Present results show that the population patterns in crime found within Britain, Canada, and the United
States are more generalizable than is often supposed. This implies that some of the causes of race differences must be sought beyond the local conditions of particular countries or even groups of countries."

If you have the time and the interest, various other references can be found in my comments at Gates of Vienna here and here

AethelBald, King of Wessex wrote “... You can get an idea of it in Tom Wolfe's A Man in Full and, from the other side, Eldridge Cleaver's Soul on Ice. ...” Please excuse me if I do not take the existence of a novel as any more than evidence of an author, animate or otherwise.


Sir HM wrote “... ways of working with what British statistics ... well, take a look, if only at the method ...” I am sorry but I will not have do this in the near future. However I would hazard a guess that UK official published statistics have been intentionally depleted to enable promotion of Multiculti propaganda but not quantitaive challenges to it.

14 November 2007 at 22:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Our moral decline is Engineered.
http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/2007/10/frankfurt-subversion.html


Crime.
http://www.met.police.uk/wanted/

http://www.met.police.uk/wanted/othercases.htm

http://iamanenglishman.com/rogues_gallery.php

http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/wanted/index.asp

http://newnation.org/NNN-UK-Europe.html

http://thefallenlist.blogspot.com/

http://warband.wordpress.com/

http://warband.wordpress.com/category/paedophilia/

http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/wanted/ukmostwanted/

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018862.php#comments


Election Fraud

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1719968.ece
http://www.underthecarpet.co.uk/Pages/NewsArticle.php?num=2195

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/apr/04/localgovernment.politics
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4310965.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/6613769.stm
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/Former-mayor-is-charged-following.3160219.jp
http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/news/s/1019288_man_jailed_after_impersonating_voter
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/6178224.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/4425519.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2788987.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/apr/04/localgovernment.politics

The Eradication of National Identity
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

3 December 2007 at 06:33  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older