Happy Parent B’s Day
But then came the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition with more than a hint of Labour’s inclination for social engineering. They decided that the traditional family – a husband, a wife and children – was a bit passé. And they decreed that marriage need no longer require a male and female of the species, and that two men or two women might enter into nuptial bliss and consummate their union without prejudice or discrimination.
And so it came to pass that all expressions of gender upon official forms and documents were expunged, in case a declaration of marriage might be presumed to be heterosexual. No more ‘Husband’ or ‘Wife’ on marriage certificates; and no more ‘Mother’ or ‘Father’ on birth certificates. The state was compelled to be gender neutral, and the statute books were amended accordingly: all presumption of biological complementarity ceased.
And so ‘Husband’ and ‘Wife’ became ‘Spouse 1’ and ‘Spouse 2’. And ‘Father’ and ‘Mother’ became ‘Parent A’ and ‘Parent B’.
It remains to be seen how long it will take the Government to realise that ‘Parent B’ is appallingly sexist and insulting to those erstwhile mothers. For who determined that the female progenitive contribution should be recognised merely as the ‘B’ component? Does not the slight of ‘B’ perpetuate the primacy of ‘A’? Is not the matriarch still subject to patriarchy? And what of ‘Parent C’, which will surely come as a consequence of imminent court rulings which will decree that a child may legally have three parents?
There was a time when might have looked to the Holy Parent B Church to intervene.
Who now can rid us of these meddlesome politicians?

86 Comments:
Given that it is possible to insulate oneself from the nightmare that this country is becoming or, as in my case, have an overseas bolt hole I have decided to sit back and watch as the freak show begins.
I wonder what kind of a society we will have when the majority no longer recognise the country they inhabit and no longer care about what happens to it - every man and his "community" for themselves.
Actually, it used to be known as 'Mothering Sunday' when we were a Christian nation.
Our Parent A, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.
This will certainly catch on, Your Grace.
With a bit of re-writing here and there both Eng. Lit and the KJV will be compliant with the new social order. But can they get the job done before the new school year begins? It seems important that the new terminology should be deeply embedded in both culture and consciousness, sooner rather than later
Can we also look forward to CD's for young Parent Bs that teach babies to cry out, 'Parent B, Parent B', rather than 'Mama, Mama'.
Has Dave gone absolutely stark staring bonkers to create a situation where one can even think about writing this stuff? Your communicant believes that Dave's tenure as leader of the Conservative Party must soon be terminated by another back-bench revolt.
It's almost a race to see who is the biggest fool in Christendom; Dave for doing all this or his backbench for allowing it.
No where man is correct- all conservative minded people could leave to an overseas bolt hole (&potential tax haven)- there are quite a few low tech pastoral worlds which happily chime with the majority view of this blog(Norfolk,Hick,Leviticus, Eden V, New Kentucky, Back-woods menland).
As for my mother's day celebration-Mother shall review the vast imperial galactic fleet, a state banquet shall be held and the various Ambassadors of the galactic powers will take note of the power of the Draconian Imperium!
And of course there is the pressie of 10,000 bolian slaves following our recent conquest er... 'regime change liberation' of bolian IV- a stone age buch of religious fanatics who were developing weapons of mass carnage which could hit the civilised galaxy with 45 minutes.
These backward folks now have the pleasure of truth, justice and the Draconis way of life (and if the savage stone age tribes try to resist we shall crush them).
Never mind, the Balkanisation has begun - we are no longer just divided by politics and class.
Rather than try to resolve that....
Now we are also divided by race, colour, religion, North/South/East/West, Metropolitan/suburban/country, English/Scottish/Welsh/NI, gender, sexuality, age group.
Rainbow Britain? Or Balkansed Britain!
And we were NEVER asked....
"But then came the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition"
But this marriage of convenience is but a fleeting epemeral thing which will disappear off the political radar unlamented, and then quickly forgotten.
But the long established usage in our culture and in Scripture of the 'mother' father, wife & etc will continue unaffected by silly government diktats.
Whatever government says on this the great majority will simply ignore and treat their social engineering with the contempt it deserves.
Your Grace,
Destroying your own culture from within is insane! Where will your species lunacy end?
I agree with No Where man- get out whilst you still can. Go somewhere else- preferably a tax haven.There are many planets out there that chime with bloggers here- I have the details if any one wants to know!
As for my mothers day celebrations- mother has been given 10,000 slaves following our liberation of Bolian VI and we shall review the vast imperial fleet later, naturally followed by a state celebration.
Peter Tatchel has just announced on the BBC that 40% of Anglican and 1/3 of Catholic priest are homosexuals.
Discuss.
How does Peter Tatchell know?
" Stop the world...I want to get off"
Mothering Sunday was also nothing to do with Mothers. Anyway, the main point behind His Grace's somewhat hysterical post is: if the politicians are messing our nation up, who can stop it? Only us. Of course there will be a variety of opinions about the ways in which we think it's being mucked up. My view on that would be very different from His Grace's. But His Grace can clearly see that our system isn't accountable enough while come discussions about electoral change he will say it doesn't need changing.
Peter Tatchel knows because he is gay and therefore omnipotent (and poss. part of a Pederast club).
Just like Haridan Harperson? - http://bit.ly/zhdFdN
On the lighter side:-
http://bit.ly/FPS74h
No where man sums matters up on his own wall quite well :
"You can stick your CCTV, Police State, wheelie bin Stasi, DNA, WMD, “Social Cohesion”, benefits for all, guilty until proved innocent, don’t do that it’s illegal now, can’t say that, ID cards for all, where are you going, what have you been saying/doing/reading, can’t photograph that, how very dare you, golliwog banning, we know where you live, we’re watching you Soviet Utopia up your arses. Sideways."
Well, happy mothering sunday to one and all!
JK: "Mothering Sunday was also nothing to do with Mothers."
There's a certain irony there about using a secular celebration which morphed from a Christian celebration which morphed from a Roman one to complain about social change. :)
Perfect analysis...I certainly would rather be a right parent than a right 'B'...Happy Mother's Day ME!!!
rachel michelle louise said...
"Well, happy mothering sunday to one and all!"
Capitals, dear girl!
Happy Mother's Day.
Well, happy mothering sunday to one and all!
"Who now can rid us of these meddlesome politicians?"
Goodness, Your Grace; I'm sure we need to be careful. We don't want to make martyrs of these gender-free social engineers, whose sole intent is world improvement for underthings!
History has shown us how that works:
Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote...
And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen whan that they were seeke. (1-18)**
Isn't it ironic, though, that the present 'back-to-the-future' generation, obsessed almost exclusively with gender-based activities, should work to eradicate gender?
------------------------
PS: Social Services are already practicing removal of offspring from their natural progenitors. Once the practice becomes mainstream, I expect they'll accommodate future neonates in euroGardens. Thence, before sterilising and releasing(psychologically conditioned) young adults to career-meisters, the wardens will cull gametes for battery farms. If the farmers then genetically engineer the embryos ... what a 'fun' eutopia :)
And it's only logical, innit? (Pace A. Huxley).
-------------------------
**Chaucer, G. "General Prologue." The Canterbury Tales. The Riverside Chaucer. 3rd ed. Ed. Larry D. Benson. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.
This comment has been removed by the author.
The first attempt to drive a 'wedge between man/woman and their relationship with God was in the Garden of Eden.This resulted in God`s Divine Order being overturned with the resultant chaos and disorder which has 'reigned' ever since.
Every attempt to restore this Divine Order has been met with opposition by the enemy of Mankind.The family unit(which is the cement which holds Society together)is under constant attack whether this is physical , material, financial, or spiritual.The enemy of Mankind knows full well that if he can destroy the integrity of the family unit then he can start destroying Society.Which is already happening.
The Politicians (wittingly or not) seem to be part of the process of destroying the Family unit.
Who now can rid us of these meddlesome politicians?
For the sake of consistency, and at the risk of repeating myself yet again, this clearly has little to do with our politicians.
Change of either the political, social,economic or scientific kind comes from the top of society and is promulgated towards the politically active middle classes through our great universities, and other teaching colleges such as Oxford, Cambridge and The London School of Economics.
The original agendas and long term planning come from small groups of oligarchical control freaks who consider this activity to be their God given duty, or birth right.
In the past this task was undertaken by what was known as the priest-hoods, who have over time mainly handed over the nuts and bolts of occult/hidden power to what would best be described as The Robber Barons, or Banksters.
This often uneasy alliance between the spiritual and temporal goes back to the dawn of civilization itself.
Therefore the above question is looking at the 'problem' if it be one, from the wrong end of the telescope.
I wish people to ask themselves this question.
Who do you blame most for the reality of Gay marriage?
The Church?
Our Politicians or their political parties?
Ourselves?
Gay People?
The mass media, most especially The Establishments BBC.
IMO, the primary driving force behind this has been The Establishments BBC, although of course all of the above have had their role to play.
The people who have been least responsible for the promotion of Gay Marriage have been Gay people themselves, which should tell you all that you really need to know as to where this is all really coming from.
Some may say, Dodo for example, that the ultimate source is Satan herself, and they might very well be on to something here. I on the other hand prefer to keep an open mind as to what is ultimately pulling the strings.
However it is worth remembering that history tells us that it was The Roman Catholic Church in the past, and I am yet to discover any evidence that suggests that this situation has radically changed for the best part of 2 thousand years.
You may also recall that the above question was lifted from a question referring to a certain meddlesome member of the early medieval priest-hood, subversively working under the influence of The Roman Catholic Church.
Beanie the Weasel
Please be clear. In what specific ways is the family as a unit being undermined? And, in order to protect it, what should the Church and Christians say and do?
Atlas
My good man, St Thomas Becket was murdered as he strove to uphold the principles of Magna Carta from Henry II.
A great saint and true Englishman.
Atlas. I on the other hand prefer to keep an open mind as to what is ultimately pulling the strings.
and then...
subversively working under the influence of The Roman Catholic Church.
Rather think the Catholic countries are spared this re-programming of society’s core values. What a silly arse you are !
Inspector had his annual night out yesterday. Asked at the curry stage his opinion of the evening so far, replied “bring on the dancing girls”. He was then accosted by a hitherto demure female member of the party to whom he had not been introduced, berating him for treating women as objects of desire. Just goes to show this nonsense goes a lot deeper that politician level...
This comment has been removed by the author.
@Alpha, your touting for business on his Grace's blog -shame on you!
Inspector - get rid of the tash and you might look half dishy.
Nowhere Man @10:23
Peter Tatchel has just announced on the BBC that 40% of Anglican and 1/3 of Catholic priest are homosexuals.
How does he know this to be true? Has he found out by practical experience? A serial adulterer under the new scheme?
Atlas said @ 13:16
Satan herself Forgive me if I'm wrong but I have never heard of Satan as being female. Satan was an Angel and Angels are either masculine or Asexual, but never in my experience female. If the devil has presented himself as a woman to you it would not surprise me, he is the father of lies and females are man’s greatest temptation (except for gays of course).
Jennifer @ 11:20
Well said but I would rather be a good parent than a 'B' parent!
Rachell:
Please tell Anna that we all love her with the love of the Lord. Our comments are given in love so that she may know the truth that sets her free.
Inspector
Did you enjoy the curry? Honestly, women these days are behaving more and more like drunken men. Shame on them.
And did you follow my advice: dance as if no one is watching; sing as if no one is listening?
I think Anna Anglican's sister is flirting with you now! Before contemplating removing your whiskers, do remember the cunning Delilha.
The spirit of Lilith is abroad and may have already got her hooks into Atlas.
Rachel. Inspector loves Anna too. He’s especially keen not to see her become a sterile lesbian....
Dodo. Curry superb, lamb madras. Succulent. Young lady concerned was someone's niece, not long out of university. Sadly unemployed. Still, that’s what happens when you obtain a degree in “Women’s Things” or whatever these Micky Mouse tickets are called today...
There is a serious point to consider under all this political correctness. The denial of complementarity implies that neither men nor women contribute anything unique to raising a child simply because of gender. It is an assertion that male and female parents are interchangeable components in child-rearing. In practice, this means that fathers are separated from their children. A father contributes nothing essential to the child that his mother is also not capable of contributing. So he loses yet one more compelling reason to stay. After all, everything "will be fine" if he leaves - or if he was never there in the first place.
carl
Hmmm. No sign of DanJ0. Wrecking society to accommodate the gay agenda is what this one trick pony is all about.
Rather think the Catholic countries are spared this re-programming of society’s core values. What a silly arse you are.
A wise megalomaniac organization first picks off its weakest enemies one by one.
Please be reminded that subversion is carried out for reasons which may not become self apparent until many years later.
It would seem that the greatest potential victim is protestantism in general, most especially the power and congregation of the Church of England.
The RCC however sits high and proud from the debate, and has done absolutely nothing to help the situation within the USA or UK.
The RCC has EMENSE power and influence at all levels of US, and UK society, most of which is at a highly occult level.
A divided enemy is a weak enemy.
The greatest enemy of The RCC is now, what it has always been, which is THE ORDINARY PEOPLE, not princes, states or homosexuality which as we know is where The RCC gains its greatest number of recruits into its supposedly sexually abstaining priest-hoods.
Or course I understand that this is true lateral thinking, and requires an intelligent which you yourself clearly do not possess, however all I ask is for you to THINK about it, and eventually it may become clear even to the likes of yourself.
The eventual plan is to consume all religion into one single world Empire of Vatican accountable centralized control.
This has ALWAYS been the plan since the foundation of the Roman Empire itself, The RCC was formed to act simply as a more occult extension of this long held plan for total world domination. The British Empire was, and still is part of this multi generational plan.
Atlas
You're not really 'len the weasel' are you? It's either that or he has been visiting your site.
Atlas
My good man, St Thomas Becket was murdered as he strove to uphold the principles of Magna Carta from Henry II.
This rather depends on which history books one subjects oneself to.
IMO, and that of many other lay historians Becket was a power crazed maniac who had once drunk of material wealth sort to gain divine approval through his power as head of the english subsidiary branch of The Roman Catholic God Corporation.
Please explain what this had to do with Magna Carta as I see no connection whatsoever, and neither do any other historians, lay, authorized or otherwise.
It had much, indeed exclusively everything to do with WHO was really running this nation, and a large proportion of France.
Was it the King of England Normandy, Brittany and Aquitaine and his nobility running the show, or a bunch of chaps in women's clothing with highly questionable sexual, and other moral habits, residing in Rome, secretly or otherwise running it for him?
A very old question indeed, which has NEVER been resolved up to this very day.
Of course heads of religious organizations are generally seen as well meaning and intentioned individuals, but as we know the world is cursed with good intentions, and most especially supposedly divinely inspired ones.
This proves without a doubt that David Cameron is NOT a conservative at all to throw away our heritage and culture on the whims of the current fashion for homosexual culture and the Stonewall dictators. What they are advocating is unfair and discriminatory to heterosexuals. The forms should read Husband/Wife/Partner. You can't take away the human right to be called by what you are, a female, a daughter, a bride, a wife, a mother, These are the natural identifying criteria for the human life span.
You can't just go and erase people's status and standing in the community to suit a minority of bullies. Think of the psychological damage that does to people.
If Spain, Canada and others wish to go along this route let them, but we don't have to follow. A fool puts his head in a bucket of boiling water just to be like his friend without first thinking about the full consequences thereof.
This is a step too far on the slippery slope to total debauchery and communism because that's where it will all lead. People living in communes all looking after each others children and fornicating around. No ordered society, no morals and no boundaries. What's a certificate to say they are a legal couple or not?
Anyone who want’s the source out Atlas’ silliness, just google ‘Jesuit Evil’. Seemingly put there by those good old Southern Baptist boys of the US of A. Giggle warning included.
Atlas
You're not really 'len the weasel' are you? It's either that or he has been visiting your site.
Very difficult, because I don't have one. Neither do I intent to get one, publish any books, go on any concert tours, become a politician, priest, or other promoter of disinformation.
I can see that you remain incapable of even wanting to seek truth, shame but sadly predictable.
Please try to EDUCATE yourself, for what I hope to impart cannot be done at this place alone.
Please also be reminded that I not only contend that The Vatican ultimately plans to destroy all forms of cohesive protestantism but also to eventually destroy Christianity as even the likes of yourself have come to mistakingly understand it.
Roman Catholicism is primarily a tradition based cult derived from the BABYLONIAN MYSTERY religions, in the Hindu, Judaic or pagan cosmological mode, and as such it will eventually emerge in full open bloom. Thus it has within its very DNA the ability to encompass all religion around the globe, with the only exception of Biblical Christianity, or true evangelism itself.
Again please try actually reading your own Bible, if you have one, the truth is there, and you don't need a priest to interpret it for you.
Inspector
Please! Don't reveal sources where the Order's secrets can be unearthed! Imagine what this information could do in the hands of weasels. We're still trying to track down the traitors who have been disclosing this.
Anyone who want’s the source out Atlas’ silliness, just google ‘Jesuit Evil’. Seemingly put there by those good old Southern Baptist boys of the US of A. Giggle warning included.
18 March 2012 16:22
Oh so you have bothered to look then. Although it is just silliness, is it?
I think you will find that this goes a whole lot deeper, and way further back in time then those good old Baptist boys as you disparagingly refer to your supposedly fellow Christians, as you, and of course His Grace to his past cost, very well know.
Indeed this goes back since the very start of the Roman Catholic Church, and has been a common thread throughout the whole of western history, especially the European part.
Christopher Columbus makes the list as one of the top 25 most evil people in man’s history. heh heh
And Jesuits were the ghost authors of 'Mein Kampf' and Mao's 'Little Red Book'.
Inspector said ...
"Hmmm. No sign of DanJ0. Wrecking society to accommodate the gay agenda is what this one trick pony is all about."
No, as he's a Liverpool lad. He'll be round his mum's for a family gathering. Brother's, sister's and playing his part as godparent to his neices and nephews.
In the valley of the blind, the one-eyed snake is King.
Dodo: "He'll be round his mum's for a family gathering."
Actually, my mum's dead. Bowel cancer.
DanJo: cor, using a howitzer to pound a duck! Thank you though, for reminding me to think of my own Mother too.
Apropos, in part, to the wider issue; I received a Mother's Day card from my youngest daughter, raised 'motherless' from the age of eight. I hasten to add that I receive a 'Father's Day' card too; but it's a nice sentiment regardless.
Here's to all our Mothers, God bless them!
...and Cameron is not just a Roman Catholic, he’s an ordained Jesuit priest. What do you mean, you never realised ??
DanJ0
Sincere apologies and God rest her soul.
Oswin: "Apropos, in part, to the wider issue; I received a Mother's Day card from my youngest daughter, raised 'motherless' from the age of eight. I hasten to add that I receive a 'Father's Day' card too; but it's a nice sentiment regardless."
Aww, that's a very nice touch.
There is now talk of a courtesy title for the same-sex spouses of peers and knights, and presumably also therefore for the husbands of women peers (peeresses are the wives of peers) and for the husbands of dames. Either that, or the style of "Lady" for peeresses and for knights' wives will be abolished, even though, in this as in all past ages, many a man has accepted a peerage or a knighthood specifically so that his wife might call herself "Lady".
But that is hardly the start of it all. Whether or not we are currently admitting it where the Duchess of Cornwall in concerned, the wife of His Majesty the King is Her Majesty the Queen Consort. The husband of Her Majesty the Queen is His Royal Highness the Prince Consort, even if he is given another title by his wife or, as in the present case, already held another title prior to her accession. Oh, and Your Grace is quite correct that two persons of the same sex may now be listed as the parents on a birth certificate, making them the only legal parents of the child. Consider that, indeed, on this Parent B's Day. Indeed, consider it all. Obviously, no one else has bothered to do so.
That said, there has been a distinct silence from the Labour Party, as such, on the redefinition of marriage. Opposing things like the abolition of national pay agreements in the public sector, while at least declining to support, as a part rather as an individuals, moves such as the redefinition of this most fundamental of institutions in the metrosexual interest, may or may not be enough to win a General Election outright. But they are certainly enough to deny the Conservative Party an overall majority for the fifth time in a row.
It is difficult to see how that party, which, as such, exists purely in order to be in government as the end in itself, could possibly survive that fifth successive denial of a clear mandate to govern. Disgruntled Tories out in the shires and the provincial cities, don't register your protest by voting UKIP. Make a real difference by voting for the only party that can actually defeat and destroy the one that that you have rightly come to despise.
If you still felt the need, then you could start again from scratch after that. But with Labour visibly dependent on you rather than on the imaginary or disagreeable "centre ground", then who knows what you might be able to achieve from a party largely created by your sort of people in the first place and, with the Blairites as good as gone, far more open to the central and local government action on which your social and cultural aspirations depend for realisation?
David Lindsay. When a political party abandons one or more of it’s core principles. You no longer vote for it. It’s the honourable thing to do. That is how it works...
Mr David Lindsay @ 20.44, how long before you realise that the Labour Party is totally corrupt? The over-representation of the unions within the party structure, by virtue of block voting, means that the ordinary party members are irrelevant. If you want to go through life as a meaningless statistic in all regards, vote Labour and you will succeed.
Your Grace,
To think of bringing change into a party is vain. It takes decades to infiltrate and work ones way up in the game of Political Snakes and Ladders. With a snake Like Warsi on the playing board, one is as likely to find one has slid to the bottom of the board in a trice.
David; The Inspector is right. Abandon those who have abandoned us.
Office of Inspector General said...
Rather think the Catholic countries are spared this re-programming of society’s core values.
Alas Inspector, whilst I normally concur with your posts I must bring you to book on this. I believe Spain has already legislated for Gay Marriage and are they not Catholic? Admittedly they are also Lefty which might explain such an abomination.
What happens in gender specific languages like say Spanish and French?
Una mujar as against un hombre.
In French le parent is masculine
Are they going down the same route?
Would not this sort of thing give heart attacks to the old buffers and gender deciders les immortels of L'Acamdemie francaise
I believe there are about 700 immortels and about 8 are women. Sexist what?
Why should a tree be masculine in most languages but feminine in Portuguese?
Will the lone mother foster parent be: Parent Bb-A?
Will the lone parent be: Parent AB?
What about Brecht's 'Mother Courage'? 'Parent B Courage' hardly has the same appeal.
Dave's a good salesman. That's what he should stick at doing
Maturecheese. The response was in relation to Atlas’ assertion that all evil can be pinned on the Catholic church (...and that which isn’t, on tobacco...). The Inspector actually missed the point that time. It’s all so much closer to home. Secularism is to blame, and it’s done so that all discrimination can be abolished. We are witnessing that in the hands of these thugs, the difference between men and women can no longer be justified...
I have not been a Labour Party member for many years. But the unions include, for example, USDAW, already taking the lead against the deregulation of public trading, the issue over which its affiliation to Labour enabled it to inflict the only Commons defeat of Thatcher's Premiership.
Consider that. Consider this; it really is very striking indeed that Labour has not come out, so to speak, in support of same-sex "marriage" as a matter of party policy: there is obviously going to be a free vote on the Labour side, the last hope of defeating the scheme. Consider the lunatic plan to reduce the spending power of the only people in poor areas who have very much, merely because they happen to be ghastly provincial peasants. Consider the EU-required Post Office privatisation's ruination of rural communities and abolition of the monarchy's link to every address in the Kingdom.
On each and all of those, you will have only one option in 2015 if you actually want to kick out this wretched Government by the only possible means, which is that of replacing it with something else in particular.
Sorry, the deregulation of Sunday trading, of course.
Oh! and thinking about this further parent A and parent B having child 1 and child 2 does not imply that they are human even. Parent A could well be an ape or the horse? Or two apes? I think apes are more intelligent than the cretins dreaming up this laughable, degrading, nonsenses.
And what about in death? Widow and widower on the death cert. would be described as corpse A and corpse B no doubt
So long as no one expects Catholics to stop calling the Pope el Papa or Priests Father.
Mr Lindsay 22.40, good to see you 'fess up about your allegiance. Trouble is Labour were the architect of the current economic debacle at the macro level. Congratulating Labour for some micro management proposals is not enough to convince.
The reality for country post offices is two-fold; their banking business is declining thanks to the internet and their parcels business is exploding for the same reason. An economic balance will emerge, don't worry.
It is mildly encouraging that Labour has yet to break cover on the SSM issue. One can imagine the internal debate, with the social conservatives of the working class pitched against the middle-class Fabians in mutual loathing. Of course, the Lib-Dems are just middle-class Fabians without the baggage of the union movement. And the social conservatives of the working class and the traditional Tories were made for each other.
So many square pegs in round holes. Now how to re-arrange them and redraw the political map?
It could be done, but not by Dave.
I thought Cameron might have been suporting this as sop to Clegg but not expecting it to go through on a free vote. If he did say that he agreed with all types of marriage at the conference then he must meen it. What a wally!
And David, don't think that New Labour isn't going to support it, they are just letting the Conservatives take all the Flak.
As I said, Labour and I parted company a long time ago.
And Mr Integrity, New Labour is a thing of the past, as is clear from the attitude to everything from this, to Sunday trading, to Post Office privatisation, to the abolition of national pay agreements. All thoroughly Blairite ideas, which is why the Coalition is pursuing them. And one not supported, the other three actively opposed, by the party now called Labour again.
This is a 1974 moment. But who is its Enoch Powell? Peter Hitchens? Who? This is not a rhetorical question.
In George Orwell's best known novel, 1984, he described how a dictatorship could change the English language inventing a version of it called Newspeak which would enable the governing class to control the way ordinary people thought. Orwell also introduced the concept of thought crime.
The Left in Britain has taken what was meant as a warning against dictatorial tendencies and instead treated it as a guidebook but they are unwilling to admit to doing that. When was the last time anyone in a BBC programme or anyone writing in the Guardian compared Political Correctness and its thought crimes with 1984?
Roy
'Opinion formers' have always known the power of language. Today it is systematically taught as 'Neuro Linguistic Programming'.
Change the meaning of words, change the way the world is seen, change the way people think and behave. It's not new. All the great teachers and leaders, good and bad, have always done it.
"Who now can rid us of these meddlesome politicians?"
I will assume that His Grace's reference to Henry is being poetic, rather than a call for seditious action.
The short answer is the electorate.
But they won't,will they?
Eventually,people will become accustomed - or maybe "inured" is a better word -to new laws AND new mores.
There is much for the Liberals to liberalise , but as has been asked before - what is left for the Conservatives to conserve??
I admire HG's efforts to speak up.
But ultimately,it will all be to no avail.
An observation based on many years. You can no longer support the Labour party and be a Christian at the same time. Labour doesn’t do religion, but socialism instead. And the difference between socialism and communism ? Socialists tolerate dissenters, at the moment at least....
Inspector
It's the influence of the Jesuits, don't you know.
Dodo If you keep trying to cover up the 'goings on' of the counter- Reformationists (The Jesuits) people will KNOW their is a something 'fishy' about them.shhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Marie 1797 is correct:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp
The Secret People
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget;
For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet.
There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully,
There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we.
There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise.
There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes;
You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet:
Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.
The fine French kings came over in a flutter of flags and dames.
We liked their smiles and battles, but we never could say their names.
The blood ran red to Bosworth and the high French lords went down;
There was naught but a naked people under a naked crown.
And the eyes of the King's Servants turned terribly every way,
And the gold of the King's Servants rose higher every day.
They burnt the homes of the shaven men, that had been quaint and kind,
Till there was no bed in a monk's house, nor food that man could find.
The inns of God where no man paid, that were the wall of the weak.
The King's Servants ate them all. And still we did not speak.
And the face of the King's Servants grew greater than the King:
He tricked them, and they trapped him, and stood round him in a ring.
The new grave lords closed round him, that had eaten the abbey's fruits,
And the men of the new religion, with their bibles in their boots,
We saw their shoulders moving, to menace or discuss,
And some were pure and some were vile; but none took heed of us.
We saw the King as they killed him, and his face was proud and pale;
And a few men talked of freedom, while England talked of ale.
A war that we understood not came over the world and woke
Americans, Frenchmen, Irish; but we knew not the things they spoke.
They talked about rights and nature and peace and the people's reign:
And the squires, our masters, bade us fight; and scorned us never again.
Weak if we be for ever, could none condemn us then;
Men called us serfs and drudges; men knew that we were men.
In foam and flame at Trafalgar, on Albuera plains,
We did and died like lions, to keep ourselves in chains,
We lay in living ruins; firing and fearing not
The strange fierce face of the Frenchmen who knew for what they fought,
And the man who seemed to be more than a man we strained against and broke;
And we broke our own rights with him. And still we never spoke.
Our patch of glory ended; we never heard guns again.
But the squire seemed struck in the saddle; he was foolish, as if in pain,
He leaned on a staggering lawyer, he clutched a cringing Jew,
He was stricken; it may be, after all, he was stricken at Waterloo.
Or perhaps the shades of the shaven men, whose spoil is in his house,
Come back in shining shapes at last to spoil his last carouse:
We only know the last sad squires rode slowly towards the sea,
And a new people takes the land: and still it is not we.
They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs.
We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
Our wrath come after Russia's wrath and our wrath be the worst.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God's scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
Recently I read something somewhere about a proposal to change forms that ask for a person's sex so that instead of a straight forward male/female choice there was a 3rd category. Although that category was intended for transexuals it was to be called something else, like "other".
Why stop at 3? How about "yes please!" and "not today, thank you?"
At a time of austerity why on earth are we paying civil servants to go and change words that everyone understands such as "male", "female", "father", "mother", "husband", "wife", "man", "woman" etc. with whatever the "gay" campaigning group Stonewall wants to replace them with?
Hasn't a single one of our MPs tabled a question in Parliament to ask about the total cost of this exercise?
On the subject of costs, why cannot we, the public, dock the salaries of MPs who act contrary to our wishes?
Oh, for heaven's sake. It's Mother's Day, not Wife's Day.
len
Have you been in the Order long?
And, you have been informed that Peter Thatchell is a member? Doing stirling work too with all the havoc being caused.
Er - excuse me, but why have I been relegated to being Parent B? Parent A would be more appropriate, being the principal carer of our children.
I consider this to be sexist and discriminatory. A new word will have to be found. How about 'mother'?
@ Flossie
I consider this [Parent A or B] to be sexist and discriminatory. A new word will have to be found. How about 'mother'?
That is an excellent idea provided that we redefine the word "mother" so that it does not contravene Harriet Harman's so-called Equality Act by being sexist and gender-specific.
David Cameron will have to ask the "Equalities Minister" Lynne Featherstone (the Coalition's answer to Mad Hattie) to introduce a Bill as soon as possible to redefine "motherhood" in a way that is not sexist or heterosexist so that the primary career in a family (and we know that families, like Heinze Baked Beans, come in at least 57 varieties) should be called the mother irrespective of whether that person is male, female, transexual, neutered, doesn't know, or won't say what category of human being they belong to.
Of course this new law will itself have to be revised if Parliament or our judges decide, as some philosophers have advocated, that higher primates and some other species such as dolphins and whales, should have the same rights that humans do.
It all provides work for politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I was never much use at algebra.
Algebra - from the Arabic 'al gebr' sic ''reunion of broken parts'' ...
A revealing article Mr Singh thank you. Camoron & co should read it and have a rethink as to what damage they are imposing upon us with “gay marriage”.
I was shocked at the sharp rise in single parents, the rate at which cohabiting couples changed partners and the increase in siblings with different parents when I worked in the public sector here during the 90's. So I've seen it coming.
It seems the dismissal of the Church's moral teachings as old fashioned and the increase in welfare state support for single parents has encouraged all this rot. It's as though commitment and responsibility went out the window as in came the feminist's “we don't need men” mantra, the ladette culture that women can be like men and of course the rise in gay culture and their pressure groups.
We need to fight back so I think the Church has to be stronger to try and arrest all this destructive communist style debauchery.
If there are to be no more mother and father-defined by male and female, will we still have sons and daughters.? Could be thought of as sexist/gender specific and likely to cause psychological problems maybe?
I think we need to know.
Elizabeth
That's it! Problem solved. Without defining gender in such sexist ways there can be no homosexuality or heterosexuality.
Well done. You deserve an Honour. Arise Noble Elizabeth.
btw, Your Grace. I'm sorry, but I think it's much prettier to use runes. We could have an ᚪ parent (Ac=Oak) and a ᛒ parent (Beorc=Birch).
What rubbish. As a mother, I'm very happy to be made breakfast on mother's day, this is clearly utter nonsense. Some families have double the number of mothers to celebrate.
Post a Comment
<< Home