Wednesday, 25 August 2010

The Poor To Suffer Most

Say it ain't so!

As for the Equalities Act, any weapon against all of this, I suppose. But with the support of all three parties, it has made Catholicism, as such, illegal in this country for the first time ever. Both the all-male Priesthood, and the definition of marriage as only ever the union of one man and one woman, are now against the law. Thank you, Harriet Harman of the Paedophile Information Exchange and of Paedophile Action for Liberation.

8 comments:

  1. "Thank you, Harriet Harman of the Paedophile Information Exchange and of Paedophile Action for Liberation."

    How's your libel lawyer? As ficitious as your "publisher"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is a well-established matter of record. Google it if you don't believe me. Specifically, Google it under "Martin Beckford Daily Telegraph". Among others. That was the 1970s campus sectarian Left, later known as New Labour. The same view was held by the 1980s Radical Right, now in government.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Do you agree with this?

    Her submission states: “Although this harm may be of a somewhat speculative nature, where participation falls short of physical assault, it is none-the-less justifiable to restrain activities by photographer which involve placing children under the age of 14 (or, arguably, 16) in sexual situations.
    “We suggest that the term 'indecent’ be qualified as follows: – A photograph or film shall not for this purpose be considered indecent (a) by reason only that the model is in a state of undress (whether complete or partial); (b) unless it is proved or is to be inferred from the photograph or film that the making of the photograph or film might reasonably be expected to have caused the model physical harm or pronounced psychological or emotional disorder.”

    ReplyDelete
  4. No idea what she thinks.

    What do you disagree with? Do you disagree that it's justifiable to restrain activities by photographer which involve placing under-16s in sexual situations?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I disagree that "the harm may be of a somewhat speculative nature".

    I disagree with the 14, and I am not happy about the 16 (it is now 18 anyway, not that that appears to be enforced much).

    I disagree with the qualifications that she wishes to place on indecent photographs of children.

    Doesn't she?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Do you believe that a photograph of a naked child is always obscene/pornographic?

    ReplyDelete
  7. You are either making yourself a stooge of these people, or you are one of their number. Either way, they need to get some new material.

    Like Hewitt, who went on to be Health Secretary with overall responsibility for every social worker in England, Harman was acting for and on behalf of the Paedophile Information Exchange.

    ReplyDelete