Realwomen of BC - Archives - December2003

THE REAL NEWS The R.E.A.L WOMEN of BC Newsletter December 2003, BOX 39068, Point Grey RPO, Vancouver, BC V6R 4P1, Tel/Fax: 604- 463-1611, website: http://www.realwomen.bc.ca, e-mail: lgeschke@almatree.net Back to contents
Hardly A Dinosaur by David Warren The Ottawa Citizen November 30, 2003 Larry Spencer probably spoke for as many Canadians as elected the last Liberal government in Ottawa, when he blotted his copybook this week. Not, of course, the same people, just, I would estimate, about the same number of people. During an interview with the Vancouver Sun, the Canadian Alliance''s former family issues critic called his own party''s bluff in the debate around "gay marriage." He, who was formerly a Baptist pastor, gamely attacked the whole project of homosexual activism, dating back to the 1960s,earning himself the title of "dinosaur." You might not guess it from the media reports, but Mr. Spencer is clear in thought and articulate in expression -- rather more so than most members of Parliament. Certainly intelligent enough to know what he is up against, and how comfortable it would be for him to keep his mouth shut. The speed with which he withdrew from his position, once the flames shot up, suggested a low pain threshhold, however. To say that the "gay revolution" was "well_orchestrated," and set in motion over time, is to pay a backhand compliment to its organizers. In my own experience, the lobbying and propagandizing for what its exponents might call "gay rights" has been very impressive. It had to be, to succeed -- for when the activists claim that our society was formerly "homophobic," they are telling the truth. It took a tremendous amount of very clever manoeuvring to cover the political distance of the last 40 years -- to move a huge chunk of society from an unthinking homophobia to an equally unthinking homophilia. To turn a moral objection into moral approval. Needless to say, the movement is disinclined to take a bow. Its success, as the success of each other of our many overlapping social revolutions, is predicated on "victimhood." Even now that the shoe is on the other foot, and it is far more dangerous to speak against homosexuality than it once was to speak in favour, and homophobe-bashing has become more socially acceptable than gay-bashing ever was, the idea of its own victimhood is sustained, by the victorious party. And while it may not be politically correct to admit that there ever was such a thing as gay activism, or that the "evolution of society" was ever advanced by the conscious efforts of the evolutionists, there can be no dispute about the results of the process. For even a self-declared conservative" newspaper, such as the National Post, felt obliged to put a front_page commentary under its news article about Mr. Spencer, suggesting that the suppression of Mr. Spencer would now be a test of Stephen Harper''s Alliance party leadership, and crucial to its impending merger with the Progressive Conservatives. But let me return to my first proposition, that in his disapproval not merely of "gay marriage," but of homosexuality itself, Mr. Spencer speaks for a substantial number of Canadians. There are wheels within wheels, revolutions within revolutions as we advance down the road of our national apostasy. To take one example, we have now established as a matter of practical politics that criminal law may be written in this country with the approval of "50 per cent plus one" of whoever is voting (more likely a court than a legislature). This overthrows what was previously believed about criminal law -- that an act becomes a crime only when an overwhelming majority believe it is a crime Conversely, that special public privileges -- such as those attaching to traditional marriage -- can only be conferred with overwhelming public support. This is why murder is a crime, and theft, and robbery, and the more remunerative forms of fraud, and why -- until less than two generations ago -- abortion was a serious crime in this country. It was so because an overwhelming majority of Canadians believed it to be so. And they believed that because, through many generations, most of them had been Christian. The law was made by the secular state, but the secular state reflected the people, and the people were not value-free. Likewise, sodomy was a crime. The great majority of persons thought it so, and the state made it so. That law was not frequently enforced, chiefly because the practice was kept invisible. Yet one of the purposes of law in society is the conservative one, of discouraging people from committing acts simply because they know them to be crimes -- the criminal law thus tending to uphold the kind of public consensus that makes a civilized order of society possible. When Pierre Trudeau shepherded (or, wolved) our old sodomy laws out of existence, he brilliantly declared that "the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation." This was also a widely accepted proposition, long before the late prime minister uttered the words. It was why sodomy wasn''t prosecuted except in the most flagrant instances. Homosexuals were "in the closet" and the laws against sodomy kept them there. Trudeau would have been very foolish to announce, in 1969, that he was making sodomy legal because homosexuality is a good thing. Instead he went out of his way to make disapproving, homophobic noises -- as cover to get his bill passed without a revolt by the "God squad" on his own backbenches. If he had said, "And some day, we will have gay marriage," it would have been the end of his career. The trick was done one step at a time, and society "was evolved" toward successively more radical propositions, until today it "goes without saying," among self-described emancipated people, that homosexual acts are neither better nor worse than heterosexual acts --in a society where chastity is right out of the question. But note -- a large minority, and from some angles even a majority (depending on how the poll questions are asked) haven''t gone along for the ride. And if the further evolution of public opinion on the abortion issue gives any indication, most of them won''t be going along. An overwhelming majority is needed to make an "evolutionary development" stick, and if you don''t have it, the thing will eventually come loose again. All trends are reversible. The very de-Christianization of our society is a reversible trend. And while he may now look foolish and exposed, Mr. Spencer may prove, by his radical rejection of a radical reversal of our moral ideas to have been a man ahead of his time. Editor’s Note: An article which may have been the basis for some of Mr. Spencer’s comments, for which he was demoted and publicly excoriated is available from us by email as an attachment in Word, Wordperfect, or RichText Format, or as hard copy sent to you by mail. There is a horrible double standard in practise in North America, when the opinion in this article by Micheal Swift does not arise the emotion and consequences which Mr. Spencer’s comments did. This article is not for the faint-hearted nor for the squeamish to read, but it is prevailing opinion among radical Homosexual Activists at work today. (Otherwise, why would they want to be propagating their lifestyle in our public schools.) The tendency in society today is to shoot the messenger of unwanted information. For that reason, we decided to not print this article, but to make it available to those of you who are interested in seeing it and keeping it for reference. This homosexual agenda was also incorporated in the book AFTER THE BALL, known as the bible of the homosexual movement and written by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk & Hunter Madsen.

Hardly A Dinosaur