This mornings debate on the Stephen Nolan show, in relation to ‘guidance’ asking some girls schools not to refer to their pupils as girls, has sparked much debate.
The Rainbow project’s John O’Doherty was on the program, aggressively supporting the idea and shouting down other contributors on the show that disagreed with his view.
I tweeted that the idea was ‘perverse’ and was met by a barrage of angry tweets from pro- LGBT supporters. Naturally, as an emotional blackmail tactic they regularly deploy to aid their cause, they happily conflated ideals with the individual holding them. Suddenly rather than an idea being perverse, the individual holding such an idea was perverse. This irrational response isn’t some hap-hazard emotional reaction but rather a well developed tool used to emotionally railroad people into bending to their every whim and desire.
This, ironically, demonstrated that those who preach tolerance are quite often themselves the most intolerant of different views. Much of the anger directed towards me appeared to be hate-filled rants which criticised me for daring to articulate a non-neutral viewpoint.
Such relentless abuse has no effect on me, however I could see how it would bully some people into silence, especially in the left leaning world of social media where it is fashionable to be pro LGBT reform of legislation and natural societal norms.
I should point out that I openly expressed my disgust that an undemocratic petition of concern was used to block a same sex marriage motion in the Assembly. I didn’t agree with the motion, but it was a democratic vote and should have been allowed to be carried as such.
LGBT individuals are just as important as I, or anyone else. And for the avoidance of doubt, they are just as deserving of equality and fair treatment. But that does not mean that their ideals should, as of right, trump that of the majority or that society should bend to their every desire.
The logical outcome of ‘neutralising’ the natural differences between boys and girls is that eventually children would come to know no difference between their sexes and would effectively be given the choice of whether they want to be a boy or girl. This doesn’t help confused children, but rather it confuses children that otherwise would be entirely comfortable with their natural sex.
For the most part a man is born as a man and a woman is born as a woman. Nature makes that decision, therefore how you are born is ‘natural’, it cannot be influenced.
It is in that context that I believe, and it may be offensive to some for me to dare to say it- but, in my view, changing your sex is ‘unnatural’ as it goes against the most basic principles of nature.
Those children who are boys but want to be girls, or vice versa, should be treated as fairly and with as much dignity as every other human being. That does not mean that we should adapt society in order to force neutrality onto the majority of persons about their sex. We should not normalise an unnatural neutralising of the sexes. Such a perverse ‘normalisation’ would actually create an environment where such seeds of confusion would be planted in the minds of children who would ordinarily be comfortable with their boy or girl status, and their natural sex.
There are many people in the LGBT community that are tolerant of opposing views and that simply seek equality of treatment. These are people such as Julie Anne Corr and Sophie Long, who I regard as friends. I disagree with them on issues such as how LGBT rights should be legislated, but they are tolerant of the right to express a different viewpoint and I would fight for their right, and the right of every human being, to be treated as an equal citizen.
However, we increasingly see a far more aggressive agenda being pursued by the Rainbow group and their spokespersons, who aren’t fighting to be an equal part of society but rather to force society to a neutral position whereby we all must tolerate everything that anyone says makes them feel happy. And we dare not challenge lest we be called some ambiguous name with ‘phobic’ tagged on at the end of it. That’s not how democracy works and such a moral free-for-all would corrode and destroy every fibre of a cohesive society.
Some of the ideas being put forward that are either creations of, or supported by, campaigners such as the Rainbow project are becoming increasingly more absurd and quite frankly offensive.
The notion that when a child goes to school that they would be encouraged not to think of themselves as a boy or a girl, but rather as a neutral species that happened to be born with a penis or vagina, is- in my view- beyond the pale.
The outrageous demands of the more aggressive LGBT campaigners and the attempted persecution of anyone who disagrees, such as the case of Asher’s bakery, is actually doing more harm than good to their cause.
Many people will be afraid to speak out in the social media sphere due to a fear of being set upon by a mob of LGBT fanatics who would be aghast that anyone would dare challenge them.
Given it is a daily feature of my life, such gang trolling directed at me is about as effective as firing a pea shooter at a brick wall. The left wing tilted world of social media in Northern Ireland is not reflective of the real world. If it was then NI21 would be in a Government coalition with the Alliance party.
I, and others, have a right to challenge ideas that we find perverse. We are entitled to oppose such ideals and to say so, whether some people find it offensive or not.
A society where we all must hug in a neutral environment and suppress our views so as not to offend would make us all clones and demolish free speech and thought.