Peter Tatchell has sent me this, the far right have long got their collective knickers in a twist over sexuality, the Nazis were homophobes, puritans obssesed with sexual hygiene, gay rights are about human rights, the far right have a totalitarian approach to difference and freedom.
There is a real danger that the BNP will win seats on the GLA and guess who they are backing with their second preferences for Mayor
"Vote to stop the BNP"
Neo-Nazis threaten gay, black, Jewish and Muslim people
Big pink vote urged to block the election of BNP candidates
London – 16 April 2008
"You can help stop the BNP winning seats by using your vote in the 1
May local and London elections," says gay human rights group OutRage!
"Lesbians and gay voters can help block the election of candidates
from the racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim and homophobic British
National Party (BNP). Make sure that you and your straight friends
vote," said Peter Tatchell of OutRage!
"A high turnout will reduce the BNP's share of the vote and lessen its
chances of winning seats," he said.
"In the 2004 London elections, the BNP won 4.8% of the vote. It only
needs 5% of the vote to win a seat on the London Assembly. There is a
real danger that the BNP will achieve an electoral breakthrough on 1
May. But we can stop them, if large numbers of Londoners vote for
other parties.
"The BNP fought previous general elections on a pledge to outlaw
homosexuality. It has described Aids as "nature taking revenge" on gay
men. It opposed the repeal of Section 28 and the equalisation of the
age of consent.
"BNP leader Nick Griffin has denounced homosexuality as a "behavioural
deviancy" and attacked gay people for "flaunting their perversion." He
also ridiculed homosexuals as "repulsive."
See sources and links below.
"We urge LGBT voters to quiz all their local candidates on gay and
other issues and to vote for those with the most progressive and
homo-friendly policies.
"With one-in-ten voters being lesbian, gay or bisexual, the pink vote
can influence the election result in many marginal constituencies.
"It is important we elect more pro-gay politicians, to help us secure
stronger policies to tackle homophobic bullying and hate crimes," said
Mr Tatchell.
"Recent election results indicate the BNP could make electoral gains,"
added campaign coordinator Brett Lock of OutRage!
"Under the proportional representation voting system for the London
elections minor parties like the BNP can win seats.
"The BNP is attempting to copy the success of other European far right
and neo-Nazi parties, such as the Front National in France, the Vlaams
Blok in Belgium and the National Democratic Party in Germany.
"The BNP is a racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic party. It has
previously threatened to jail queers and bring back Section 28," said
Mr Lock.
As well as the party's long history of homophobia, BNP activists also
stand accused racism, anti-Semitism, holocaust denial and
Islamophobia. A disturbing number of past and present BNP members have
criminal convictions for violence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party
Although the BNP has publicly ditched some of its most extreme and
bigoted policies, many critics believe this make-over is just an
astute public relations exercise designed to con people who were put
off by its thuggish neo-Nazi image. They say the BNP hasn't changed at
all; it has just got more professional and media savvy.
The party's website claims that: "Sexually-transmitted diseases are no
joke. Thanks to them, the average life-expectancy of a gay man is now
40, compared to 71 for all men" -
http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/traditional_values.html
Claiming that the "gay rights lobby target school children," the BNP
has opposed gay equality reforms like the repeal of Section 28 and the
abolition of the unequal age of consent. It has also condemned and
ridiculed LGBT History Month.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/lgbt_month.htm
Soon after the neo-Nazi bombing of a gay bar in Soho, London, in 1999,
which killed three people and maimed dozens more, BNP leader Nick
Griffin seemed to excuse and endorse the homophobic hatred that
inspired the terrorist atrocity. He attacked lesbian and gay people
for "flaunting their perversion" and said this showed why "so many
ordinary people find these creatures so repulsive".
Source: Stranger things have happened, Nick Griffin, Spearhead (BNP
magazine), June 1999.
Griffin has also denounced homosexuality as "form of behavioural
deviancy" and "not a valid lifestyle choice". He claims the BNP speaks
for "the majority of the population" who, he says, believe
"homosexuality is wrong" and that it "needs to be pushed humanely but
firmly back into the closet". Griffin warns that if gays continue to
"press their aims further" there will be an "almighty backlash" which
will result in the imprisonment of all homosexuals.
Source: Putting the record straight, Nick Griffin, Identity (BNP
Magazine), December 2003.
Griffin is not alone. Mark Collett, former chairman of the Young BNP
and possibly the party's future leader, described homosexuals as "AIDS
Monkeys", "bum bandits" and "faggots" and said the idea of
homosexuality was a "sickening thought" -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party
ENDS
Further Information:
Brett Lock – OutRage! – 0770 843 5917
Peter Tatchell – OutRage! – 020 7403 1790
Typical homophobic propaganda from the BNP website:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/traditional_values.html
Why traditional values on sex are better
Alan Goodacre says it's time someone was honest about the failings of
the sexual revolution.
Thankfully, despite the Blair regime's attempts to shove homosexuality
down our throats by means of sex-ed, we do not yet live in a country
where sexual matters are regulated by the state, as in the novel Brave
New World. So there is an understandable temptation to simply ignore
such matters in the name of individual freedom. But unfortunately,
sexual mores, and the encouragement or discouragement government gives
to them, deal with the social relations of human beings with one
another, and have immense consequences for society, so they cannot be
ignored.
Although the BNP is not a "puritan" party, it nonetheless recognizes
that something has gone horribly wrong with the sexual revolution and
believes that, insofar as state policy does touch on sexual matters,
it should centre on repairing the damage of that revolution, not
worsening it. Because the sexual revolution has helped create the
social chaos that we must overcome if we are to move to a true
national renaissance, we must at least get clear in our minds what is
wrong, even if the resources of government are – and rightly – limited
in dealing with it.
Before one can intelligently discuss sexual policy, one must dispell
the great myth of our age. People often ask, "why can't we just say
that anything consenting adults do is OK?" Well, it's not OK because
it has a long list of negative consequences:
1. Sexually-transmitted diseases are no joke. Thanks to them, the
average life-expectancy of a gay man is now 40, compared to 71 for all
men. Something like 20% of British women aged 25-30 are sterile
because of STDs.
2. Making "consenting adults" the standard means polygamy, bestiality,
prostitution and God-knows-what-else must be accepted, in the long
run. One cannot endorse an idea that leads logically to this
conclusion and expect that conclusion not to be reached when lust,
money, and liberalism will be straining to reach it. So unless we
want brothels to be as common and as public as Tesco, there have to be
some limits.
Some people suggest that such things are acceptable in private but not
in public, but this solution will not work. It is unrealistic to
expect that we can accept such things in private but condemn them in
public, because allowing people to do these things in private results
in the formation of interest groups that will then demand public
acceptance. And if people get used to seeing such things in private,
the shock of seeing them in public will wear off and they will cease
to care.
3. Tolerating "anything between consenting adults" will not lead to a
libertarian paradise, but:
a. For the underclass, it will produce a wasteland of broken homes,
fatherless children, and mindless couplings. See Theodore Dalrymple's
Life at the Bottom:
b. For everyone else, it will produce an emotionally cruel social
order which provides superficial pleasures for the rich and the pretty
at the expense of misery for everyone else. It will culturally and
socially disenfranchise the old and push the young into premature
maturity.
c. It will cause young people to waste their 20's chasing short-term
flings rather than getting married, and when they finally figure out
that this is a recipe for unfulfilled lives and continual heartbreak,
they'll be in their early 30's and half of them will not be able to
establish stable households before female fertility declines.
4. A sexual order whose central concept is "consenting adults" will by
definition be very selfish towards persons who are not adults, i.e.
children. The easy availability of extra-marital sex encourages
divorce and makes the children of the partner's previous marriages or
cohabitations into nuisances. It will result in a ruthlessly
adult-centric social order in which children are degraded, ignored,
and not raised properly.
5. Making "consenting adults" the rule undermines social cohesion by
making everyone into a sexual competitor to everyone else. The most
ordinary recreational or civic organizations will suffer and the whole
tone of life poisoned. Furthermore, because this makes innocent
flirting not so innocent, it actually produces a de-eroticized culture
with the coldness of Dangerous Liaisons.
6. Accepting the sexual revolution means conceding that traditional
British culture was as stupid as Tony Blair thinks it is. It means
admitting the left was correct. It means giving up one of the best
cultural sticks we have to beat the liberal establishment with. And
accepting polygamy means giving up one of the best politically-correct
cultural sticks we have to beat Islam with.
7. A certain sexual self-restraint has long been part of the culture
of Britain and was, in my view, a source of national greatness as male
sexual energy was channelled into other pursuits and female sexual
energy into the family. Can it really be an accident that our zenith
of national greatness coincided with Victorian sexual restraint, and
that Rome's decline set in just about the time orgies became
fashionable?
So while we should certainly disavow any attempt to introduce a sexual
police-state, we should not give positive moral endorsement to
avoidable vices. Lots of people are quietly fed up with the sexual
revolution and would appreciate someone being honest about its
shortcomings.
End of the BNP website article
--
NOTE: Please do not reply via this automated email system.
If you want to respond to this email, or at any time to contact Peter,
please email him at his NEW email address - peter@petertatchell.net
Peter Tatchell is the Green Party parliamentary candidate for Oxford East
www.greenoxford.com/peter and www.petertatchell.net
No comments:
Post a Comment