James Rhodes’ love song to Stephen Fry
Why did the mass media almost always mention Stephen Fry, in reports of James Rhodes victory in the Supreme Court? The victory clearing the way for the publication of his book Instrumental, which documents the homosexual abuse of James Rhodes during his childhood? Continue reading
Why Tesco should resist pressure to discriminate against Asher’s bakery
The old maxim, “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, was intended to restrain the lust of the outraged for vengeance, in order to prevent an escalation of conflict. Continue reading
The EU Directive published today on the right to die places the EU Commission on a direct collision course with the Council of Europe, which is still, in its European Convention on Human Rights, rather sold on the outdated notion of humans having a so-called “right to life” (Article 2).
The right to life is incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998. Because today’s Directive has direct applicability, the right to die established in today’s Directive is directly incorporated into UK law, with immediate effect, by the European Communities Act 1972. This is an Act, which, as the late Master of the Rolls Lord Denning observed, Parliament may not have the freedom to repeal that it imagined it would have, when it passed the Act, even if UKIP gets elected to power.
As from today, therefore, without Parliament having to lift a legislative finger to implement the EU provision, the new British right to die now sits uncomfortably alongside the old British right to stay alive.
Who gets the better deal? Transgendered people, or transoriented people?
Today, not for the first time, I read a comment complaining that people who are transgendered face problems of non-acceptance. It reminded me of the non-acceptance experienced by people who are, or who want to become, transoriented.
Transgendered people and transoriented people both experience non-acceptance, and for the same basic reason.
Transgendered people are (for example) male, but want to be accepted in future as female (or vice versa). In some cases, trangendered people have had their bodies changed, so that they resemble more their acquired gender, and less their birth gender. Transgendered people experience rejection on the part of people with strong, fixed beliefs. Beliefs that it is impossible for a man really to change himself, or be changed, into a woman (or vice versa).
A counterblast to Michael Swift’s famous essay
The Gay Revolutionary
published in Gay Community News, 15-21 Feb. 1987, often referred to as “The Homosexual Manifesto”.
You will probably enjoy this more, if you read Swift’s original essay first, re-published here, by Jesuits.
Trigger warning added later: Please do not read this piece at all if you are likely to be offended by the hate speech of Michael Swift in his original 1987 essay, of which this a parody.
This blog post
Touch the image to read the gist in brief
Bipolar patient has capacity to decide to terminate pregnancy
about this judgment of the Court of Protection
SB (A Patient; Capacity To Consent To Termination), Re  EWHC 1417 (COP) (21 May 2013)
has set me thinking.
. . .
A tense, life-or-death, courtroom drama
Pitched against her own legal team, the mental patient, Mrs SB, had two psychiatrists, her mother, her father, her husband (presumably the baby’s father) and the NHS hospital in which she was sectioned, along with their various solicitors and barristers, all agreeing that she was “not thinking straight”.
Her baby was not legally represented in court. As the nice judge said, “the foetus has no independent rights which fall to be weighed or considered by me at all in these proceedings”.
Present (though hardly as a disinterested, mere spectator), was the enterprising would-be sub-contractor who had put in a last-minute bid to do the job, less than a week before the mother reached 24 weeks pregnant, and the baby’s life would have become untouchable. “A doctor employed by a well known body”, is how the judge described this potential beneficiary of the judge’s own hard day’s work, when the abortionist put in his own “hard day at the orifice”. Continue reading
The Guardian reports the fate of British school teacher Robert Haye here:
Homophobic teacher loses appeal against classroom ban
Robert Haye flouted the benign British “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy towards people with opinions that are not approved by the government.
If you don’t know who Catherine Schaible is, then please click on her picture below, and take your pick of the various news stories and blog posts in the search results.
The executive summary is that Ms Schaible’s son died aged two, and she was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. (Allegedly, her son died because Ms Schaible hadn’t called a doctor when her son fell ill.) She was sentenced to ten years probation. Recently, another of her five children, who was only eight months old, hardly what you’d call a “person” yet, also fell ill and died. Again, she hadn’t called the doctor. Again, she found herself in trouble with the law, in the fascist, theocratic state Pennsylvania.
A lot of bigoted fanatics have been saying unkind things about Ms Schaible online and in the media. I have been posting comments like the following on some of the websites that contain such criticism of her, criticism that is often very strongly worded, for example even calling this innocent woman a “murderer”, would you believe?
If you don’t want to kill YOUR baby by neglect, then don’t kill your baby by neglect. Simple.
It is nobody’s business but Catherine Schaible’s what she did with her OWN BABY. It is was her RIGHT, as a woman with inalienable reproductive rights, to CHOOSE whether or not to call the doctor when her baby was taken ill. All you fanatical zealots who want to force your beliefs in medical science down the throats of non-believers like Ms Schaible, need to learn to keep your noses out of other people’s bedrooms and family business.