Likely to Expose to Hatred or Contempt

No Likely About This

[ ED NOTE: Mbrandon8026 from Freedom Through Truth was kind enough to let me crosspost this article from his blog. You can read the original here.

A while back, I can remember, Christina Blizzard was rather incredulous at Barbara Hall’s response to the practice of honor killings in Ontario – namely, well, the OHRC just can’t quite manage to get around to that, because they’re busy with other things. One presumes, things like trying to prosecute mainstream magazines for writing articles on Islam. Sigh… ]

George Jonas wrote something that caught my eye here. Most of his article is actually having to defend his condemnation of Roman Polanski and his sexual molestation of a minor, because he relied on reporting only the official record of the disposition of the charge, rather than other less reliable sources of information, such as a possibly authentic, but not tested in court grand jury hearing testimony. But that is not what caught my eye. What was really attention grabbing for me was this part:

I did make a mistake but it wasn’t relying on the record. It was using the Polanski case as a jumping-off point to discuss what I called “seasonal laws” as opposed to “laws for all seasons” — that is, acts condemned universally, as opposed to acts condemned in certain times and places. The Polanski affair was the wrong platform from which to dive into this pool (or cesspool). The film director’s transgression had become a lightning rod for people’s pent-up fury at the baboon society that emerged from the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

The Pill, along with the “make love, not war” generation of the Vietnam years, propelled Western societies from their quiet quasi-Victorian 1950s lagoons to a virtual Sodom and Gomorrah within a decade. The solemn pillars of misdeeds buttressing society’s moral edifice either crumbled or metamorphosed into “choices” one by one:

  • Divorce “progressed” from a scandal that cost Nelson Rockefeller his political career in 1964 to a statistical commonplace (about 50% for first marriages in the U.S.);
  • Pre-marital sex changed from a taboo to standard practice for teenagers (including Polanski’s 13-year-old victim);
  • Adultery was reduced from a grave marital misconduct to an irrelevancy in no-fault divorce;
  • Fornication grew from biblical prohibition to fashionable spouse-swapping venues at Plato’s Retreat and, eventually, the Internet;
  • Abortion turned from a crime into a civil distinction (a medal for Dr. Morgentaler); and
  • Homosexuality from a love that dared not speak its name into one that couldn’t shut up about it.

That is a brief but highly useful summary of the destruction of our moral values in North America starting with The Pill. It is what Paul Paul VI prophesied in 1968 when he wrote Humanae Vitae, the encyclical that went so counter to the sexual revolution that was just heating up. Take Mr. Jonas’ brief summary of some of the events of the sexual revolution, and compare them to what the Pope prophesied would happen:

He first predicted a rise in marital infidelity and moral decline. Bingo on that one. Anyone want to disagree?

Second, he predicted lost respect for women. Our culture does not respect the gifts that women have as women, but values them more as sexual objects. Watch any TV last night?

Next, he predicted abuse of power. The power over reproduction is a heady power. With it you can rule nations. China has abused reproductive power significantly, and the abuses of family planning in third world countries, in the name of helping them are legendary.

Finally, he predicted that mankind would think he had unlimited dominion over his own body. We see sterilization, wide use of body disfigurement, test tube babies, and stem cell research requiring the fertilization of eggs, essentially killing pre-born infants, among other things.

That old man in Rome was so out of touch with society, eh! Not so much, as far as I can see. So, here in Canada, we have these so called Hate Speech laws administered by HRCs/HRTs that make it a no no to put forward stuff that is likely to expose people from one of the defined “do not touch” groups to hatred or contempt.

One of the effects of this sexual revolution that Mr. Jonas touched on has been the proliferation of pornography in our society. In pornography, particularly now, anything goes, at least pretty much anything that one or more men can do to one or more women, and some even use animals. Also, anything men can do to each other, or women can do to each other, with or without members of the opposite sex participating is game. You can Google any one of your favourite sexual terms, and see a plethora of images, videos, and web sites devoted to displaying what tickles your fancy. That’s just the free stuff. I have no idea how gross it gets when you put money out for your titillation.

In our society today, how many men really respect women that they sleep with, and vice versa? The kids are getting into it too, and in schools they are being taught how to use condoms and how to put a reproductive organ into a garbage chute.

So, where do we look for hate speech complaints? We look at the sad sack Nazi wannabees, who don’t have the brains to come in out of the rain. Then, we look at Christians, like Steve Boissoin, and Fr. De Valk, and Bishop Henry who speak out the true teachings of Christianity about things like homosexuality, not in hatred or condemnation, but in love. Exposed to hatred and contempt? Are you kidding me, if they listen up, they will be exposed to love and compassion. And finally, we look at the folks who reproduce Muslim cartoons as a news item (Ezra Levant) or write a book quoting radical Muslims around the world about jihad (Mark Steyn).

But, who condemns the real haters in our society? I mean the people who bring you all the sexual filth your mind can absorb, the filth that debases women, and even children? A lot of men and women do not treat each other with love and respect in our society, because they have become sexual objects to each other. To put it bluntly, they hate each other and use each other for sexual gratification.

Well, who do you think was “likely to expose them to hatred or contempt?” Not likely to, but actually does it on a day in, day out, night in, night out basis. And who goes after them? Nobody, not Jennifer Lynch or Barb Hall or the others who have “Likely to expositis”, and look for discrimination at every askance look. Apparently, it is politically correct to allow pornography, that is likely to expose children to being sexually abused and used, and women to being raped or sexually abused by men who know them, to exist in our society. Since when do women and children not deserve protection from evil in our society?

I do not like Canada Human Rights Section 13, or Alberta Human Rights Section 3(1) and have been outspoken about it. But, if they are going to exist, they should be used for good, not for BS purposes as they have been.

While Barb Hall makes projects out of call outs on transit companies and so called discrimination in rental housing, who is looking after the sexual discrimination visited on children and women that pornography depicts and invites?

Bishop Lahey has viewed a bunch of child pornography probably, and it is wrong and he should be punished. What about the purveyors of all that filth? Who is going after them? The shmoe who reads or views that trash is being victimized, though basically willingly, and then victimizes those he should love.

What a crazy, mixed up world we live in.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: