|
Memorandum submitted by Dr James Waddell (CJ&I 12)
Re: Proposed amendment to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill by Stonewall I understand that on 16th October 2007, the committee will be petitioned by the homosexual lobby group Stonewall to introduce an offence of inciting hatred on the grounds of sexuality. I wish to express my total and complete opposition to this proposal for the following reasons: · The proposal is yet another full frontal assault on the liberty of Christians and other religious groups and normal heterosexual people, which are the majority, to express their opposition and revulsion to homosexual and other deviant sexual practices. Stonewall are again trying to make the person and the practice of homosexuality one - they are not, as a person can choose to practice heterosexual or homosexual behaviour. So the proposal is an attempt yet again to silence those who object to homosexual behaviour. · Homosexual behaviour has and never can deliver any public, social or cultural good. Homosexual people can of course make a valuable contribution to society with their talents just like anyone else, but their behaviour and practices pose a major health risk to their partners and to society as a whole. The widely reported culture amongst homosexuals encourages having hundreds of sexual partners and promoting the "gifting" from HIV Positive homosexuals to a person without the virus, increasing the public health risks and surely is a practice that should be abhorred and openly condemned. · As many people are discrete about their sexual practices, it is impossible to know if in a particular situation a view of opposition to homosexuality, could be perceived by an unidentified homosexual as hatred. This could happen in normal social conversations, debates in an educational context and when biblical teaching is being presented. · Stonewall are a very aggressive organisation and have been working hard on multiple fronts with strictures and policies to silence all opposition to homosexual and other non-heterosexual practices, particularly amongst religious groups, higher education, schools and public services. Why should a high risk sexual practice that the majority of people find revolting be given legal protection from opposition - the whole idea is absurd and defies common sense. At a time when family values and the traditional and proven morals of a safe and caring society are being undermined by lobby groups such as Stonewall, shouldn't the government be protecting us from them?
October 2007 |