ON this week's 1984 theme comes the report that there's a conference advocating techniques for men and women to be cured of their homosexuality. It's being organised by the Anglican Mainstream Organisation, a group which seeks to preserve the conservative tenets of Christianity.
Apparently, a recent study found that a sixth of Britain’s registered therapists and psychiatrists have been asked to cure homosexual patients, and the main speaker at the conference will be Joseph Nicolosi, of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.
Mr
Nicolosi advocates and practices reparative therapy, which rehabilitates patients with unwanted homosexual feelings in order to return them to mainstream society. He believes he can "cure" homosexuality, and claims that being gay is the result of a problem in childhood and can be treated. He has a 66% success rate.
The Orwell element of the story is that is that the Church of England has condemned the conference saying that it will "distress" gay people and may cause offence. How could offering a cure for those who seek help with an illness, cause any distress? The only distress will be to those who seek to promote homosexuality as a political tool to undermine the family values in society.
Nick Griffin was brilliant on The Report on Radio 4 last night. For the BBC, it was a very fair programme and will do us no harm whatsoever.
Last night's election results were nothing to shout about but our effort in Erewash was a solid performance. The local Labour Party activists here deserve a mention for achieving an incredible result and their efforts no doubt trimmed a few percentage points off our vote. Also, apparently we missed the postal vote campaign which will have accounted for another couple of percentage points lost, so all-in-all it's a result we can live with.
It's a truncated blog this morning as I'm under the cosh with Freedom.
Friday, 24 April 2009
When a cure can cause distress
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Martin,
I appreciate you have a lot of other things on, but for those of us who are trying to put together a picture of the progress of English self-awareness it is as interesting to factor in the poor results as the spectacular ones.
Speaking for myself, I would welcome an ongoing, informed, holistic commentary on the process. I want to see what effect variables like constituency make-up, previous campaign experience, mainstream party strength, candidate quality, and so on actually have. I would like to learn about the laws which govern the process, so to speak. I want to be able to assess the macro-effects of deepening economic crisis, growing state totalitarianism, and, most of all, white dispossession at the micro level.
Ultimately, what "we the people" want to know is whether there is a real possibility in Britain of driving an ethno-nationalist party all the way to power. We don't simply want to be unthinking consumers of nationalist propaganda.
Election results can be extremely unpredictable things to say the least! Pendlebury, Salford by-election this year saw our vote remain unchanged (13%) from the May elections of 2008 - when, I think, little of the ward,if any, had been leafletted - despite three leaflets being put out second time around and no smear leaflets. Then again, about six weeks later, Moston , Manchester - with better quality lealflets than in Pendlebury but with a full UAF leafletting of the ward and both Labour and Li-Dem leaflets attacking us - we came from nowhere to win second place and over 23%.
A few tactical suggestions as to how we might progress in elections.
1. Campaign mainly against whichever Party is holding the seat/ward, eg; in Henley we should have gone for the Tories rather than campaigning against Labour as this is where the main body of votes lay and disgruntled Tory voters might have been comfortable with switching to us as Labour didn't stand a chance. In Labour areas leaflets should be geared towards unsettling their support by attacking their record. In marginals attack them both.
2. In local elelctions try to demonstrate that we have an awareness of local issues. Campaigning purely on national issues makes us seem irrelevant, oppotunistic and out of touch.
3. Election literature needs to have a short statement refuting the 'fascist' or 'nazi' smear ie; a statement of our commitment to free speech and multi-party democracy. Many sympathetic voters are holding back from voting for us because they have been fooled into believing we are totalitarians.
Post a Comment