I’ve often pointed out that the “diversity is our greatest strength” meme, has been heavily pushed, even though not a single shred of evidence has ever been provided to back it up. However, it looks as if they’ve finally found the evidence that they’ve needed at last. Following France’s recent victory in the World Cup, the treacherous career politicians, and the tightly controlled mainstream media are all rallying behind the story as “proof”, that diversity really is a strength. Lets just take a look at a sample of some recent headlines on the topic.
Wow, when you look at that, it seems pretty unanimous. How could anyone possibly doubt it, when all these different media sources, all independently came to the same conclusion? The evidence must be overwhelming. If I didn’t know better, and I was some kind of crazy, tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist, I would almost suspect that the media is basically a monopoly colluding with one another, on the narratives that should be pushed.
“JUST A COINCIDENCE. GO BACK TO SLEEP.”
No, I would say that THIS, is what is actually extremely dangerous to our democracy.
So yeah, according to the media and the political establishment, diversity is a wonderful thing, because a “diverse” team won a tournament that involves kicking a ball into a net. This is apparently the most important thing ever.
So lets take a look at what has been happening in “diverse” France, in the aftermath of their world cup victory.
Isn’t it funny, how the media is cherry picking which stories to focus their attention on, in regards to the diversity narrative? They play up the benefits of diversity in regards to the World Cup victory, a great honour for any country of course, but not something that is essential to the wellbeing of France or the French people. But in regards to the riots, violence, property damage etc., all of which are largely a consequence of France’s immigration policies, they are completely silent. No sane person thinks that the benefits of winning the World Cup, compensate for the untold damage that the country has undergone in the last few decades. Does the World Cup victory compensate for the multiple terror attacks? Does it compensate for all the burned our cars and smashed windows? Does it compensate for all the black/Arab on white violence that has happened in the country? Does it compensate for the collapsing social cohesion in the country?
Of course it doesn’t, but the media and career politicians are never going to ask any of these questions, because they don’t give a damn about any of this. They have a mission to enforce a multicultural dystopian hellhole on the people of Europe, and they will cynically exploit any piece of propaganda that can help promote it, while downplaying any information, that might hinder it.
Enjoy your World Cup victory French people. If things keep going the way that they’re going, it could very well be one of the last things that you have any reason to feel proud about.
For a long time, I’ve tried my best to understand and make sense of the transgender issue, but even after all this time, I’m still no closer to doing so. It’s not that I don’t feel any sense of sympathy or compassion for what these people are going through. It’s just that after all this time, I’ve yet to see any compelling scientific evidence that a quote, unquote “sex change” actually does meet the criteria for turning people into the opposite sex. As far as I can see, all it does is take vulnerable people with severe mental health problems, irreparably mutilate their bodies, and turn them into a poor imitation of what they aspire to be.
Yet despite these very real reasons that make many people, myself included, feel skeptical, the issue only seems to be getting more attention and becoming a much bigger deal, with absolutely no attempt being made to address our skepticisms . I think really since around the time that Bruce Jenner transitioned, the issue has been heavily pushed by the media and the political establishment as the next big “civil rights frontier” to overcome. We’re led to believe that the reason why we’re hearing so much more about it today is because of “greater awareness”, “greater understanding”, and that more transpeople are “finding the courage” to come forward because of this.
I personally don’t buy it myself. I am not a scientist, so I don’t have the empirical evidence to back up what I’m about to say, but this is my own personal belief, based on observation and contemplation. I personally believe that there are two different kinds of transgender people, similar in a way to how there are two different types of diabetes. Type A, are people who are born with their brain wired differently than what is typical for their biological sex. These people are naturally transgender, and make up that tiny minority who have always existed. There’s probably no way that these people will ever be able to come to terms with their biological sex, and while I don’t personally think that transitioning is a good idea in general, it’s probably the best solution for addressing their specific cases.
Type B on the other hand are a product of nurture rather than nature, and are I believe, the vast majority of cases, particularly the cases that have come in the past few years. The average human brain is not fully developed until around the age of 25 and even then, neuroplasticity, is a thing. The human brain can rewire itself based on external stimuli. Therefore, is it really that hard to consider the possibility that when the media is heavily pushing something, and SJW parents and teachers are encouraging it, that this can have an effect on how children think, and this could be what actually accounts for the massive rise in transgender kids the last few years?
What a strange coincidence here. The parent is trans, and the child is too. Clearly the child came to this decision zirself, and not because of the prompting of the parent.
So if my theory is correct, and the majority of the recent transgender cases fall into the Type B category, then would it not be logical to try and prevent these kids from dealing with the mental health issues in the first place, and potentially have to undergo the highly damaging surgery, by not glamourising it so much, and by not drawing so much attention to it? If it wasn’t being pushed so heavily, there would be much less cases of the Type B, and therefore much less children having to suffer the associated problems of struggling with their gender identity. By all means, have facilities in place to try and identify and help those who fall into the Type A category, but as things stand, the media and activists conflate both the majority Type B and the minority Type A into one category, and in my opinion, this is completely wrong.
Anyway, that was a pretty long introduction to what is in fact, a very brief article that I wished to share.
A review of Ireland’s gender recognition laws is to be brought before the Cabinet this morning.
It reportedly recommends making it easier for children to change their gender.
Commissioned by Social Protection Minister Regina Doherty, it is understood the report recommends letting children officially change their gender without going to court.
Regina Doherty, who is a high ranking member of Ireland’s Fine Gael party.
Never forget, that Fine Gael are supposed to be Ireland’s “right wing conservative party”. They brought Ireland the Gay Marriage referendum. They brought Ireland the Abortion referendum. They’ve talked about making free (ie., tax-payer funded) contraception readily available. Our current Taoiseach is best buds with that snivelling worm, Justin Trudeau. And now, we’re getting this rhetoric from them.
But yeah people are still delusional enough to think that they’re totally a right wing conservative party, because the Overton window has moved so far to the left, that full on Communists are now mainstream, and centrist parties like Fine Gael, seem far right in comparison.
Children under 16 would be allowed to register the change on documents as long as they have parental consent.
Parental consent? Oh dear that’s such an outdated attitude to have. Why should parents have any say in any life changing decisions that their children wish to make? I think maybe Leo should take some advice from how things are done in the country of his good buddy Trudeau.
It would take the decision out of the courts unless there is a situation where one parent does not consent to the change or if there are mental health concerns.
I’m sure we can guess which parent the court will side with in such a scenario.
There have been calls for the minister to publish the report findings, which will likely be done after it is noted by Cabinet this morning.
I look forward to seeing the report. Actually to be honest, I really don’t care.
I can’t see this situation ending well at all. I can see many vulnerable kids with mental health problems, being encouraged to do something that is not in their best interests at all. And then when they end up realising that they’ve made a mistake, as so many do, and feel as if suicide istheir onlyoption, because they’ve destroyed their bodies and ruined their lives, do you think those who encouraged them, are going to accept any responsibility for it? Do you think they’ll honestly reflect on their own behaviour and think “maybe it was a bad idea to encourage this”?
A little over two years ago, I wrote a post, that dealt with an article demanding that Ireland bring in “Hate Crime” legislation. I gave my thoughts on the topic then, and I am forced to do so yet again today, because the topic is back on the agenda.
Ireland has the highest rate of hate crime against people of African descent and transgender people in the EU.
No statistics or details on how this information was obtained are provided in this article whatsoever. We aren’t told how many so called “hate crimes” have occurred, what exactly constitutes a “hate crime”, nor are we told how this data was even collected or analysed. Feel free to read the rest of the article and see for yourself if you don’t believe me.
A new report also criticises the fact that hate crime is not recognised in Irish law.
And why should it be? A crime is a crime, and a victim is a victim. Lets say I was out one night and I decided to attack an innocent man just for fun. I severely injure him, and am rightfully convicted of assault, and get a 5 year prison sentence. Now lets imagine another scenario, were I’m out one night and I decide to attack an innocent gay man, just because he’s gay. I inflict the exact same injuries on him as I inflicted on the person in the first scenario, but this time I’m given a 10 year prison sentence, because of the added “hate” element to the crime. What is the actual justification for this? My crime is just as brutal in both cases, and my victim suffers just as much, so why should the sentence be any different?
South Park pointed out the stupidity of this concept years ago.
The Irish Council for Civil Liberties is calling for the urgent introduction of regulations in this area.
Another parasitic group that has to justify its own worthless existence. I wonder where they get their funding from.
For those who aren’t aware, the Open Society Foundation, is an organisation founded and run by the evil Demon, George Soros (whose subversive and destructive activities I’ve covered here.)
I’d also suggest watching this BPS video on Soros, if you haven’t already.
“This is an Irish report but it’s part of a wider European project which analyses how hate crime is reported and recorded across Europe,” said the council’s executive director, Liam Herrick.
Of course it’s European wide. All European countries need to desperately clamp down on all dissent against their genocidal policies against their native populations. People are starting to wake up to what is going on, and fight back. Their only response is not to listen to our grievances and work with us to resolve things, but to become ever more tyrannical and oppressive. They’re trying to sell this hate crime nonsense as a positive thing to protect vulnerable minorities, but that’s not what it’s about at all. It’s about treating the majorities as second class citizens and punishing us, if we dare to stand up for ourselves.
“What we find in the Irish study is that hate crime, which is not defined in Irish law, is not recorded or reported in a systematic fashion.
Again, I ask this question. “Why should it be?”
Minister for Justice, Charlie Flanagan welcomed the report.
Of course he did. Politicians love any excuse to increase the power and reach of the state.
“Hate motivation for crime results in vulnerable groups and individuals being targeted simply for who they are.
So does that mean you’ll be cracking down hard on anyone who has a problem with white people and commits crimes against them, specifically because they’re white?
Yeah don’t bother answering that, because I already know what your answer will be.
That is not acceptable to me or the Government, and I know that it is not acceptable to the Irish people.
You speak for yourself you fucking prick. I’m an Irish person, and you don’t speak for me. I find it perfectly acceptable that we treat victims of crimes equally, rather than giving special treatment to some and not to others.
“This report on hate crime is a hugely important piece of research,
Saying something is important, doesn’t make it important. Also as I mentioned before, this “important” report, is not provided in the article at all. We just have to trust in it, sight unseen.
and makes a series of recommendations on how our criminal justice system can do better in combatting hatred.
Yes a fantastic idea. Instead of combatting actual tangible crimes such as murders, rapes, vicious assaults etc., lets put resources into fighting the universally held emotion of “hatred” instead. What a fantastic idea to focus our attentions on.
“I am making arrangements for this report and its recommendations to be urgently examined by my Department, in consultation with all of the relevant agencies, including of course the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, with the aim of bringing forward proposals to address the findings of the report.”
And I can guarantee that what they will implement on the basis of the report, will be strict laws that give a harsher punishment to those who point out certain politically incorrect truths about the sources of certain crimes, rather than those who do the crimes themselves?
Don’t believe me? Just look at the likes of the UK, Sweden, or Germany, to see what is coming to Ireland, if this happens.
Following recent events such as a man being charged with a hate crime for teaching his pug Roman salutes, a convicted paedophile getting his sentence delayed to go on holiday, and the arrest of Tommy Robinson, simply for reporting on a court case involving Muslim child rape gangs, I made the suggestion that the United Kingdom (now commonly known as “Cuck Island“), was a contender to Sweden’s throne for the most shameful, laughing stock in all of Europe. Well after what I have just learned today, I have to take it back. There is still some will to live left in the Brits, and it looks as if they have finally reached the limits of their patience.
If you’re wondering what I’m referring to, then please watch the following videos.
And my favourite video of all…
And these are all just a small sample of what’s happening. I’m not even counting the videos that show what is happening inside prisons (it’s basically just more of the same).
Look ideally, I would like it if all European countries existed under a system of law and order, were suspected criminals were properly investigated by the authorities, given a fair trial if enough evidence was found to justify trying them, and if found guilty, given an appropriate sentence, depending on the severity of their crimes.
But the UK has failed miserably in that regard. Or rather, I don’t know if you can really refer to it as a “failure”, when it was done that way on purpose, but I’m sure you know what I mean. For the past four decades or so in the UK, there has been an epidemic of young white English girls being groomed, raped, and tortured by men of a primarily Muslim background, with the authorities not only failing to do anything about it, but actively helping to conceal it from the general public. Instead, they’ve been focusing their time and effort on punishing those who speak the truth about what has been happening. This isn’t simple incompetence. This is a massive betrayal of the people they are sworn to protect and serve.
So with the proper channels failing to protect these children, is it really that hard to understand why the ordinary, working class, white Brits, are feeling as if they have no other choice, but to take justice into their own hands? If the police and justice system won’t protect them, then they’ll protect themselves. If the police and justice system won’t punish these rape gangs, then they’ll punish them themselves. You might not agree with their methods, but they’ve been pushed into this situation against their will, and they obviously feel like this is the only option left to them. And personally, I really can’t blame them one bit.
While it is sad to see that things have gotten this far, it is promising to know, that people haven’t given up the will to fight back entirely. While I do unfortunately think that we’re long past the point of finding a peaceful solution to the problems facing Europe, I at least take solace knowing that when shit does inevitably hit the fan, that people won’t just lay down and die. They will resist afterall. And as long as people are willing to resist, there’s still hope.
Yesterday, I made a post giving my thoughts on the stupidity surrounding the latest Trump scandal, namely, children of illegal immigrants being separated from their parents by border patrol agents, and put in “Concentration camps”. Today I came across a quick comic that illustrates the stupidity of the prevailing narrative quite well.
Is the sheer stupidity of the manufactured outrage clear now?
There just doesn’t seem to be any escape from the idiotic and infuriating whining and virtue signalling on social media and in the mainstream media, about how much of a bad man Trump is. It’s just completely ridiculous at this point. Every story seems to follow the same path.
Trump says or does something.
Fake news mainstream media acts as if it as the worst thing ever.
Idiots on social media buy into fake news story and pretend to be offended over it.
Rational people try to debate with idiots by appealing to reason.
Idiots choose to use emotion rather than reason.
Idiots demand that we throw out common sense in favour of basing official policy around their own subjective emotions.
Truth comes out that debunks fake news narrative.
Idiots ignore truth and continue to believe the original lies.
Trump says or does something new.
Fake news mainstream media acts as if THIS is the worst thing ever and quietly moves on from previous “scandal”.
Cycle repeats ad infinitum.
It’s all just so tiring at this point. Look I’m not saying that there aren’t any legitimate reasons to criticise Trump at all. I’ve done so myself in the past, and I will continue to do so, whenever I feel he’s deserving of it. But in regards to the current scandal that the horde of TDS sufferers are outraged over, namely his alleged “concentration camps” for migrant children, I think he has done nothing wrong at all.
The reality is that Trump’s “concentration camps” are anything but, as the following two videos make quite clear.
Trump’s voters voted for him for many reasons, but the biggest reason of all was because of his pledge to deal with illegal immigration, primarily coming from the southern border. He has a mandate to deal with the issue, and the way I can see it, there are only four possible options.
He can do nothing and effectively give up on having a border at all.
He can build a border wall that stops people from illegally entering in the first place.
He can have agents capture and deport illegal immigrants on the spot.
He can capture and detain immigrants until they’ve had a chance to have their cases heard by a judge. Then deport them afterwards
Option one is the very option he was elected NOT to do. The American people are sick and tired of the consistent failure to defend the borders, and they will not accept this at all.
Option two is the preferred option, and is the one he was voted in to implement. However, his enemies in congress are doing everything in their power to prevent this from happening.
Option three would be a great temporary measure to implement before building the wall, but he’s prevented from doing this, thanks to the actions of a corrupt judiciary that demands “due process” for every captured illegal immigrant. Despite not being citizens, and not being subject to the same constitutional protections as citizens, there is still an expectation that they waste time and money on court cases, before inevitably deporting them.
This means that the only option left is option four, which is the option that Trump is going with. Illegal immigrants have committed a crime by crossing the border illegally, and like all criminals, they are arrested, sent to jail, and given a chance in court to defend themselves. However, kids can’t go to jail with them, because jail is for adults, which inevitably means that kids and adults have to be separated, with the kids taken into state care instead. This is what all the outrage is over. Kids being taken into state care, while their illegal immigrant parents are in jail for committing a crime. But where is this same outrage when other criminals are arrested and separated from their children? Why is it an issue when illegal immigrants are arrested for the crime of illegal border crossing and separated from their kids, but there is no similar outrage in every other circumstance were a person is arrested and separated from their own children?
It’s just emotional blackmail. There’s no attempt at reason. No attempt at nuance. It’s just complete and utter insanity at this point. They don’t offer any reasonable solution to deal with the flow of illegal immigration. They just lash out at every single attempt to solve it.
“Can I build a border wall?”
“No, we won’t give you the funding.”
“Ok, can I have our agents patrol, capture and deport them straight away?”
“No, you have to give them a chance to defend themselves in court before deporting them.”
“Ok, I’ll do that then.”
“No you can’t do that. Many of them have children, and kids can’t be held in jail while their parents are waiting for their court appearance.”
“Ok that’s fine, we’ll build facilities to care for the children. They’ll have nice beds. They’ll have good food and healthcare. We’ll even provide education and leisure activities for them. They’ll be well looked after, while they’re waiting for their parents.”
“No you can’t do that. You can’t separate children from their parents.”
“Ok, so I can’t build a wall to keep them out. I can’t deport them as soon as they’re caught, because they have to appear in court first. I can’t keep the kids in jail with the parents while the parents are waiting for their court appearance, and I can’t take the kids into state care while the parents are in jail, because I can’t separate them. So what can I do instead?”
But we know exactly what he can do. The only option they’ll ever accept. Do nothing. Stop enforcing the border. Stop rounding up illegal immigrants entirely. Stop sending people back. Just abolish the border entirely and let everyone in, with no regard for the longterm consequences of doing so.
That’s literally all they will accept. And that’s the one thing he was elected not to do.
If you’ve read my two most recent posts on this blog, you’ll probably have noticed that I’m feeling very blackpilled in regards to the future of Ireland. Thank God I’ve always got Sweden to compare us to and remind myself that things really could be a whole lot worse.
A shooting at an internet cafe in the southern Swedish city of Malmo has claimed the lives of three men.
Wow BBC, what’s with the heteronormative language being used here? This is Sweden we’re talking about. How can you just assume the gender of the victims like that? Maybe they all identified as women, or perhaps as non-binary. I can’t believe in *current year* there is still such outdated language being used, especially in reference to an incident that took place in a progressive Utopia like Sweden.
Several others were wounded in the centre of the city late on Monday, when at least one attacker opened fire as the victims left the cafe.
“At least one”
So there may be another one still out there? Oh who am I kidding, this is Sweden. There’s probably a few thousand more out there still.
Police said there was no indication of terrorism.
Funny isn’t it how they can dismiss terrorism as the cause straight away, before the investigation has even begun?
Malmo has gained a reputation for violent crime.
Hmm I wonder why that is.
Yeah, I just can’t figure out why that could be.
Monday night’s attack – which occurred near a police station – is being linked to gangs and organised crime.
Witnesses reported hearing about 15 shots fired by an automatic weapon. The gunman is believed to have fled the scene by car.
When I first started this blog back in late 2014, I did so due to concerns that I had about the future of my country. I looked at the stories that were coming in from all across Europe. Stories about terrorist attacks. Stories about an increase in sexual assaults and rapes. Stories about an increasing number of homicides. And worst of all, stories about an apathetic and indifferent populace that was not only refusing to resist what was happening to their countries, but was in fact actively supporting the policies that were leading to these problems in the first place.
At the time, Ireland was relatively sheltered from what was happening. Being an Island on the periphery of Europe, and being relatively backward in comparison to our European neighbours, we were quite far behind the other countries on the path to national suicide. At the time when I started the blog, I was still somewhat optimistic that we could avoid the same fate that so many other countries were experiencing. However, following the Dundalk incident in January, the Kildare incident, that I wrote about in my last post, and today’s story, I have come to the conclusion that no, we cannot avoid the same fate as other European countries.
Concerns have been raised over a 68% rise in the number of reported sexual assaults in Dublin South Central over the last 12 months.
An increase of that level, in that short of a time is not normal at all. This is absolutely dreadful.
Earlier this week, a meeting of the Local Policing Forum heard that the number of sexual assaults in the area rose to 19 for the first six months of the year, compared with 13 over the same period in 2017.
19 might not seem like all that much, and in comparison to certain other countries *cough* “Sweden” *cough*, it certainly isn’t, but that’s not the point. Even one, is too many as far as I’m concerned.
And one representative from the area has called for tougher laws to tackle those convicted of the crime.
That would definitely be an improvement, yes.
Fianna Fail Senator Catherine Ardagh believes that while a greater awareness of sexual crimes may be leading more people to come forward, any increase in the figure was “deeply worrying.”
Yes it is deeply worrying. And no, I don’t buy into that “greater awareness” excuse at all. They used the same excuse to explain Germany and Sweden, and we all know what crap that was.
She said: “Those living in the South Inner City and the surrounding communities should feel safe walking home and going about their daily lives without the fear of any assault.
Yes they should. But that’s just not going to happen, if the present course of action continues. We’ve seen what has happened in Sweden. We’ve seen what has happened In Germany. In France. In Britain. In many other European countries. And we’re making the exact same mistakes that they have. There’s no way we can do what they’re doing, and expect to keep our people safe. The two things are mutually exclusive.
“As policy makers we need to be vigilant and ensure that all that can be done to detect and prevent such attacks is being done.
Might I suggest closing the borders to the kind of people who would do this…?
Of course not, because for some reason, the safety and wellbeing of our own people, is less important than not offending people we have no moral or ethical obligation to.
“Increasing sentences is one element of the public response that needs to be further examined.”
Finding ways to prevent it from happening in the first place, would be an even better thing to look at. But that won’t ever happen because of the conflict of interest there.
Senator Ardagh also said that her party has proposed an update and expanding of legislation to effectively deal with sexual offences, including stronger criminal penalties.
She added: “I intend on raising this matter in the Seanad and to seek clarity on the measures in place to deter criminals from carrying out sexual assault.”
Soft sentences are only a small part of the problem, and harsh sentences are not enough of a deterrent. If they were, nobody would be committing capital crimes in countries that have the death penalty. Yet they continue to do so anyway. A harsh sentence is only useful after the crime has been committed, as a way of making the victim feel as if justice has been done, and that their victimiser is being made to suffer for what they did to them. But harsh sentences don’t deal with the actual problem, which is the existence of the kind of people who are evil enough to do the things that they do, and their presence in our societies.
Yes, individuals from any demographic can be involved in these kinds of crimes. And yes, whatever their demographic background, they’re all equally despicable. But there’s a big difference between members of the native demographic committing a crime and non-natives doing it. The natives are our responsibility to deal with. We can’t deport them, and we can’t block them from living among us. We can only deal with them after the fact. But the non-natives can’t claim the same luxury. The excuse of “natives also commit sexual assaults and rapes” as a justification for importing more rapists, is an idiotic talking point.
And on top of that, when these non-native demographics are vastly overrepresented in these types of crimes, it only highlights the absurdity of the situation even further.
But whatever. I’ve been worrying about this scenario for the last few years, and now it is finally here. There’s nothing I can do about it. All I can do, is watch how it plays out, wait for people to wake up to the new reality and ask any Dublin women who are reading this, to take care of yourself, and try to be safe.
The past few years, I’ve written extensively about the gradual self destruction that has been taking place all over the Western world. Some of the countries that I’ve written about most frequently include France, The United Kingdom, Germany, and of course, Sweden. However it’s pretty much a universal problem so it would be inaccurate to suggest that the countries that I’ve spoken about most frequently, are the only ones in serious danger. The reality is that some countries are just further along the path to destruction than others are, but that doesn’t mean these other countries aren’t on the same path. My own country of Ireland has been relatively lucky for the most part, and hasn’t been suffering too much… at least not yet. However based on our current trajectory, it is inevitable that Ireland will eventually end up going the same way, and it’s stories like today’s that are a sign of things to come. This is only the beginning. It will get a whole lot worse.
Gardaí are appealing for witnesses after a young woman alleged she was attacked by three men and raped by one of them while walking home.
Yes, I know that attacks on women can happen anywhere, but lets be honest with ourselves. How often do attacks with multiple perpetrators happen in Ireland? I would say it’s very rare. Most attacks would be done by individuals acting alone. I’m not saying it would never happen, but it would typically be the exception, rather than the rule. This kind of modus operandi with multiple men acting together against a single victim, is more up the ally of certain othergroups ofpeople.
The incident is alleged to have taken place on Millicent Road, Clane, Co Kildare, between 1am and 1.30am yesterday. The woman, who is Irish, was returning from a night out socialising at the time.
How dare she be out in public alone at night, without a male relative to escort her? Was she even wearing her burka at the time? Probably not. And “socialising”. Is that just code word for “consuming alcohol”, which as we all know, is haram? Wow, clearly she has nobody to blame but herself, for not adhering to the proper behaviour that is expected of her.
It’s believed the three suspects are foreign nationals and it has been alleged one of the men raped the young woman.
I think it’s obvious who did this.
It’s understood the young woman then called into a house in a nearby estate and raised the alarm.
The young woman has spoken to gardaí and has said that she did not know the men prior to the attack. Gardaí in Naas are investigating and are asking anyone who may have noticed anything suspicious in Clane on Monday night or early yesterday morning to come forward.
I can guarantee you that based on precedents that we’ve seen take place in other countries, that these attacks will start to happen so often, that eventually the media won’t even report on the description of the attackers as being “foreign”. They wouldn’t want people noticing the pattern that is emerging. It will just be reported as yet another attack and the clueless masses will be scratching their heads and wondering why Ireland started getting more violent over time.
And then we’ll be just like the UK, France, Germany, and Sweden. Isn’t that wonderful?
I want you all to imagine a scenario. Lets say there was a gay man who owned a bakery. One day, a group of conservative Christians came in and demanded that he bake them a cake with a “Support traditional marriage” message, written on it in icing. The gay baker has no problem serving them because of their religious views, but he doesn’t feel comfortable baking a cake with that particular message because in doing so, he is being asked to participate in something that doesn’t match his own values.
He politely declines and suggests instead that the customers go to another bakery, and even recommends one that will have no problem fulfilling their request. Instead of taking their business elsewhere like normal adults, the Christians decide to sue the gay baker for discriminating against their religion, and destroy his livelihood. They do this because they specifically chose this baker knowing that he was gay, and knowing he wouldn’t be willing to make such a cake. It was never about the cake. It was about bullying the gay baker into doing something he wasn’t comfortable with, under threat of the loss of his livelihood. Does this sound morally justifiable to you? If your answer is no, then why is it morally acceptable when the reverse happens?
Well we’ve had plenty of cases of the reverse happen over the years. In fact, one of my very first posts on this blog was in relation to a similar situation that took place in Northern Ireland. However, today’s story is in relation to a case that occurred in America.
A baker was sued by a gay couple for refusing to bake a gay wedding cake, and after years in the legal system, the supreme court ruled in favour of the baker.
The US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a Christian baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, saying the decision was unlikely to have a sweeping legal impact.
The nation’s highest court said the baker’s religious rights were violated when a state Civil Rights Commission decided he had broken Colorado’s anti-discrimination law.
Like it or not, religious freedom is under the same legal protection as sexuality is. There was absolutely no need for this case to ever go as far as it did. It was obvious that they were just “butthurt” (and not in the way they like), that this man didn’t fawn all over them.
The refusal by baker Jack Phillips in 2012 to make a cake for David Mullins and Charlie Craig became a cultural flashpoint, seen as part of a conservative Christian backlash to the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing gay marriage.
It probably was, but it changes nothing. There was no need to sue over this. The free market would have sorted this problem out quite easily. If he wasn’t interested in the potentially lucrative money that could have come from baking gay wedding cakes, then some other baker would have taken the business instead. The gay couples still get their wedding cakes, the Christian bakers get to live in their little niche, and a business opportunity opens up for other bakers, who aren’t devout Christians. Everybody would have won.
But of course, it was never about this. The cake wasn’t what they wanted. Forcing the baker to do what they wanted was the real motivation. If we look at the history of the gay rights movement, it has followed a particular path. In more homophobic times, all they wanted was tolerance. They just wanted to be left to live their lives in peace, free from persecution, and most reasonable people thought this was fair enough, and tolerance was extended.
After tolerance, came the desire to be accepted. They didn’t just want to be tolerated. They wanted to be accepted as equal members of society who didn’t have to hide away from the rest of us, and once again, most reasonable people had no problem with this. What’s the harm in accepting them as equals? If things had stopped right here most people, both gay and straight would have been perfectly happy, because fairness had finally been achieved.
But there were a few who wanted more than this. It wasn’t enough for these ones to simply be equal. They wanted to be pandered to, treated as special beings, and to have the rest of society participate in their lifestyle with them. And if the rest of society refused to participate in their lifestyle with them, they would use the power of the state to force them to do so.
President Donald Trump’s administration intervened in support of the baker.
But the Supreme Court ruling did not address broader questions of religious exemptions from anti-discrimination laws or whether baking a cake is protected as free speech under the U.S. Constitution, experts said.
So we’ll be seeing more of these cases in the future then it seems. It isn’t over yet.
“The broad rule that the bakery was looking for here was that it had a license to discriminate,” said James Essex, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
“They most emphatically did not get that ruling from this court today.”
If he was still willing to sell them things despite knowing they were gay, then how exactly was he looking to discriminate? He just wasn’t willing to bake a cake for a specific event that his religious views made him uncomfortable with. Would you say the same thing to a Muslim baker who refused to do the same thing?
The decision made it clear that even if the court ultimately rules in a future case that bakers or other businesses that sell creative products such as florists and wedding photographers can avoid punishment under anti-discrimination laws, most businesses open to the public would have no such defense.
Because there is a difference between refusing to serve someone because of their sexuality, and refusing to use your labour to participate in something that you have religious objections to. The baker didn’t refuse to serve them because they were gay, so this comparison is meaningless.
Nonetheless, the couple, Mullins and Craig, said they were disappointed.
“No one should have to face the shame, embarrassment and humiliation of being told ‘we don’t serve your kind here’ that we faced,” they said on an ACLU conference call with reporters.
HE WAS WILLING TO SERVE “YOUR KIND”, YOU FUCKING WHINER!!!!
He just wasn’t willing to participate in an an event that contradicted his religious views. You were perfectly free to buy a product from the store. He just wasn’t willing to bake a specific cake for you. You want to talk about the mental harm you experienced? What about the mental harm the baker experienced by being caught between his desire not to “sin” in the eyes of his God, and his desire to make a living, when you could have just had the maturity to take your business elsewhere?
Annise Parker, head of the LGBTQ Victory Institute, expressed concern it could “open the floodgates” to discrimination.
“Homophobic forces will purposefully over-interpret the ruling and challenge existing non-discrimination laws by refusing service to LGBTQ people … denying them dinner at a restaurant, lodging at a hotel, or renting an apartment,” Parker said in a statement.
Funny isn’t it how the “slippery slope” suddenly isn’t a logical fallacy anymore?
The Human Rights Coalition echoed the view that the ruling “did not change our nation’s fundamental civil rights laws.”
“Regardless of today’s decision, the fact remains that LGBTQ people face alarming levels of discrimination all across the country,” the civil rights group said.
There’s few countries on the planet right now, were “LGBTQ” people face less discrimination, than in the United States. In a country were this is acceptable (warning, NSFW), you can hardly claim to be discriminated against. This reaction is completely hysterical.
Essex added that the issue is “not about cakes.”
Which as I’ve stated above, I agree with.
“It is about access to health care.
It’s about access to education.
It’s about employment.
It’s about people being fired from jobs because their employer has a religious objection to who they are,” he said. The ACLU represented the gay couple.
People being fired from their jobs because their employer has a religious objection to who they are? What about people like this baker potentially being forced out of his job, because you have an objection to his religious views?
“There is an intentional campaign out there of people who are opposed to LGBT rights but also to equality more broadly,” he said. “I’m sure they are out there saying this is a broad victory.”
Colorado Christian University President Donald Sweeting called it “an enormous milestone victory” for “religious freedom and freedom of conscience.”
“We are grateful that the court upheld these today,” he said in a statement.
They’re so used to getting their own way in everything that they do, that they have zero ability to self-reflect, and assume that the only people who could possibly be glad about this result are homophobes, who don’t want them to have any rights. They are incapable of understanding how obnoxious they themselves have become, and to reconsider their own behaviour.
And for that reason, you can be sure that this issue is not going to die anytime soon.