How much of an idiot can you be? And reality.

21/09/2023 - Difference of opinion about the limits of democracy

A gay guy in the article says: "I’m a gay man, but I could accept it if a country voted to ban gays. I would never vote for that myself, ... But I think people should be able to make their own rules about how they want to live in their society. People should be given the keys to their own destiny."

How stupid such a reasoning that a majority should be able to oppress a large section of their society. Of course, this also means that other societies may decide not to deal with such societies. 

Instead, people need to be educated about human rights, so they understand the difference between diversity among people versus people who oppose differences. Then people will understand the difference between people who love each other by their own free will versus people who oppose that people love the people they love. Worst are those who preach against being yourself, and then abuse, such as in the Roman Catholic Church whereby priests abused children, including boys, and enjoyed protection to avoid a scandal, while those same priests, and certainly under "Saint" Pope John Paul II, dehumanised LGBTQ people, and this indoctrination is felt up to today as a certain section of society still considers LGBTQ people are inferior.

An example

The Taliban in Afghanistan decides that LGBTQ+ can't exist and that women should be banned from the streets so mothers can't even go with their children to parks. These are serious violations of human rights that are hard, if at all, defensible. I have written extensively before about the evils of the Taliban that include the hiding of the mastermind of terrorist attacks against the USA, both in Africa and America.

Therefore, other societies have the right to stop any trade with Afghanistan when they disagree with the policies of the Taliban to abuse human rights at a mass scale (at least half the population as they are women), even when this means poverty and death by starvation of Afghans. Although this sounds extremely cruel as it is, otherwise Afghan men will claim most food for themselves so they can continue to violate women rights. People should accept the consequences of their choices, and can stop the violation of human and children rights. But even without sanctions by other societies, there are consequences for Afghanistan that include a shortage of police officers, judges, and certainly doctors, nurses and teachers as under Western occupation under the leadership of the USA women were allowed to work, and too many Afghan men don't want to study as that is something for sissies. When traditions are doom for countries. Compare with the ancient story of Moses  who defended the right of the first shepherds who were women to let their animals drink while shepherds who arrived later had to wait, even when they were men. There must have been a reason why Moses and not other men was chosen. 

Of course, when we impose harsh policies, we should also help those who escape prosecution in their country, while refuse those who escape poverty but agree with human right violations. When those people arrive, we need to educate them about human rights for everyone that includes women but also LGBTQ people; when they do not agree we can refuse them the right to live in advanced societies. 

26/09/2023 - Suella Braverman opposes UN refugee convention

What a coincidence, only days after the publication of above article, UK's Home Office Suella Braverman speaks out against LGBTQ+ migrants who she accuses of using the UN refugee convention to be able to enter countries and request migrant status, even when later it seems they are not LGBTQ. It is correct that not all situations justify this migrant status when discrimination is not about imprisonment and even dead penalties (as is the case in some countries) because in those cases LGBTQ can try to make their own society more open-minded, just as happened in the West. 

However, she uses this example to justify her demand to change the UN human rights declaration. It shows, again, that she dislikes migrants, and tries every subject possible to tighten the rules. For her, it seems LGBTQ+ are a group of people who are not worth our help. Indeed, fake LGBTQ+ people who uses this to enter countries as mentioned in the article shouldn't be confused with real LGBTQ+ people whose lives are in real danger in their own countries. But, as the gay man at the start says: he wouldn't mind if LGBTQ+ people are not welcome in their own country, while his own government may be more anti LGBTQ+ than he hopes for. This argument seems to be used by people who want to make refugee status harder for all migrants. 

I wonder, as a daughter of migrants, why does she hate migrants with such an intensity? Does she really want to show she is a real Brit, and therefore don't want more migrants? She lives in the UK because it was a human society; and one that needed migrants.

03/10/2023 - Suella Braverman speeches at Tory conference

A really dangerous speech by Mrs Braverman. The speech is not only against migrants, but also against what she claims is "the privileged woke minority, with their luxury beliefs" while the Tories stand with "hardworking commonsense majority". She should be happy that people lived who welcomed her parents so their daughter could become an important politician, instead that people dehumanised them. And again she also spoke out against trans people whereby a gay Tory London Assembly member was removed from the conference as he made it clear he didn't agree with her. 

While she is right that certain from the elite want migrants for cheap labour, the woke movement is just the opposite and wants fair pay for everyone, versus the people with whom she sides who are often those who say that employees are paid too much, and as a result they can't pay more to themselves. 

Concerning migration, indeed, we can expect more migrants. Why? Because of climate change. But also because we need to invest more in good and well-paid jobs in Africa and elsewhere so people don't need to come. That is also woke, something a large part of the economic elite will not like to hear. 

But she is right to defend the rights of victims of sex offenders.

The world evolves towards inclusion

In the end, Suella Braverman may be right when she says that "People with luxury beliefs will flock to Labour at the next election...". Indeed, a study finds that Britain is much more liberal-minded than it was 40 years ago. Today people have been at LGBTQ weddings, and know LGBTQ people on television, films and music, teachers,..., and people notice that openly LGBTQ people are not threatening. People have also better views concerning single parenting, abortion, the role of women in the home and society.  Similar in the rest of Europe, and increasingly worldwide. That is woke whereby people respect other people, and no longer want to hurt them. Temporarily there may be a reversal as a subsection of society tries to convince us that woke is wrong. But in the end few people want a society where people can't be themselves, whether they are gay, lesbian, bi, straight, whoever they are, as people don't want that others dictate how they should live. Of course, exceptions exist such as certain professions such as police, fire officers and army, doctors and nurses need uniforms, while public figures need to dress well to show they have respect for others.