SO, YOU DON’T WANT TO VIEW TWO MEN HAVING SEX IN PUBLIC?  TOUGH LUCK SEEMS TO BE THE MESSAGE.

 

1. ‘We are continuing to patrol this area and need to make clear that this sort of activity will not be tolerated.’

   I call bullshit. See below.

   “But Mr Cunningham, who is also a spokesman on homosexual issues for the Association of Chief Police Officers, argues that offenders should only be prosecuted as a last resort because of the potential impact on their lives of making their activities public.”

   They have already chosen, nay INSISTED, on “making their activities public”, that’s why a complaint was filed.

   Therefore, by your own words Mr. Cunningham, yes this sort of activity will too be tolerated. Therefore you are already exposed, by your own words, as a lying sack of shit.

   Please understand, I don’t have any problem with gay people. I’ve had more than one close friend who is gay. The only reason I don’t now is because I live in an area too redneck for a gay man who values his life to be open.
   For that matter, I don’t have a problem with public sex, as long as only those who don’t mind or will enjoy the show are at risk of coming across you.

   What I have a problem with is the idea that if you think laws should be obeyed we’ll enforce them on YOU, but will not enforce them on those who hold the laws in contempt. Once you go that route your best possible action is to abolish government entirely, as it cannot serve any useful purpose under such conditions.

   Posted by GrumpyOldFart       11/25/2008  at  08:59 AM  



2. Forget “Two men having sex in public.”

   If I see ANYONE doing anything of that nature with ANYONE or ANY PERSONS, I am going to use my broom to deadly effect.

   It is called “Public Decency”, asshats.

   If you don’t want to see two “Breeders” nude and getting it on, keep in mind that the rest of us probably don’t want to see YOUR bedroom antics taken outside of the bedroom.

   Posted by Turtler       11/25/2008  at  09:25 AM  



3. well said grumps BUT ....  there really was a time when folks just knew that behavior came in two colors. Right and Wrong.  There are things that belong in the privacy of a home or bedroom, but really. In public?  Nah.  That’s just exhibition.  Although I am aware of some folks I have read about, who do bizarre things in public places not to be seen, but to see if they can get away without being seen.

   I don’t think heterosexual woopie should be public either btw. It all comes down to decorum which is sadly lacking these days. And a feeling with regard to good manners and public decency. 

   Anyway .. like you I honestly have nothing personal against the homosexual community except when they rant in our face insisting that we all must accept whatever it is they do.
   Why can’t it be private?  Why are there parades to announce who they are.  Don’t they already know each other?

   And of course my other major gripe as always is their hijacking of a nice word.  Which wouldn’t be possible if so darn many went along with it. Good grief Grumps.  Even you’re using the ‘G’ word as they want it to be used.

   Posted by peiper       11/25/2008  at  01:17 PM  



4. This is a letter I wrote to the reporter James Tozer of the Daily Mail after reading the article of the 25th November 2008 and I am currently rewriting the childrens song, ‘If you go down to the woods today you’ll never believe your eyes---’ I’ll keep you posted!
   James
   What ever happened to decency in the UK??
   I read your article with belief and disgust.
   Where is the indignation? Page 25 is just another paper filler.
   I hope Marie Gragg and all her neighbours take action and stand up to the establishment which will surely try and suppress them, given the stance of the police ( or is it a stoop?)
   What about shaming and naming these people or is your paper yet another of those to be infiltrated by homosexuals?
   Let’s get the paparazzi out of the cupboard with their super duper zoom lens cameras clicking furiously, they seem to manage most things regarding ‘absolute intrusion’
   Of course, you must warn them that will be accused of perversion, voyeurism and infringing those ‘buggers’ rights.
   Lets get the community together to organise woodland walks with the dogs, ‘take the camera folks so as we can get some really good winter scenes and perhaps post them on the Internet!’
   Lets get some slogans out like, ‘For your public safety-pee together’-- and take the camera in case you meet any cottagers!
   ‘Of course you must warn them that you may be arrested for infringing those ‘bugger’s rights!!’
   And what about the Police???
   Mr Cunning hams it by saying, leave the poor buggers alone as disclosure will have an impact on their lives!
   They have made their activities public and for me and I’m sure countless thousands of decent people, They have given up any rights they have as part of the human race.
   
   From my school days, when we were taught a bit of , good old fashioned morals!
   Was it St.Matthew who said,’If the blind lead the blind, they fall in the ditch’
   Well! Mr Cunning ham, if I was on the Lancashire Council. you would be on the carpet.
   (No Mike! open your eyes and get up, we’ll have no ‘dogging’ here!!)
   
   Instead of ‘mambie-pambying’ to the rights of homosexuals and teaching tolerance and understanding to our children, let’s inform them of the truth of the matter, which can then be balanced with an alternative view.
   
   Prior to the change in the law in the late 60s when an inordinate number of homosexuals in the government of the time, managed to manipulate and connive to decriminalise homosexual activity but only in private.
   Remember the Rev Paisleys supposed comment,’The houses of Parliament is a HOT BED of homosexuality!’
   Many of the public, including policemen, lawyers and many in the legal profession at the time called the new Act, the ‘Poofs Charter’! and were absolutely opposed to it, as many still are today.
   In the schools curriculum of today, are the children informed that prior to the sexual offences act of 1967 being passed? Buggery, was a criminal offence, which on indictment carried the same sentence as for ‘rape’ and carried a maximum of 14 years imprisonment under the sexual offences act of 1964.
   Are they informed that over the intervening years, those of a pederant disposition have managed to nibble away at the law until we can now teach our children that its OK to act like dogs in your green and pleasant land and keep reducing the age of consent to that of third world countries and paedophiles dreams??
   The greater insult is that the word ‘gay’ has been high-jacked and bastardised beyond redemption.
   As in the Robert Burns song,’Step we gayely as we go--’, I was brought up in a gay community and most of us lived in cottages, occasionally we would come across dogs copulating in the street.
   The remedy invariably was, a bucket of cold water and a kick up the arse!! (or is it called something else these days!!)
   I have lived in Spain for the last 12 years and have been contemplating returning to my native land, buying a little cottage near pretty woodland walks so that I can take my newly acquire dog and my grandchildren for long and interesting nature walks. Can you recommend anywhere nice, I quite like the Lancashire area?
   Finally, James, I like your report, as tragic as it is. Be a great reporter and keep seeking the truth and fighting for justice.
   My uncle when in a prison of war camp in eastern Europe carved these words from a tea chest, ‘God defend the right’ I still have that piece of three ply wooden carving and that message still gives me hope in my princely 62 years on this earth.
   Keep the faith
   .
   PS
   Don’t let them wear you down.
   For the publics sake let’s see the sequel on the front page!

   Posted by Dr I Lovit       11/26/2008  at  09:05 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.