Why The UKIP Is Wrong On “Gay Adoption”.




I like the UKIP in many ways, and I like most the fact that being a conservative alternative to the Tories, they force at least those Tory MP in “endangered” constituencies to wake up a bit before it’s too late. Still, this is a young party which has to develop a coherent thinking yet as it grows out of the one-issue grouping it used to be.

Let us take the controversy about “gay adoption”. A UKIP politician says he is against to his local newspaper in Croydon; predictably, the usual crowds starts to bark; the man tweets desperately around saying (more or less) “gay” is fine, but “gay adoption” isn’t.


If it is fine being “gay”, it really can’t be seen why such a “fine” man could not enjoy all the rights the law gives to his heterosexual counterparts. He should, then, be allowed to adopt as everyone else, and Christianity was simply wrong in maintaining that a homosexual is a sexual pervert. Those heretics and hypocrites like our beloved Archbishop Nichols could then “charitably” assume they live a chaste lifestyle, and give a child in adoption to a sexual pervert (or perhaps two? Nichols is even nuanced about “civil partnerships”…) without blinking.

If, on the other hand, the idea of  some “gay” (that is: a homosexual; a man suffering from a very grave form of sexual perversion; a perversion so abominable it has been a taboo for 2000 years, up to this pervert generation) adopting is repugnant and utterly abominable, this is not because gays happen to be, say, “inhospitable” or overly grumpy, but exactly because…. they are sexual perverts!

The argument of “gayness” being fine and “gay adoption” wrong is, therefore, entirely contradictory and rather the fruit of the omnipresent fear of the Gaystapo than of reasoned thinking. The fear the UKIP people have of the Gaystapo shooting the usual “hate” and “homophobic” salvos is what prevents them from saying what they clearly think: homosexuality is a perversion. If it were not so, why would they not support “gay adoption”? How can they say with a straight face to homosexuals “you are fine, but you can’t adopt”? Why, then, can they not adopt? Will it not be because………Yes! That’s why!

We see here at work a disease much spread among politicians: the irrational fear of saying the truth. Therefore, they say half the truth, but refrain from saying the other half. Their argument remains unconvincing, because it is contradictory, and their reputation will suffer, because they will be rightly seen as pliable to the mob’s wishes.

I think this is the wrong strategy. In my eyes, the UKIP should give itself a solidly and rigidly conservative programme in all social and religious matters, and should go and harvest their votes among the disaffected Conservative voters in rural England, where people still (more or less) have fear of the Lord and believe in traditional values.

I can’t see them winning a seat in, say, Croydon any time soon anyway; but if they did, they could only do it at the price of “Cameronising” themselves, which would mean sure death outside of the London area, or a life at the fringe of the British Conservative life.

I truly hope for the UKIP that they will grow to become a seriously conservative Party, but if they keep trying to avoid the serious questions they will never be an alternative to the Tories, and their men will be forgotten as soon as the Conservative party comes back to sanity. Better be a good replica of the Tory party of Margaret Thatcher, than a bad copy of Cameron’s. That it doesn’t really work anyway we can see at what is happening to Cameron himself.

To do so, they must stop the nonsense of allowing a perverts’ group in their midst. It is a matter of common sense and of elementary dignity. If they avoid taking stance on controversial issues, they will soon be forgotten. 


Posted on November 29, 2012, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. Having just finished reading the final part [of three] in Christian Order on the apparent stranglehold the ‘gay mafia’ have within Mother Church, I am completely sickened. We have all this muttering about the validity of SSPX Sacraments and ‘faculties’ and we have practising homosexuals on the altar and all ++Muller can talk about is acceptance of Vatican II!!!

    • Ah, I have to visit Christian Order more often… but you are right, the situation is sickening. What also angers me is that whilst Rome burns, the Pope fiddles…


  2. The Republican party in the US has pro-queer groups in it too. The most (in)famous of these groups is the Log Cabin Republicans. The GOP, like the Demo’s, is trying to pander and suck up to minorities, and it’s not going to work for them. The racial, and now, sexual minorities, got what they want from the Democrats, why should they switch parties? All the GOP will accomplish is to drive their conservative base from them. This is already starting to happen. Talk of a new party that will represent tradition American values is in the air. Secession from the USA is also being bandied about if things can’t be changed by working within the system. Pray for us Mund, we’re going to be living in some very interesting times in the States.

    • Yes I knew the GOP is trying to pander to the perverts. A very stupid thing to do, but again, this is the RINO mentality of those who thought they could win with Romney. I think it will take some time until they wake up, but at some point they will have to.

      As to the secession, I see a lot of angry people on Twitter, but in the end I think patriotism will, for now, prevail. Obviously there are states (like Texas) big and strong enough to start thinking seriously about secession at some point, but if it hasn’t happened in Italy (where patriotic feelings are always stronger than economic differences) I can’t imagine it happening in the USA in my lifetime. Still, in Italy things changed when the Lega began to make itself heard; at some level, “secession” movement might scare the Obama states too…


%d bloggers like this: