Wednesday, 8 September 2010
FUCK OFF PETER TATCHELL
Images - Queer degenerates. No child should be forced to see such things in the streets of their community.
There is no greater hypocrite in this country than the vile paedophile supporting political queer Peter Tatchell.
He supports the right of homosexual pederasts to molest young boys and then attacks the Pope for not protecting children from sex abuse by Catholic priests.
Tatchell is not a homosexual, Tatchell is a political Queer.
Political Queers demand society is reformed in line with their demands, they do not want equality or tolerance - they want to dominate and control.
Any discrimination against homosexuals is immoral, illegal and vile and rightfully so, as the sexuality of any decent human being is irrelevant to their decency as a human being.
But political Queers have no respect for homosexuals in our society, they hold them in as much contempt as they hold heterosexuals.
Political Queers want to legalise paedophilia, they want society to tolerate their depravities such as the 'right' to dress up in semi-naked sado-masochistic outfits and lead their partners in the street on chains in Gay Pride Parades and they demand that society changes to cater to their political demands.
It is because of the political queers that homophobia is present in our society, as decent people find the political queers repulsive and then confuse political queers with decent homosexual people.
Decent homosexuals find the activities of political queers, such as indulging in gay sex in public toilets where children go and leaving those facilities strewn with used condoms and splattered in semen, drawing graffiti of gay sex acts in toilets that children can see, cutting holes in the walls and partitions in public toilets so they can see other men using the toilet or have oral sex via a 'glory hole' and leaving grafitti asking for children to text them their mobile numbers so they can be molested and other paedophile activities, as repulsive.
To see Tatchell attack the Pope when he has said in the past ' "Several of my friends... had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13... It is time that society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful."
Letter to The Guardian.
27th June, 1998.
Fuck off Tatchell you sick bastard.
Here are some quotes from Tatchell’s website
Isn’t it time the lesbian and gay community said, loud and clear, that the under-16s also have sexual rights? Don’t we have a responsibility to defend the right of under-age queers to make their own free, informed choices about when they are ready for sex?
We should be empowering young people to stand up for their sexual rights – including the right to say “yes” to sex and the right to say “no”.
“If you consent to having sex with a paedophile, it’s fine. If you don’t, it’s not”
It’s all very well for the lesbian and gay community to call for an equal age of consent of 16, but what about the sexual rights of those who are younger?
BTW he’s not just talking about teenagers, he talking about all under sixteen year olds.
A few are ready for sex at l2; others not until they’re 20. Having a single, inflexible age of consent doesn’t take into account these differences.
The law does not force a person of 20 to have sex, it does however protect the prepubescent from paedophiles. We could lower the age of consent to 12 but the reason it is set at 16 is that by 16 everyone should have been through puberty and at 12 not everyone would.
Tatchell’s solution – a universal age of consent at 14 and a sliding scale of the age of consent for under 14s. So a 16 year old can have sex with a 13 year old and an eight year old with a five year old. But this is just window dressing, Tatchell says:
Although an improvement, even this three-year flexibility is a bit arbitrary
So if there is no harm done i.e. the child consents
punishment is inappropriate and the courts should, at most, impose a counselling order to ensure that the couple are advised about contraception and safer sex.