By Stephen Gray
We read and hear the label social conservatives, or socons, put upon people who are opposed to the killing of the child in the womb, against abnormal lifestyles, and in favour of the traditional family. During the election campaign many of the media were working itself into a frenzy because there were “social conservatives” running for the Conservative Party. One media “bureau chief” being interviewed by the “news” reader on one TV station (both of them from the same corporate conglomerate kennel) was practically crying on air because “social conservatives” and “right wing Christians” were running and might even win some seats. This twosome of twaddle were each lofting politically correct questions and answers to each other that appeared to denigrate anyone opposed to their liberal philosophy. This was the way it came across, though it was done under the banner of “election news.”
It is fashionable by the media and their camp followers to sneer at what they like to call “social conservatives” and “right wing Christians” and use derogatory words as weapons to put them down. Imagine what would happen if these so-called journalists, announcers and radio hosts used the words “radical homosexual” or “right wing Jew” to describe people running for public office in the same way they use the words “social conservatives” and “rightwing Christians.” Ah, but they would not dare! Yet, it appears they can smear social conservatives and Christians generally, with impunity. If decent and moral people are called “social conservatives” by the media and their liberal allies, and sneered at for standing up for decent and normal family values, what then should we call the opponents of normalcy, decency and truth? Should we call them Social Perverts or Sopervs?
Take, for example, abortion which is supported by much of the media.
Should we call those in the media in favour of abortion social perverts or sopervs? This atrocity is disguised as a “womans right to choose” by the media. “Choose what?” a thinking person might ask? Though "sopervs" never ever finish their sentence after the word “choose.” If they did they would then have to explain what is being chosen and its consequences. Since the so called “searchers of truth” in the media won’t do this, let me enlighten them on the act of abortion. The child in the womb is dismembered by being suctioned out or cut to pieces, or in the case of a partial birth abortion its head is pierced by a sharp medical instrument and its brains suctioned out. Some babies have even been born alive after abortion but are left to die. But hey, this is called “freedom of choice” by our “knowledgeable” media. Surely the mutilation, butchering, and killing of the innocent child in the womb qualifies to be called a social perversion. And are those supporting it entitled to be called social perverts or sopervs?
( Go to: http://www.AbortionNo.org and see the truth about abortion )
Another issue it is not politically correct to oppose is so called “same-sex marriage.” Social Conservatives or socons are lambasted, attacked and reviled for daring to even question this absurdity. Any sane person knows that marriage can only be between a man and a woman, except of course, for our conglomerate owned media, the judicial jackasses on the benches and many brain challenged politicians who are declaring this as a “right. So should we call those in favour of this nonsense social perverts or sopervs? Surely a man “marrying” a man is a not only bizarre behaviour but a social perversion? And this behaviour if practiced is surely unhealthy to its practitioners. The medical consequences of this behaviour are many.
“In Canada, the HIV/AIDS epidemic continues to grow despite the efforts of governments, community-based organizations, national non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the health care sector, researchers and a legion of committed and dedicated volunteers across the country. The Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control (CIDPC) estimates that 56 000 people in Canada were living with HIV infection at the end of 2002 - a 12 per cent increase from previous estimates in 1999. 3 Men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to be the most affected group,…"
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/aids-sida/hiv_aids/report04/1_e.html
The above information comes from the government of Canada website, yet if social conservatives or socons state that this behaviour is unhealthy and dangerous they are accused of being “neanderthal” of spreading “bile” and “hate” and of not being “socially moderate” by the purveyors of propaganda in the “mainstream” media. So all you people out there reading this. What do you think? Should we call the nutbars of “news” social perverts?
Stephen Gray
February 1, 2006.
graysinfo@yahoo.ca website: http://www.oocities.org/graysinfo