The Truth
 
 
 
 

Under New Labour, "democracy" and "equality" should be rationed* .........

 
Stewart Cowan, 4/9/08

Labour MEP for London, Mary Honeyball, has recently seen controversy over her opinions of the beliefs of Roman Catholics.

The MEP is a "passionate campaigner for women's rights" and is a member of the European Parliament Women's Rights and Gender Equality Committee.

She states that she is not "prejudiced against any religion." Judging by what I have read about her, she is prejudiced against ALL religions as she seems to consider that they all preach against her feminist ideals.

She is a member of the recently formed Labour Humanists. She says in her review of 2007 (page 14) that the humanists "are, amongst other things, doing good work pointing out the problems associated with faith schools and opposing Church of England bishops having seats in a reformed second chamber".

She starts her review of religion with the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks. This strikes me as a particularly dishonest and disturbing introduction in an attempt to promote her feminist humanist agenda.

She is a signatory of the Brussels Declaration, which calls for a secular Europe.

On her blog on 2nd October, she wrote:

"The Embryology Bill is an extremely important piece of legislation, to women and their families. It is contained in the Labour manifesto on which the party was elected this term."

The reply I left was this:

Aah, the Labour manifesto "ON WHICH THE PARTY WAS ELECTED THIS TERM?" (My emphasis)

The same worthless document that promised a referendum on the changing face of Europe? (One of your correspondents used the phrase "a Woolworth's Pick'n'Mix" on a different matter.)

Mary Honeyball, you seem to think that by believing Catholics should be allowed on the throne again makes everything all right with your previous comments.

You wrote on that post: "I am against certain dogmas proclaimed by the Catholic Church where they undermine and attack the lives and aspirations of women."

I'm not a Catholic, but I guess you mean it's terrible to deny a woman the 'right' to have her unborn children killed by chemical or surgical means or the 'right' to deny her children a father.

What more can a woman aspire to than to marry a good man and bear his children?

What more can a man aspire to than to find a righteous woman?

New Labour has been systematically destroying the laws and institutions that have protected family life.

Who wins in New Labour's New Britain? Not men, not women and not children, because the natural place to be is in a family. New Labour and the EU have created tensions between people through divide and rule tactics.

I am not saying that everyone has always been treated fairly, that would be ridiculous, but to try and address certain issues by destroying decent society itself is beyond gross negligence - it is either wilful destruction or unparalleled ignorance.

Either way, I reckon there are many in your Party guilty of crimes against humanity, not only with regards to the unwarranted warmongering.

As for your insistence that everyone in the Party must toe the line on the Government's social engineering projects, you are probably aware of Conor McGinn who resigned as vice chairman of Young Labour because of hostility towards Catholics and the pro-life movement.

As he rightly said about the Embryology Bill, it is "an issue of conscience and not party politics." He also quoted you, Mary Honeyball, as describing Catholicism as having a "a "vice-like grip" across Europe, and accusing Catholics of "interfering in the democratic process".

So, only people or organisations who agree with the Government are allowed to have a say in this 'democracy'? You are reported to have said that "democracy and religion do not mix."

When one considers the surveillance society and squads of state snoopers; fingerprinting of children at school; banning people from taking photographs; the many arrests of law-abiding citizens making a stand; turning of the state into a surrogate parent and allowing the 'authorities' to execute people like Jean Charles de Menezes, would you say the country is becoming more like East Germany or Stalin's Russia? Or potentially even worse?

*P.S. Of course if "democracy" and "equality" are rationed then neither exists.