California's army of bitter homosexual activists are applying their preferred strategy - manipulating the law and the legal system to achieve their object of imposing their political and "moral" vision on the general community

No decent fair-minded person would object to the claim of people who call themselves "gay" to equality and protection under the common and statute law of their country. In the first instance, what many would object to is the irretrievable destruction of a good expressive English word.

Occasionally, when reading literature written before the great campaigns of the PC-class got underway in the Sixties, I come across the word "gay" used with the sense and meaning it had before its political hijacking. Most recently this has been while reading Evelyn Waugh's early satires. One can only imagine what that master of English prose would say. Indeed, what would he say about the wholesale political assault on the English language, the common heritage of so many countries around the world? But let me get back to the point.

Actually, I am not so much off the point because the manipulation of the law and the legal system outside the democratic process is essentially the clever, sometimes brilliant, manipulation of language. The cultivated PC-mind has no peer in this talent. Take for example the most powerful PC-bigot word of them all, "Homophobia". The application of this word can shut down public dialogue and destroy careers and reputations in an instant. It's only people like me who would dare to tell the PC empress that she has no (intellectual) clothes on. I have no reputation to destroy and even if I had I am rash enough not to care. But I drift away again.

Homosexuals, lesbians, gays, whatever you want to call them, have a right to all the benefits our civil society - our democratic society - has to offer. No argument. What they don't have a right to is the manipulation of the political system outside the democratic process to impose their political and "moral" framework on the rest of us.

Our liberal democratic society - the result of centuries of organic growth and adjustment - protects the right of its citizens to marry, as marriage has been understood since the dawn of human consciousness. Homosexuals are not denied that right. They simply elect not to enjoy that right. What have homosexuals and radical feminists (peas in a pod with gays) done about that? Attempted to change the meaning of the word "marriage". And they have succeeded in getting the change of meaning accepted where it is politically necessary: among the dominant political class. A fantastic victory.

They can now wield with gay abandon the range of politically coloured equality and anti-discrimination legislation to achieve their end of "gay marriage" - and the imposition of a "moral" framework totally in opposition to that which has underwritten Western Civilisation. So much the better, I hear. Sadly, the ordinary person does not seem to realise that such a change with its vast implications puts the whole traditional system in jeopardy. There's plenty of empirical evidence for the claim that Western Society is dying.

Last year the population of California voted on the meaning of marriage for the law. Even in that most liberal/PC state of America, there was a majority in favour of maintaining marriage as the union between male and female. The outrage of California's homo-fascists was uncontainable. They immediately set about isolating those people and organisations they held responsible for their defeat for punishment and discipline. Those people must think twice before they cross the Gay juggernaut again.

Meanwhile, efforts to circumvent the ignorance of the general population must go on. Newmax.com has a comment on the latest legal manoeuvres.

Comment: comment@gerardcharleswilson.com