Journalist and author Peter Hitchens has taken Britain’s Education Secretary Nicky Morgan to task in his Mail on Sunday column this weekend, shortly after she claimed that homosexuality is a fundamental British value, and said that those who seemed “intolerant” may fall foul of anti-extremism laws.
Speaking earlier this week, Ms. Morgan – who herself once voted against same sex marriage – said, “Sadly, Isis are extremely intolerant of homosexuality.” She was attempting to point out how to spot extremists in British schools.
But Hitchens has responded to her claims, writing:
How could teachers spot a potential fanatic, who was in danger of rejecting British values and might end up waving an AK-47? You could almost hear the poor woman’s brain flapping wildly from side to side.
Then she reached for the one thing that absolutely everyone is now compelled to agree on, if they don’t want the thought police and everyone on Twitter to think they are an extremist.
‘Sadly, Isis are extremely intolerant of homosexuality,’ she gabbled.
Alas, until quite recently, Ms Morgan took a position which could, in these days of sexual liberation, be viewed as ‘extremely intolerant’ of homosexuality.
‘Marriage, to me, is between a man and a woman,’ she said in February 2013, after voting against same-sex weddings. This view, she argued, tied in with her Christian faith.
She has since had the politically correct technicians in to adjust her brain, and said in October last year that she had changed her mind, though it wasn’t quite clear how she had done this. The fact is that, in her previous state of mind, she could quite easily have been reported to the police by some zealous sneak, under her own guidelines.
Even more hilarious (if you find this sort of thing funny) is the fact that homosexuality is now officially a fundamental British value.
It’s true that the French have always claimed this was so, especially in the upper reaches of our ruling class, but I have never before heard it confirmed by a Minister of the Crown.
Hitchens then lashed out at Prime Minister David Cameron, pointing out his hypocrisy over wanted to bomb Assad just a few years ago, and now wanting to use the same British military resources to fight his enemies, in the region, ISIS.
Mr Cameron also took to the airwaves this week to claim that the Islamic State is nothing to do with Islam, and that the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) should use a different term to describe the group.
Hitchens wrote of this:
Then there was the Prime Minister’s weird attack on the BBC for using the term ‘Islamic State’. This was very ungrateful, given the Corporation’s huge efforts to rehabilitate the Tory Party, after it turned liberal and decided that homosexuality was a core British value.
If we can’t use the term ‘Islamic State’, on the grounds that it’s not Islamic or a state, then surely we can’t use the term ‘Conservative Party’ either. It certainly isn’t conservative, and I’m not sure it has enough members left to be called a party.
But our glorious rulers were not done yet. To crown a week of wild floundering, the Government announced that our few remaining bombers will soon be fighting alongside President Assad of Syria.
Two years ago they wanted to use the same aircraft to bomb Mr Assad.
You can read his column in full, here.