Poor Larry Spencer, he’s a decent man trapped in a country where the government is willing to assist in the enforcement of the Shariah, the strict Islamic code of laws, but where people who disapprove of homosexuality are less popular, at least among opinion leaders, than pedophiles. This can hardly be called unexpected: abortion and homosexuality are the twin sacraments of modern liberalism. I am ardently looking forward to the day when those same Moslem activists now being coddled by the left in this country declare that the time has arrived to punish homosexuals as outlined in the Shariah. It will be interesting to discover which is more beloved by the left: the advancement of barbaric cultures and religions in the name of ‘tolerance’ or buggery.

A conservative Canadian Alliance MP from Saskatchewan and a Baptist Minister, Spencer has been fired from his position in the Shadow Cabinet and driven from the Alliance Caucus for saying, in a Vancouver Sun interview, that he believed that it was a mistake for Canada to have repealed its laws forbidding homosexuality, an event which occurred in the 1960’s under the leadership of Pierre Elliot Trudeau. He also said that he would support any bill recriminalizing homosexuality (but admitted that the possibility of such a bill coming before the House was essentially nil) and that he believed that there would soon be a strong push made to legalize pedophilia and polygamy.

Spencer clearly wasn’t announcing that the Canadian Alliance would seek to criminalize homosexuality, he was merely musing that, in an ideal world, it would be nice to do so. He also made it quite clear that he didn’t favor jailing homosexuals, but rather contemplated some other form of punishment. I agree with him: ideally, I think, laws against homosexuality would remain on the books, but only occasionally enforced. The real point of such laws is not to jail homosexuals: something which, after all, costs money. Rather, the point is to demonstrate official disapproval of homosexuality and drive it underground. We shall never be rid of gays altogether: but we can at least shove them back into the closet.

I am ashamed, but not surprised, to find that the most likely leader of the future Conservative Party, Stephen Harper, is so beholden to the power of the gays that he immediately resorted to the extreme measure of firing Spencer for what were, in reality, relatively mild comments that a great many Canadians would probably agree with privately.

In fact, I strongly suspect that the polls taken with regard to gay marriage and public approval of homosexuality in general are vastly distorted by what has been called the ‘Wilder effect.’ In the 1989 Virginia Gubernatorial elections every poll showed the Democratic candidate, a black man named Douglas Wilder, leading by a far margin. On Election Day he barely won. The same phenomenon occurred in the Louisiana Governor’s election earlier this month, where Republican Bobby Jindal led in the polls but was unexpectedly defeated. Part of what happened in both cases (though in the Jindal case, a poorly-executed response to Democratic attack ads hurt as well) is that, when polled, voters who hold politically incorrect beliefs will tell pollsters one thing and actually vote another way.

It is now utterly unfashionable in Canada to oppose the homosexual agenda in any way, shape, or form. People are afraid to express their true opinions on gays to the general public for fear of being branded a ‘homophobe.’ I’ve been called one so many times that I think I will now proudly wear the title. I suspect that, if a group made the case against gay rights in public, the Canadian establishment would cry, scream, and shout while, in ten million homes across the country, people would watch their TV’s and gently nod their heads.

When I was in high school, a fellow student started up what was then the only ‘Gay-Straight Alliance’ in the Province of British Columbia. The group, which was lavishly sponsored by the school, then plastered the walls with various pro-gay propaganda. The next few months set off a battle in which I served, in essence, as the leader of the forces opposed to the Alliance. There were two shocking elements in this battle: the scale of the opposition and the eye-opening reaction of the Administrators and the gay-rights activists.

Hundreds of students, nearly one-third of a school with two thousand students, signed a petition I circulated in just a few days. One student who wore a shirt which contained a picture of an arrow and the words, “Straight: the only way to go,” was punished and accused of spreading ‘fascist propaganda’ by a Vice-Principal. I myself was called before the school administration and confronted with a series of draft newspaper articles I had written months earlier in which I denounced the Student President, who I felt was accorded privileges not granted to other students and who I believed had attained the Presidency (the student President was not chosen by a direct vote until the next year, when I threatened to swamp the meetings with supporters, elect my entire slate, and essentially abolish the student government). On another occasion, I was called before an inquisition, led by a school employee, in which I was repeatedly attacked for my beliefs. It was then and there I learned the real nature of the gay rights movement and how, unless it is fought, it will achieve all of its aims: and we don’t even know exactly what those are.

This does not mean that I wish gays killed or for harm to befall them: far from it. Rather, I simply wish for them to shut up and go away. I am tired of arguing about this issue, an issue which provided my first reason for becoming actively engaged in politics and truly demonstrated to me the dangerous loss of freedom which has occurred in our society. Yet I cannot stop fighting over this issue because I understand the fundamental truth that the spread of homosexuality is merely the forward edge of a wave of degeneracy which threatens to overwhelm our society. Gay people may be nice and kind, on an individual basis: but as a collective group they are a menace who threatens our values and our way of life.

What are the goals of the so-called ‘gay rights’ movement? You know who we are, and what we stand for. Who are they? And what do they stand for?

Does anyone really believe that, now that gays are allowed to marry, their movement will stop? Where shall it end? What are they taking us towards?

The purpose of the gay movement (or, to borrow from the Hon. Mr. Spencer, the gay conspiracy) seems to be a fundamental reordering of society. Their goal isn’t ‘acceptance’- they’ve had that a long time ago. Their goal isn’t ‘equal rights’- there is not a single right that straight people have that gays do not. There are no ‘straights only’ water fountains, no one is being forced to the back of the bus. Their goal is to impose their vision of the world upon us all.

Mr. Spencer is vilified for suggesting that there will soon be a pedophile rights movement. But is he so wrong? I wonder. After all, NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association), the leading pedophile rights organization in the world, has extensive ties with gay-rights groups. Already pedophiles are speaking about their ‘sexual orientation’ and some people on the American Psychological Association are manoeuvring to have pedophilia removed from the official list of mental disorders. Already books are being written, and printed by serious publishers, seeking to debunk the ‘myth’ that sexual abuse is harmful to children.

Just thirty-four years separate us from when homosexuality was decriminalized in Canada and the point where, this very year, opposition to homosexuality was criminalized. One wonders how long it will be before Hollywood is giving Oscars to movies which tell the tale of pedophiles as the victims of a pedophobic society. How long will it be before Lolita is widely interpreted as the tale of a man unfair victimized because of his sexuality?

After all, one can already hear, in the voice of Michael Jackson (while holding the hand of the child he apparently molested) the words of the future movement for the rights of child molesters. It’s all about ‘love’ and ‘caring’, etc. You probably don’t believe me, I know: but talk to me again in 2037.

What Mr. Spencer said needed to be said: and needs to be said some more. We will never save this country if we surrender to the sodomites at the gates. Stand up or give up: those are the choices now.