Why did Nadine Dorries withdraw her "No Sex We Are Still Schoolgirls" bill?

How interesting that @cathynewman is yet another feminist encouraging schoolgirls to be sluts. @TheConWom @MarriageF @AnnCoulter
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) June 30, 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadine_Dorries#Abstinence_advocacy_for_girls_in_sex_education

Abstinence advocacy for girls in sex education
On 4 May 2011, Dorries proposed a bill to require that sex education in schools should include content promoting abstinence to girls aged 13 to 16 which was presented as teaching them "how to say no".[83] While sex education already mentions the option of abstinence, the bill would have required active promotion of abstinence to girls, with no such requirement in the education provided to boys. Owing to Dorries' claims about practices used in teaching about sex, Sarah Ditum in The Guardian accused Dorries of making Sex and Relationship Education (SRE) "sound like a terrifying exercise in depravity".[84]

The bill drew criticism from health care and sex education professionals, questioning claims made during the bill's reading,[85] and the bill was opposed in the House by Labour MP Chris Bryant who described it as "the daftest piece of legislation I have seen".[86] Dorries accused her opponents of behaving as though she was advocating "the compulsory wearing of chastity belts for all teenage girls".[87]

On 16 May 2011, Dorries appeared to suggest that a lack of awareness around abstinence among young girls is linked to rates of child sexual abuse. Dorries stated: "If a stronger 'just say no' message was given to children in school, there might be an impact on sex abuse, because a lot of girls, when sex abuse takes place don't realise until later that was a wrong thing to do... I don't think people realise that if we did empower this message into girls, imbued this message in school, we would probably have less sex abuse."[88]

The sexual abstinence bill was set for second reading on 20 January 2012 (Bill 185).[89] after she was granted leave to introduce the Bill on a vote of 67 to 61 on 4 May 2011.[90] The Bill, placed eighth on the order paper, was withdrawn shortly before its second reading, possibly by Dorries herself.[91]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/20/nadine-dorries-sex-education-abstinence-bill-withdrawn_n_1218486.html

I'm big fan of morning after pill. Better than abortion which is emotionally challenging for many and IMO wrong after 20 weeks @cathynewman
— Nadine Dorries MP (@NadineDorriesMP) June 30, 2014

From saying "just say no" to being a fan of the morning after pill with no explanation at all, fancy that!

Is this the ultimate expression of the unreliability and the capriciousness of women?

Why did no journalist even ask her why she withdraw her bill?

Was she threatened by her party?

Or did all the filthy feminist journalists of Britain collectively threaten to burn her house down with her in it or something? Talk about a U turn, eh?

@ntfem @cathynewman @whjm I didn't - it joined the list of bills and parl ran out of time by the end of year which means it drops
— Nadine Dorries MP (@NadineDorriesMP) June 30, 2014

@NadineDorriesMP Going from advocating abstinence to being "a big fan of the morning after pill" seems to be a major shift of position.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) July 1, 2014

Harriet Sergeant does not condemn the causes of crime and gang culture - SLUT SINGLE MUMS

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163396/A-middle-class-mother-hoodies.html

Titillating photograph of Harriet Sergeant and her boys from the hood gives publicity to her potboiler that does NOT condemn illegitimacy

http://harrietsergeant.com/articles/fixing-broken-britain/

Below is what she says about illegitimacy:

Despite the huge amount of evidence of the harm this causes children (mothers of children on the “at risk” register, for example, are five times more likely to be single teenage mothers), the Labour government made single motherhood an attractive proposition.

Since 1997 a single mother of two children has seen her benefits increase by 85%. We watched the effects of that policy play out on our streets every night last week.

To accuse these young girls of being feckless is unjust. They are merely responding to the economics of the situation. They are as much victims of the crisis in our schools and the perverse influence of benefits as teenage boys. What future is there for a girl who leaves school without a qualification? Whereas boys take to crime, girls get pregnant.

Ministers talk of family breakdown, but there is no family to break down. More than half of single mothers have never lived with a boyfriend. The state has taken over the role of both husband and employer.

Take just one example: single mothers. Mash’s older sister, a single mother of 22, admitted she would love to get married: “But all the men I know are in prison or deal drugs. I don’t know one man with a job.”

Like all the people and organisations she complains about, Harriet Sergeant only proposes to deal with the SYMPTOMS but not the causes, probably because she a dirty rotten feminist IN DENIAL about the causes of crime and gang culture - stupid sluts opening their legs at the drop of a pair of trousers and disdaining to practice effective contraception because they want to progress on the slut ladder of becoming a welfare mum with variously fathered feral bastards which the taxpaying men of Paedo Bastard Britain Fatso Slutland are too limp-dicked to protest.

Harriet Sergeant - tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime?  Not bloody likely.   She is a woman after all, and will probably defend to the death the right of sluts to have babies at the expense of the taxpayer because she is a woman herself.  She has a son, but does she care enough about him to denounce feminism?  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2164185/The-day-Kray-gang-robber-taught-hoodie-crime-doesnt-pay-The-middle-class-mother-befriended-teenage-thugs-dressed-suit-encounter-shocked-core.html

Nope, nothing here either about what to do with scummy slut single mums who breed their verminous spawn who will become the criminals of the next generation.  Not a dicky bird.

Maybe the next one, eh?

Her book is now being serialised in the Mail, so give her a chance.  She may possibly get round to mentioning SLUT SINGLE MUMS which I suspect her feminine feminist sympathies will probably prevent her from criticising.  She probably has quite a few friends who are also slut single mums and she doesn't want to hurt their feelings.  Girls stick together at the expense of boys, even mothers who have sons want to keep all the feminist privileges they have acquired at the expense of men, even if that will fuck up their sons' futures and the future of their own country.

That's shitty stinking fucking evil feminist ideology for you, eh?

If nothing about criticising slut single mums come out in the other parts of her serialised book, perhaps some might think she deserves the fate of Marie Antoinette whom she so strikingly resembles.

Harriet says there is a whole chapter devoted to the subject of single mums in her book, out 12 July.   I will make a point of popping into Waterstone's to see if there is anything at all constructive being proposed about dealing with the causes and consequences of state-sponsored slut single mummery.

http://www.teachit.so/index_htm_files/Wasted.pdf has a book written by Harriet with a chapter devoted to single mums, from page 19.   Nothing was proposed however, about stigmatising these women or even endorsing the Just Say No recommendation of Nadine Dorries MP.

Let us hope the chapter on single mums in her new book is rather more constructive.  Then I will happily eat my words and hat about Harriet being an evil feminist who refuses to criticise the morals of British women just because she is one herself.

I may even attend the book launch, if I am not escorted off the premises by her minders who may consist of members the gang she has been hanging out with.   If so, I may even buy a copy and ask her to to dedicate it 'To Claire "Robespierre" Khaw, With love and best wishes from Harriet "Marie Antoinette" Sergeant'

When Enoch Powell talked about a nation busily engaged in heaping up their own funeral pyre, he didn't know the half of it.  

Decent MPs in no particular order who have a mind and IDEAS of their own unlike the useless lobby fodder

• Nadine Dorries  (I would make her Minister for Women)
• John Baron (I would make him Foreign Secretary)
• Frank Field (I would make him Minister for Labour)
• Peter Bone (My one-party state would implement exactly his House of Commons Disqualification Bill explained at  http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2010/10/peter-bone-seeks-to-abolish-the-flatterers-cajolers-and-sometime-bullies-that-are-the-party-whips.html and give MPs more rights than any other political party in existence.)

I shall be adding to this list as and when.   

Tom Harris needs to be a little more courageous.

David Davis of Howden & Haltemprice needs to renounce and apologise for his support for the war and he will be OK with the voter.

Diane Abbott is one funny lady and it is a pity she is not leader so we can all have a good laugh from time to time.  This woman can be quite witty sometimes and it would have been great fun to watch her annoy everybody on her own side and everyone else.

Cameron is clearly not having a good time and he is just beginning to find out how much he is hated.   I am willing to take take the place of Steve Hilton if he is feeling a little beleaguered and wondering what to do next.   I would only tell him to stand aside for John Baron anyway.

How some MPs can regain the respect of the voters

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6346254.ece

I am still trying to work out why Cameron has told our Nadine to suspend her blog.

After all, today's Today Programme broadcast a heart-wrenching lip-trembling reading of an MP's account of his fear and dismay at the hatred, contempt and ridicule politicians such as he are now held in.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8064000/8064880.stm

But these were people too short-sighted and cowardly to look after their own interests and vote themselves a payrise to avoid all this!

No, let us continue baying for their blood until they present us with policies that seem half way sensible.

For starters, they could attempt to appease us by offering us referenda on whether we would like to -

1) repeal all anti-discrimination legislation and kill the totalitarian Equality Bill

2) repeal the Abolition of the Death Penalty Act 1964

3) repeal the European Communities Act 1972

4) repeal the Human Rights Act

5) repeal the Race and Religious Hatred Act

6) repeal the Inheritance Tax Act linked with the repeal of the Civil Partnership Act

7) reform the British education system along the lines I have suggested at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/02/new-model-comprehensive-by-tories.html


I suppose this would be more constructive than ritual suicide or beheadings.

It might now be a good time to suggest that the more independent MPs such as perhaps David Davis and Nadine Dorries, to do a deal with the BNP and say they will join, but only if the BNP revises its constitution, particularly their political objective of returning the racial composition of this country to what it was pre-1948, and lifts its colour bar. Such an act of courage may gain the respect of the public and would assist them in escaping the odium they are now held in, as despised and discredited politicians of the Lib-Lab-Con.

It would give them a party desperately in need of respectability and Parliamentary experience, and a chance to distinguish themselves by an act that is not prevarication, cowardice and economy with the truth.

The BNP could have a few MPs in Parliament by the next General Election, if enough Tories and Labour MPs jumped ship, if the BNP played their cards right and presented the offer enticingly enough to the more adventurous Members of Parliament.

Then, maybe, we would be a little closer to a quiet revolution of commonsense government.

http://www.mpacuk.org/content/view/5713/102/#jreactions

has a story that MPs in trouble for their expenses would find pertinent.