Only a theocracy would give us a minimal state as well as good government and patriarchy

The Liberty Belles

4 hrs · 

Please see the comments we have sent to HOPE not hate:

'Ladies for Philip Davies founding member Elizabeth Hobson was invited to deliver her infant male circumcision presentation at the forum after appearing at the free speech discussion club, the extremists club. She did not know that they are associated with people such as Irving at the time.
Her presentation has excellent research into the area of male genital mutilation and at the time she was happy to have any public platform to discuss a controversial issue, such as the abuse of consent and bodily autonomy of infant baby boys.

As staunch free speech supporters we respect the right of the forum to exist, but we do not agree with all the views expressed at the forum. Especially those of ethno nationalist nature and those who deny aspects of or if the holocaust happened.

The extremists club is a forum for free speech and has a variety of views which vary across the political and philosophical spectrum.
Unfortunately, we live in a ridiculously politically correct culture that anything that doesn't fit in with the mainstream media which is domainated by the ideology of the progressive left and centre right.
We also have people, such as yourself (hope not hate) who claim to be 'anti fascist' yet you support denying people with views you disagree with platform's to speak to the public. We believe that the public have enough common sense to judge arguments when presented fairly and without smear. This article is yet another attempt to smear Philip Davies, who has pointed out real inaccuracies in the focus on gender and the absurdity of political correctness.

Also, we would like to add that the liberty belles do not agree with Claire Khaws view that the UK needs a 'Theocracy'. This goes against the very foundation of libertarian philosophy.
For those of you who like to read 'hope not hate' please use your internet search engine to fine out what libertarianianism is. If you are a mature adult capabale of listening to opposing arguments and able to handle conflict without having a melt down, it might just make some sense to you, we found it very empowering as individuals and especially, as women.'

X

Claire Khaw

Chronological

Like

Comment

Share

Comments

Claire Khaw The only way to have a minimum state now is to have a theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../the-only...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 24 mins · Edited

Claire Khaw The case for a theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../the...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 20 mins

Claire Khaw How a theocracy could be useful for atheists

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../an...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 19 mins

Claire Khaw The advantages of a theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../advantages...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 18 mins

Claire Khaw The Nature of a Modern Theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../nature-of...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 17 mins · Edited

Claire Khaw An Atheist Argument for a Theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../atheist...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 16 mins

Claire Khaw Man's Greatest Achievement is the Creation of God

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../mans...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 15 mins

Claire Khaw A Theocracy that Worships Reason?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../islam-and...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 13 mins

Claire Khaw There are only two kinds of morality because there are only two sexes

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../there-are...

Like

 · Reply · Storify · 12 mins

Claire Khaw Atheism + Feminism = Matriarchy 

Monotheism + Marriage = Patriarchy

Marriage is an indispensable ingredient of patriarchy. 

The most important thing about marriage is the rule that everyone should only have sex with the other parent of their offspring. 

This is undeniably a very high standard of sexual morality and this understandably dismays the degenerate who have had their character fatally weakened after over half a century of moral laxity. 

Because it is such a very high standard of morality, God was created and then conscripted into protecting this institution. 

If you are complaining about the craziness of our degenerate matriarchy, the solution is patriarchy. 

If you want patriarchy, you have to practice marriage. 

If you want a society that respects the rules of marriage, you have to obey the laws of God which forbid extramarital sex because this is the only way to respect the most important rule of marriage and carry on this civilising human tradition.

On those who keep wittering on about the British constitution as if they knew what they were on about

We have a Bill of Rights 1688/9. Common Law since Alfred the Great. Justice is not a fashion statement, it is an emerging shield for us all.

— Godfrey Bloom (@goddersbloom) May 11, 2015

@goddersbloom An important primer to watch: http://t.co/ng788J0FaG

— eddie coke (@eddiecoke) May 11, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom If we were a 1-party state, its constitution would really be the party constitution protecting its members' rights.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom There is nothing special about the idea of putting promises down in writing hoping it will be a binding contract.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Many constitutionalists do not understand that our politicians' rights need to be protected.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Because politicians are so despised, nobody cares that they have no right to free speech.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Those who admire Enoch Powell should reflect on what happened to him for telling what he thought to be the truth.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Those who think politicians should speak the truth more should reflect on what happened to Keith Joseph in 1974.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Joseph#1974

“A high and rising proportion of children are being born to mothers least fitted to bring children into the world.... Some are of low intelligence, most of low educational attainment. They are unlikely to be able to give children the stable emotional background, the consistent combination of love and firmness…. They are producing problem children…. The balance of our human stock, is threatened….”

The response was outrage that despite his repeated apologies sharply undercut Joseph's campaign to replace Heath as party leader. The speech was largely written by Alfred Sherman but the most controversial sentence was inserted by Joseph himself.

It has now 41 years since a male politician dared to criticise Slut Single Mothers who are bad mothers to their bastard offspring. Expecting this lot to start doing it now would be like expecting a drug-addict who only cares about his next fix to call the cops on his drug-dealer. Ain't gonna happen. Only Secular Koranism is strong enough to cleanse this country of so many decades of sluttery, bastardy and degeneracy as well as five generations of feckless fuckers. 

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Talking about limiting the power of the monarch is now irrelevant as talking about the divine right to rule.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom If politicians fear to express what they believe to be the truth then they are not fit for purpose.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The point I am making about the free speech of MPs can be found at http://t.co/e5TDEO9iul

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

If members of the Conservative Party have no rights and can have their membership cancelled at the absolute discretion of the Secretary of the Board of the  Conservative Party, then this must also mean that the Prime Minister himself is vulnerable to being expelled from the Conservative Party without ceremony.

Claire Khaw's membership of the Conservative Party cancelled

The Conservative Party has no principles and its members have no rights

The Conservative Party pretends it has principles

Why the Conservative Party is a public body whose administrative decisions should be subject to judicial review

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom A political establishment that has no principles or morals is no different to a psychopath.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom A psychopath is a person who has no conscience and no moral principles and does not care if he hurts people.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom It used to be the case that the Archbishop of Canterbury was the conscience of the monarch or government.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The C of E was created precisely to serve the monarch as a Creature of the State.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The C of E is now a creature of the PC Liberal State and the PC Liberal State believes in gay marriage.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The C of E is stuffed to its rafters with feminists, Reds, LGBTs n those who don't give a damn about Xtian teaching

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom C of E is stuffed to its rafters with parasites living off it whose raison d'etre is to subvert Biblical teaching.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom A constitution is basically a rule book n the best rule book is short, clear and IN ONE BOOK not all over the place

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The old debate was about preventing monarchs who claimed to rule by divine right from abusing their power.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The current debate ought to be about drafting a constitution that would bring about good government.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The best constitution is a rule book that is clear, short n in one book whose words and meaning are not in dispute.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Liberty is what we ought to have after all the necessary laws are in place. What are the necessary laws?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Talking about "repealing the rule of law" is nonsensical. The rule of law is just means following the law.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The debate on Legal Positivism and Natural Law should be revived now that Islamists are proposing a theocracy.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

Redefining the terms of the Natural Law v Legal Positivism debate

What the debate between Natural Law v Legal Positivism should really be about - Theocracy v Secularism

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom It would be helpful to have the principles of good government articulated and explained, would it not?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Is good government synonymous with democracy? Only if most voters are wise but they are patently fools and knaves.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom Is good government synonymous with the majority view of MPs? But they too are mostly fools and knaves.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The speaker is not classically educated or he would know Ancient Rome and Greece would elect tyrants and dictators.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrant

The original Greek term, however, merely meant an authoritarian sovereign without reference to character, bearing no pejorative connotation during the Archaic and early Classical periods. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictator

The word originated as the title of a magistrate in ancient Rome appointed by the Senate to rule the republic in times of emergency.

There is much talk of a Caliphate, which I believe means Regent of God. It is basically a dictator who is bound by Koranic principles. Better government by a rightly-guided Caliph, I would have thought, than government by a psychopathic political establishment suffering from dementia not bound by any principles, not even their own, which they will not or cannot state. When you start breaking your own rules and lying about what they were and why you break them, I think it is time you called it a day.

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom How do we know when we have good government? When politicians are not widely held in hatred, ridicule and contempt.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom You can have any kind of rule in your rule book but a rule is only as good as its interpreter and enforcer.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom EC of Human Rights affirms freedom of belief but in EU countries Holocaust Denial is an imprisonable offence.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The Equality Act 2010 is clearly Orwellian thought-crime legislation but libertarians pretend not to notice.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

@eddiecoke @goddersbloom The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, but we are all suffering from narcolepsy, it seems.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) May 12, 2015

British values are not an ideal, merely an expression of the status quo.

Wishy-washy crap at http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/insearchofbritishvalues1/#.U51byfldVqX:

Michael Gove Politician

There is something rather unBritish about seeking to define Britishness. Rather like trying to define leadership, it’s a quality which is best appreciated when demonstrated through action rather than described in the abstract.

As a Scot who, like Brown, has made his career in London and whose family are now rooted in England, I feel immensely fortunate to be a citizen of a cosmopolitan state where nationality is defined not by ethnicity but sustained by the subtle interweaving of traditions and given life by a spirit of liberty.

Britishness is best understood as an identity shaped by an understanding of the common law, refined by the struggle between the people’s representatives and arbitrary power, rooted in a presumption in favour of individual freedom, enriched by a love of the quirky, local and unique, buttressed by anger at injustice, constantly open to the world and engaged with suffering of others, sustained through adversity by subversive humour and better understood through literature than any other art.

But if you really want to understand Britishness you need to ask why the British find Tracey Emin loveable, regard Ealing comedies as sacred, look on the world of Wodehouse as a lost Eden, always vote for the underdog on Big Brother, make the landscape the central character in their Sunday evening dramas, respect doctors more than lawyers and venerate their army but have never had a soldier as leader since the Duke of Wellington.

Do you think this mush is going to make Muslims give up Islam and buy into this fey idea of Britishness and be OK about their daughters becoming sluts after sex ed who become SSMs https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379?fref=ts and their sons being divorced by their slut wives who then lose their homes and access to their children?  Not if they have their heads screwed on properly.

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/114702181761 What are British values?
http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/114704808321  What I would like British values to be
http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/114705485953  What should be the ten defining core British values?

British values are not an ideal: they are whatever they happen to be. Right now, the Education Secretary says they are gender equality and democracy.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jun/09/michael-gove-british-values-curriculum

This seems to mean that no one may propose or campaign for the return of the patriarchy or discuss whether our environment of indiscriminate universal suffrage is compatible with good government and the long term national interest.  If that is the case, then COUNT ME OUT of this dementia called "British values".

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/human-rights-are-conceptual-nonsense.html
Human rights are a conceptual nonsense

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSVYYiv_clU&list=UUqnbu3dpuqx7O3KRgZQarnA#t=80
Is Britain a Christian country?  

Man's Greatest Achievement is the Creation of God

The only thing that distinguishes Man from lower animals is our ability to reason better than they how best to obtain pleasure and avoid pain in the long term. It was after all Man who created God and the institution of marriage. That must be Man's greatest achievement of all time.

God was created through an act of thinking, when Man conceived of a being that is unique, omnipotent and omniscient - a supreme being.

Having created God in his mind, by an act of thinking, Man simply started behaving as if God existed, Pygmalion-like, in just the same way a troubled child is encouraged by a child psychologist to have an imaginary friend.  That was how God came into existence.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_(mythology)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_friend

Lust is a deadly sin when we have extra-marital sex, yet is instantly converted into something good and godly if we are married.   It has all the mysteries of transubstantiation yet can be explained quite simply.


If you are a woman, it is much easier to get a man to have sex with you than it is to get him to marry you.


Woman, do not take the easy way out and misuse the sexual instinct to prove - exactly what?  That a man will have sex with you because you are not smelly, old, repulsive or diseased?


Let us therefore use this instrument of good government that is God to obtain pleasure and avoid pain in the long term.   

Most of us are not saints and philosophers and do not care about the long term if the short term beckons with promises of pleasure.  Most of us are therefore like lower animals, and will not change our behaviour except through fear and pain.  Only a general belief in an omnipotent and omniscient God will make these lower human beings do the right thing therefore.  God is after all cheaper than CCTV and less intrusive than thoughtcrime laws.

Let us have the humility once again to pick up this much-used and much-abused Instrument of Good Government and vow to try harder and do better this time.

Liberals have their own priesthood too, do they not?  They have their own - dread word - theocracy, ie their  people who have the power to initiate, pass and enforce laws and also start wars that kill and torture people for unfair, irrational and unkind reasons.

Liberals believe in Free Love which would lead to a matriarchy, ie a society that condones female promiscuity.   Female promiscuity is logically, biologically and inevitably the facilitator of male promiscuity.

Anti-liberals (who believe that God serves the purpose of assisting us in our government, morality and spirituality) believe that a patriarchy which condones male promiscuity is the lesser evil, and those in charge of the ship of state always have a duty to choose the lesser evil in the long term.

The reason they do not is because our political system and political establishment is now infected by matriarchal dementia.

If the matriarchal dementia we are now suffering from is terminal and irreversible then the patient should at least know what he is dying of.