Thursday, January 17, 2019

More Liberal Scum

Liberal scum 

CARE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT? 
DO YOU VOTE FOR THE GREENS? 
The Greens candidate for Summer Hill in Sydney's inner west is Tom Raue an activist and a union organiser. In the last election in 2015 the Greens won 39.5 per cent of the two-party preferred vote.

What else does Mr. Raue support apart from the environment?
Well, he thinks there is nothing wrong with necrophilia, sex with dead people.
Writing in the March 6, 2013 issue of Honi Soit, the student newspaper of the University of Sydney, Mr. Raue shared his enlightening words of wisdom concerning sex with coprses:
“I am an organ donor because when I die, I won’t be using my body anymore. Doctors might as well cut into my flesh and pull out the useful bits. I would be upset if something like that happened while I was alive, but when I’m dead, I can no longer be harmed. That’s why I also wouldn’t mind somebody having sex with my corpse.
Necrophilia is one of the most taboo sexualities in almost every society. In Australia it is illegal, and is classified as “interfering with a corpse”. Although it may not be everyone’s cup of tea, necrophilia in and of itself is harmless and should be allowed.
Laws are designed to prevent harm. It’s hard to see this justification when applied to sexual activity with a corpse. Killing somebody in order to have sex with their body would of course be wrong, but that’s why we have a law against murder.

If having sex with a body is so offensive that it upsets people, that’s not a good enough reason to make it illegal. If it upsets the family of the deceased person, that’s a different issue – one of property rights. I don’t believe in private property when it comes to important resources, but it’s fine for objects of sentimental value. Corpses have extreme sentimental value and thus should belong to the family, friends or partner of the deceased. How to determine this in a fair way would require complex legal arguments that do not belong in this article.

Whoever ends up “owning” the corpse should have a say in how it is used. They should be able to decide if the organs are donated or if they want to allow somebody to have sex with the body. This should be overruled if the deceased person specified what they wanted before they died. If they stated that they did not want their corpse interfered with, that should be respected.

Necrophilia is classified as a paraphilia, meaning that it is a sexuality which deviates from the norm. Homosexuality was once considered a paraphilia, but it was decided that it was close enough to normal sexuality not to be a disorder.

I don’t think it’s the business of psychologists to define normality and stigmatise behaviours simply because they are unusual. If a person gives permission for their corpse to be used for sex, and the family has no issue with it, then what’s the harm? Fuck it.”
(http://honisoit.com/2013/03/drop-dead-gorgeous/)
Oh, Raue wrote in the same student newspaper in a 2012 a column support bestiality:
“why is consensual sex with animals considered so heinous that it must be illegal? Why is it taboo to even talk about it? Yes most Australians find it disgusting, but that is not a good enough reason to legislate against it. Consensual sex with an animal should not be illegal, no matter how distasteful it may seem”


Tom Raue, who won Greens preselection for the inner Sydney seat of Summer Hill last week, authored a bizarre column in favour of bestiality in a student newspaper in 2012.


Raue once wrote in the same student newspaper in a 2012 column “why is consensual sex with animals considered so heinous that it must be illegal? Why is it taboo to even talk about it? Yes most Australians find it disgusting, but that is not a good enough reason to legislate against it. Consensual sex with an animal should not be illegal, no matter how distasteful it may seem”

http://honisoit.com/2013/03/drop-dead-gorgeous/

Lets apply Raue’s “logic” to another form of sexual expression. Since neither necrophilia nor bestiality are truly consensual, why cannot Ruae’s reasoning be applied to pedophilia:
“why is consensual sex with children considered so heinous that it must be illegal? Why is it taboo to even talk about it? Yes most Australians find it disgusting, but that is not a good enough reason to legislate against it. Consensual sex with children should not be illegal, no matter how distasteful it may seem”

No comments:

Post a Comment

How Congress (Jews and White Freemasons) is targeting middle-class retirement savings

https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/how-congress-is-targeting-middle-class-retirement-savings/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaig...

Most Popular Posts This Week