 |
| ...as long as you agree with us, that is... |
The Telegraph reports that, once again, Featherstone has asked Church leaders 'not to polarise debate' on gay marriage.
This is, again, a piece of curious doublespeak on the reality of public debate. What Featherstone of course really means is, 'don't disagree with us', since it appears that to take the opposite view to that taken by Britain's political elite is to be wholly unreasonable and deeply unpleasant to those in favour of 'gay marriage'. By vocally disagreeing with same-sex marriage, you are guilty of 'fanning the flames of homophobia'. Basically, if you disagree with the redefinition of marriage to include two people of the same-sex, you're committing a 'hate crime', even if your arguments against redefining marriage are grounded in reason, rather than prejudice against the homosexual community.
According to The Telegraph, Featherstone, apparently, 'gave a "cast iron guarantee" that civil gay marriages would be law by the next general election despite the strength of opposition from church leaders.' But I am really beginning to wonder just who is she giving that "cast-iron guarantee" to? Is it to those 'on the ground' or those 'above' her? What is becoming more apparent in the whole 'gay marriage' debate is the unswerving support given to this project for social engineering by those in political power, despite the fact that, as David Burrowes, Conservative MP for Enfield Southgate, has said, there is no tangible public groundswell of support for the law to be changed.
Perhaps we are all a little guilty of naivety over the 'gay rights' movement. Who, after all, is funding the LGBT movement in the United Kingdom? Who is funding the LGBT movement in the USA and Europe? I ask this because, let's be frank, the LGBT political agitation phenomena appears to be a movement that is near global. The fact that it is a global strategy for social change should make us wonder whether those behind the drive for gay marriage are, in fact, globalists. So, lets do some digging and find out exactly whether our beloved Government are genuinely afraid of upsetting the 'gay rights activists' themselves, or whether, in fact, they are genuinely afraid of upsetting those who fund the gay rights movement.
So who is funding the LGBT Movement?
The website, LGBTQ Funders, gives us some information about who is funding the movement both in the UK and elsewhere. The Board of Directors listed on the LGBTQ Funders site reveals some interesting names in global philanthropy which are driving the LGBT campaign forward in the US, the UK and Europe and, yes, across the whole World. This LGBTQ Funders report states that, 'In this, our 9th year of mapping the amount and character of such grantmaking, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Grantmaking by US Foundations (2010) reveals that support for LGBTQ communities increased from $93.5 million to $97.2 million, an increase of 3.9 percent from 2009'. Here are a few of the names of large backers, many of whom are on the Board of Directors:
Of course, the name that leaps out of the pack is the Rockerfeller Philanthropy Advisers group. So let's start with them. The Rockerfeller Foundation has, historically, been major funders for some of the most culturally seismic changes in Western society, including the women's liberation and the movement for the legalisation of abortion, as well as continuing to fund various projects in Africa and beyond aimed at depopulation of the continent and, indeed, every continent on Earth. It was the Rockerfeller dynasty that started the Population Council.
In fact, in 2009, I blogged about a C-Fam report on a meeting of the World's billionaires in New York in order to discuss 'global population issues'. Attending the conference were such leading philanthropic investment bankers as George Soros, David Rockerfeller, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, Warren Buffett and Michael Bloomberg. And, let us make no mistake, 'gay marriage' and the gay rights movement is most definitely a population issue, since, as we all know, neither homosexuals nor lesbians can procreate and bring forth children.
The Rockerfeller Foundation, along with the Ford Foundation, the Buffett Foundation and the Playboy Foundation also, as a footnote, fund Catholics for Choice, the openly dissenting organisation campaigning for the Church to accept abortion and artificial contraception. Oh, and the Rockerfeller Foundation also funded various eugenic programmes in Germany, including Dr Josef Mengele's before he went into Auschwitz. So, we know we are dealing with nice philanthropists with hearts of gold, here.
'Sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, Kinsey's goal was "to supplant what he saw as a narrow procreational Judeo Christian era with a promiscuous "anything goes" bi/gay pedophile paradise." (Reisman, Crafting Gay Children: An Inquiry, p.4) He cruised Times Square looking for subjects. More than 25% of his sample were prostitutes and prison inmates including many sex offenders. Kinsey, who died prematurely of disease associated with impotence and self-mutilation (orchitis, Reisman p. 278), said 10 per cent of American men were gay when in fact only two per cent were.'
The reason the Kinsey Reports have been said to have laid the groundwork for moral collapse in the Western world is because apart from offering distorted and exaggerated 'scientific' views of human sexuality and orientation, the chief achievement of the reports was to separate sex from procreation. He founded the Kinsey Institute for Sex, Gender and Reproduction. In other words, it was the Rockerfeller Foundation that helped to lay the groundwork not just for moral collapse in the West, but also to disassociate sex from reproduction and to help to break down sexual taboos in Western societies.
The Arcus Foundation is a private foundation founded in the United States which, bizarrely, proclaims that its mission is "to achieve social justice that is inclusive of sexual orientation, gender identity and race, and to ensure conservation and respect of the great apes." Its owner and director is one Jon Stryker, a billionaire philanthropist (the 428th richest man in the World, to be precise) who has, from Kalamazoo, stretched out his generous hand to LGBT organisations in both the United States and the United Kingdom. Arcus now have offices in, all of places, Cambridge, England. In 2010, the Arcus Foundation, alone, made grants of $16,234,896 to LGBT organisations around the World.
According to Wikipedia, The Foundation Center is a 'nonprofit organization headquartered in New York City. The Center’s stated mission is "to strengthen the social sector by advancing knowledge about philanthropy in the U.S. and around the world." The Center maintains comprehensive databases on grantmakers and their grants; issues a wide variety of print, electronic, and online information resources; conducts and publishes research on trends in foundation growth, giving, and practice; and offers education and training programs online and at its five regional library/learning centers and global network of more than 450 funding information centers known as Cooperating Collections. The president of the organization is Bradford K. Smith.' According to the LGBTQ Funders document, 40 Years of LGBTQ Philanthropy, The Ford Foundation has, from 1970 - 1910 showered LGBT organisations with $46,123,135.
I shall not go on. I think you get the gist. The fact that the Rockerfellers among other billionnaires are funding the worldwide campaign for 'gay rights' and 'gay marriage' should have enough people up on their seats wondering exactly for whom the Government works. Is it the citizens of the United Kingdom? Or, is it the case that, as has been true in recent memory, the Government do the bidding of very well-funded lobby groups, not just because of the propaganda which emanates through the Press on its behalf, nor merely because they are well-formed, established and militant pressure groups, but because the financial backers, many of whom form part of an international banking dynasty, fund these pressure groups and these men are, in fact, some of the richest and most powerful men on Earth?
Why? Because they don't work for you or me. They work on behalf of the rich and powerful of this World with an agenda which is divorced from any notion of the common good of society which has been hitherto understood as sensible. The gay marriage issue is not an issue of 'rights' for homosexuals and lesbians. It is, first and fundamentally, a population issue driven by an unelected powerful elite. Secondarily, it is an exercise in ensuring that parents are no longer the primary moral educators of their children, but the State. Thirdly, it is an exercise in cornering the Church and anyone else who believes in traditional marriage into a situation in which liberty and freedom of speech itself will come under increased and sustained attack from the State's thought police. Fourthly, it is an exercise in elective dictatorship in which the State is the new conscience of the nation and, more importantly arbiter and giver of rights. Fifthly and most importantly, it is about destroying the family, natural bonds of society and in deepening the relationship between the individual and the State.
Within the time it has taken to write this blogpost, Lynne Featherstone has confirmed that whether you protest against same-sex marriage by letter, phone, email, fax or guitar, this 'consultation' phase of introducing 'gay marriage' is an exercise in cosmetic democracy. The fact that dysfunctional 'three parent families', which are surely deeply distressting to children, are already in our courts means nothing to the Government. As I said, they're going to do it anyway. Colin Hart of the Coalition for Marriage has said, "I always thought that a consultation was about listening to people and asking them their views, before making a decision. Not only are they redefining the meaning of marriage, they're redefining the meaning of consultation." Welcome to 1984, Colin. Welcome to the Brave New World. This 'consultation' is fast beginning to remind me of a Russian election.
If you want to know just how dangerous the Rockerfeller dynasty and its stranglehold over national Governments is to human freedom, I suggest you watch this interview with US film-maker Aaron Russo, now, sadly, deceased. "He who controls the money supply, controls the nation". That, I expect, is the reality that we and even David Cameron and Lynne Featherstone now face. The French Revolution was not orchestrated by the masses, but by a vanguard of elite spokespersons who acted on their behalf. The Russian Revolution was not orchestrated by the masses, but by a vanguard of elite spokespersons who acted on their behalf. This revolution, the revolution in Marriage, is not being orchestrated by the masses, but by a vanguard of the elite who have employed others to speak on our behalf because our voice is not welcome.
9 comments:
Great post, and full of useful information about the funders. Thank you.
I wonder a bit about their motives.
But what do we do?
I suppose the bare minimum is to make sure we are in a state of grace, save our souls and search and rescue as many souls as we can in the time available to us.
But is there something more?
Does the solution lie in the twenty-first century equivalent of what happened with the mendicant friars? A radically new form of religious life? What can we do?
I guess worrying won't help anything. God will give us what we need.
Pray and keep blogging and hope God gives the truth to a wider audience. All we know is that Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will triumph. A free press that educates rather than propagates is the greatest obstacle to the plans of globalists. As long as it remains unregulated the internet is an opportunity to witness to the truth.
The ones with the money really do control the rest of the world. The world my son is growing up into is scary.
And the target of the money since 2008 has been religious groups.
From one of the funders, Arcus, websites:
"Religious institutions are a critical battleground in the fight
against discrimination, says Ms. Vaid.“We realized from talking to people that a key obstacle to acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people was the mischaracterization of us as sinful and immoral. And yet we also found that there’s this vital movement within every faith tradition that’s advocating for a different treatment of gay and lesbian people,” says Ms. Vaid, who works mostly in New York but spends
one week per month in Kalamazoo. “There were opportunities for
investing in those voices and those
leaders.”
The Arcus Foundation is also
giving more and more to gay and
lesbian organizations overseas. Mr.
Stryker cites the dearth of support
for such causes—about $10.5-
million in 2005, according to Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues.
In 2007, his foundation gave $1.1-
million to international gay-rights
groups.
Other grant makers say the
changes Arcus has made could in-
fluence other donors who finance
gay causes to focus on religion and
overseas support."
http://www.arcusfoundation.org/images/uploads/downloads/Jon_Stryker_Chronicle_Philanthropy_Interview_2008.pdf
Also eugenics. Once marriage is distroyed a new institute will have to arise to cater for the upbringing of children. However this time it will be the state who decides who can enter the institution or not and thus insure only the right sort of people breed.
Dawn
Thanks very much for this post. For some time now I have been asking the obvious question, "Cui bono?"- who benefits? You have begun to provide answers.
Great post. Have just watched the Newsnight debate. The archbishop was the only person to mention the Child.
They want nothing less than total control of populations by using State and international government apparatus, academia, Media etc. to destroy the biggest natural bulwarks against their totalitarian amoral regime - marriage, the family, the nation and religious communions. This is done primarily by promoting sexual licence and uncoupling sex from marriage, procreation, family. Procreation is to be denigrated and reduced to a tiny rate, whilst child farming and eugenics is promoted as the way to get a child - only unnatural, immoral, marriage and family destroying ways are permitted - IVF, surrogacy, and those and adoption for homosexual relationships. Otherwise, people are not to have children in the normal, natural way - they are to contracept, sterilise and kill their children in utero whilst having lots of debauched, perverse, loveless sex. The promotion and proliferation of pornography is a crucial tool in creating more promiscuity, and people enslaved to sexual immorality. Btw, Chuck Feeney is another on that list of billionaires engaged in this evil ideological "philanthropy".
ultimately, the state would like to produce it's own children, these would of course be engineered to be sterile so as to destroy the idea of family altogether.
Men or women not required.
men or women not required
Post a Comment