There has - quite rightly - been an uproar about Brunei's threat/promise to punish homosexual acts by stoning people to death. Anybody who thinks this is justifiable clearly has a very, very sick mind, because being gay or lesbian is in fact perfectly natural.
It's not 'normal' in the sense that a huge majority aren't gay, but it is still a natural part of the human condition, like being left-handed is perfectly natural. That's not 'normal' either but perfectly natural. Some people just are.
But... they intend/hope to stone adulterers to death as well. Personally, I think adultery is despicable behaviour, but it's certainly not a 'crime' that requires a state-sanctioned punishment. Maybe some readers are swingers, or think that adultery is not so serious; and maybe other readers take a dimmer view than I do, those are minor differences of opinion.
Same goes for 'thieves'. Typical Western penalties - social shaming; fines; community service or prison in serious cases (such as burglary) - seem reasonable to me. To want to chop somebody's actual hand off requires an equally sick mind as wanting to stone people to death for non-crimes like being gay or cheating on your spouse.
But unfortunately thieves and adulterers don't have their own lobby, for obvious reasons.
Unfinished business
2 hours ago
6 comments:
Hi, what is your view on ban all bank lending except capital development lending. 0% overdrafts for capital development lending agency businesses deliver state funds. Improve productive economy.
Ink, I'll answer that later.
PS, the irony is not lost on me.
OTOH, they'd like to kill any ex-muslim.
Unk, fuller reply:
As any reader of this blog will know, I've nothing against proper bank lending - personal loans, house purchase mortgages, credit cards, business loans etc. The only kind of lending which is poison to the real economy is lending to buy land, this just pushes up land prices, leads to boom-bust cycle, sucks resources out of the real economy and gives them to rent seekers (land owners and bankers alike).
Funding public services out of user charges on land owners for benefits received (aka Land Value Tax) instead of out of taxes on output (VAT) and wages (NIC) would kill at least two birds with one stone:
1. Frees up real economy, more output, more employment, more to go round.
2. Depresses selling price of land to a much lower level:
a. Fewer resources get sucked up by owners of natural/public assets
AND
b. There will be much less bank lending on land, because there's no security any more. Thus dampening boom-bust cycle as a bonus.
I was pleased by the response of the celebrities, finally backing a cause that is actually worthwhile, and taking it out on a wealthy person for a change.
But as Penseivat touches on, there is a contradiction here. By opposing Islam they have become "islamophobic" and therefore they have become they type of person that they profess to dislike.
I realised years ago that the political left is inherently contradictory. It's happening in Birmingham as well, where Muslims are protesting against the teaching of homosexuality in schools. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the long run.
If Boris Johnson were still foreign secretary he would stand up for adulterers.
Probably the 'chopping hands off' is more to discourage les autres than to punish the thief. Still Barbaric tho'.
I'm with MW.
Post a Comment