Ann Widdecombe needs to shut the hell up.
Don’t get me wrong: the crazy cat lady and former Member of the UK Parliament exemplifies a lot of what I like about British politics. Here in the US, everything sitting politicians say is extensively focus-grouped and rewritten and watered down until it becomes a genre of its own, essentially verbal papier-mâché. When somebody actually says what they’re thinking, it’s played up as a “gaffe” or a “misstep” in the news, as though holding real opinions is the gravest sin a politican can commit. Unless they’re in the Tea Party, in which case they are portrayed as just saying what everyone’s thinking. (If that is true, by the way, I really am moving to Canada.) Whereas, British politicians can say things like this and keep their careers.
The judge has now opened up yet another raft of abuse as people arrive claiming to be homosexual. Perhaps Lord Rodgers will set out the criteria for proving such claims? Attendance at a Kylie concert? Talking loudly about boys? For sheer silliness this judge takes a lot of beating.
There’s a lot of support for this idea in Britain, this idea that it’s a really desirable country for immigrants (it is) and so people from gay-hating countries will pretend to be gay in order to get a path to citizenship. But just for perspective, here’s a breakdown.
Widdecombe’s idea of the trade-off is as follows: it is worth it for gay people to be sent to countries where they will be brutally murdered for simply existing, drawn and quartered, stoned, decapitated, their bodies dug up and spat upon, to prevent people from choosing to claim a different and still much-maligned sexual orientation, and commit to at least appear to live by it, in order that they might scrape out an existence as a minicab driver.
But still: CATS!