Homosexuals etc.

I will be blunt. Someone who has vested interests in the moral breakdown of third world countries' populations is behind this homosexual, lesbian phenomenon. The phenomenon itself is one big conspiracy, a hoax that is anchored on our predictable revulsion and consequent impulsive reaction.

I remember reading, in a local newspaper, about a conversation between two ladies seated in a minibus. The gist of the conversation was that of the two "holes", only number one should be presented to a husband. If you present hole number two, the husband will be captivated by its tightness, and before you know it, he will be off to look for another man to sleep with. Presumably the reason he looks for a man and not a woman is because a woman might want to entice him back to hole number one - a boring, emotionless hole that he no longer wants to have anything to do with. I am not concerned with the merits or demerits of this conversation, but with the fact that some couples occassionally use BOTH holes.

Now how would we as a society react if some married couples came forward and "confessed" that they only use hole number one when they want to make a child, otherwise their hole of first recourse, is hole number two. I think our response would be "so what ?". And what if the couples' shocker was then delivered - "we want to register our  society of sexual orientation, we will call it HOLE TWO else ONE. We are doing this because society is descriminating against us."

I think you get the point. To parade bedroom matters in the street, in the name of pursuing sexual equality is at best hypocritical, and possibly conspiratorial. Last week I watched in horror as a young "twerker", wearing tight fitting "leggings", gyrated. She was standing with her legs apart . Her head was lower than her knees. The music was blaring  and she was gyrating; gyrating like she was flaunting her holes to an Anunnaki somewhere out on planet Nibiru. Fortunately  the camera was focussing on her from the back of her head, and not from the "interesting" side. In my view, she took her bedroom potential out on to the street. Is that really necessary?

Now contrast that with the reaction of new year revellers in a German town who were allegedly "groped" by people who looked like North Africans or Arabs!. These were revellers. None had her hole penetrated. Some might even have been accidentally bumped into by these "darkies". I am not condoning the behaviour of the "darkies". I'm only showing the contrast between a girl who does not feel insulted when strangers gawk at her gyrating bottom in the street, and a reveler who feels insulted and humiliated if a darkie gave her a pat of appreciation on the bottom.

"So why the homosexual and lesbian conspiracy?", you may ask. The intention is to create chaos and confusion in our societies; to cause us to impulsively react by passing laws that WE CANNOT ENFORCE, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BE IN THE BEDROOM TO GET THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE FOR CONVICTION. As soon as the laws are passed, the conspirators have achieved their objective. The rest will be sorted out, if at all, between the impulsive legislators, and those who claim that their bedroom exploits are being legislated against. For crying out loud, we don't even know that the people who claim to be homosexuals and lesbians actually practice that in their bedrooms. Nor need we to know.

To call the conspirators's bluff, to expose the hoax, all we need to do is repeal any laws that we might have impulsively promulgated against this "imaginary" group, and steadfastly REFUSE to register their bedroom organisations in our statutes. That's my two pennies' worth.  

Devil's Advocate - 2019

Tsholetsa Domkrag!  When we ask for your votes, and you give us your votes to rule, we immediately start ruling; just as we have been doing for the last 50- something years. We do not, after getting your votes, start fighting (read negotiating) on how to rule you.

The UDC has been "negotiating" for the last ten years. But these negotiations have not been on HOW to rule you, should they win the elections; no, not at all. The negotiations on how to rule you will start when you have voted them into Government. In other words when they are supposed to be governing you, they will be starting serious negotiations on how (in heck) to do that - which party takes wich Ministry and which Parastatals. They can't agree on these issues BEFORE elections, because they don't know which of the cooperating parties will win in their allocated constituencies!

So you may want to know what exactly they have been negotiating on during the last ten years. They have been carving up the country like the Imperialists did to Africa from the comfort of their European sofas in or around 1885. Bane ba gopela lefatshe! You the voters were not consulted at all. You were only told at the end of ten years, which cooperating party you must vote for. And now they want you to believe that "carving up Government responsibilities" among themselves can be done in 3 or 4 days after elections? Ao, Bathong do these guys think you are idiots or what?

Yes, they have produced a joint manifesto under the UDC umbrella concept. Even though they call UDC a party, in reality it is just a concept because you can't join it. A joint manifesto is not a contract. Any of the cooperating parties can decide to pull out of the umbrella the day after the elections.

Ask yourselves - if they can produce a joint manifesto and REALLY mean what they have written in that manifesto, what then prevents them from UNITING their parties into ONE party with such manifesto as the guiding document? The answer is simple - The "joint manifesto" is just to fool you, the voters. Vote them in and they will tear the manifesto apart and resort to government ala-Palapye 1998 solution!