Taoiseach Leo Varadkar announced on Friday 10th, March, plans to remove the constitutional protections for stay at home mothers. Like many who base their lives on ideology, the Taoiseach is not restricted to being truthful. He does not tell the whole truth and sometimes what he says is not true. The ideology is elevated to the status of infallible truth regardless of whether or not it conforms to known and scientifically observable facts.
In his press launch for a referendum this coming November to remove article 41-2-1° and 41-2-2°, the Taoiseach said the following.
“For too long, women and girls have carried a disproportionate share of caring responsibilities, been discriminated against at home and in the workplace, objectified or lived in fear of domestic or gender-based violence.”
But Leo Varadkar supports abortion which is an act of gender based violence against women. He is not against gender based violence against women per-se, only what he ideologically perceives to be gender based violence. Leo Varadkar, despite being a medical doctor, pretends not to understand gender which relates to the sexual characteristics of male and female. Contrary to the government’s ideological definition of what constitutes gender, only women can have abortions. Men do not get pregnant and men cannot have abortions. Abortion is an act of gender based violence as it is only done to pregnant women. Abortion, whether chemical or surgical, uses force to remove a living human being from the mother’s womb.
The Merriam-Webster definition of violence is “the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy” Abortion fits that definition.
The World Health Organization defines violence as “the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation.” Abortion fits this definition too.
Abortion is the intentional killing of an innocent human being in the mother’s womb which uses either chemical or surgical force to bring about the death. It is an act of gender based violence against mothers.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar, by his support for the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018, bears significant responsibility for this gender based violence against women in Ireland. This act legalised the killing of innocent human beings in the wombs of women.
Only women can become mothers and those women who desired to stay at home to safeguard the upbringing of their children enjoyed two constitutional protections under Article 41.2 of Bunreacht na hÉireann.
41 2 1° in particular, the state recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the state a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
41 2 2° the state shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.
Successive Irish governments have failed to ensure that stay at home mothers receive these protections. The Budget of 2000 introduced the concept of Tax individualisation which allows the government to tax single income families at a higher rate than double income families. This goes against the principle enunciated in article 41.2.2°. However, for a constitutional case to be launched it would have to be proved that a mother was obliged by economic necessity to leave her home for work and that she was neglecting her duties in the home. Most single income families simply took the hit and got on with their lives, it being obvious that the Irish political parties did not have their best interests at heart.
Leo Varadkar and Roderick O’Gorman, both men incidentally, are now aiming to remove these protections from stay at home mothers. They are attacking these women by proposing to strip away the recognition given to them in the constitution. Their ideological mindset does not recognise any benefit of mothers staying at home to raise their children.
Their ideological mindset, is in accord with UNICEF (United Nations Childrens’ Education Fund), which sees these mothers as an obstacle to being able to indoctrinate children from a young age. This is part of a global agenda to undermine parental influence, and the removal of article 41.2 is part of the Irish government’s plan to conform to the global ideology.
In 2019, UNICEF produced a document titled “The Opportunity for Digital Sexuality Education in East Asia and the Pacific.” You can download a copy HERE. On page 15 of this document they cite the following as a barrier to implementing comprehensive sex education in the schools.
“In addition, programmes may not be compulsory but up to the discretion of schools or teachers who may be influenced by perceived or real opposition from parents, communities and religious leaders.”
UNICEF see parents, communities and religious leaders as barriers to comprehensive sex education. Thank God that they are. But these ideologists embark on strategies to get around the barriers. In this particular document they seek to get access to the children via digital platforms. In the executive summary on page 10 they note:
“Digital media provides scope for targeted interventions and the potential to reach adolescent populations at scale, anytime, anywhere.”
United Nations Children’s Fund. The Opportunity for Digital
Sexuality Education in East Asia and the Pacific. UNICEF East Asia
and Pacific, Bangkok, 2019.
Catholic parents need to realise that there is a global movement which seeks to indoctrinate their children with an ideology that is contrary to Catholic teaching on human sexuality. The Irish government is part of this global movement, although Irish politicians tend to be well-paid gullible pawns for the most part. Some of them actually believe in the ideology.
According to a recent Irish Times article (IT 06/03/23), both Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar spoke out in favour of indoctrinating primary school children with the transgender ideology. Of course that’s not how they put it, but that’s what it amounts to. Leo Varadkar is quoted as saying:
““It doesn’t have to be a value judgment as to whether it’s right or wrong,” he said. “But you know, it just makes sense to me that education is about teaching children about the real world, and trans people exist in the real world. So you know, why not just give them information or facts? It doesn’t have to be a value judgment in either direction or challenge anyone’s religious or personal opinions.”
Once again Leo is not being quite honest. Presenting the information as he suggests is already a value judgement. Not telling children that homosexual behaviour is immoral, for example, is a value judgment. Leo does not seek to inform the children about the disproportionate sexual disease risks that accompany the male homosexual lifestyle. Like all apologists for aberrant sexual behaviour, he is very selective about which facts he wants to be made known.
It is not pleasant to write about such things but consider the following.
HSE data reveals that active male homosexuals account for more than 50% of new HIV cases in Ireland and other sexually transmitted diseases. Here are some of the bullet points from the HSE report, “Annual trends update: HIV, Hepatitis and STIs among men who have sex with men in Ireland”, published in December 2019.
• Men who have sex with men are the group most affected by HIV in Ireland and account for more than half of diagnoses in recent years (56% in 2018)
• Men who have sex with men remain the group most affected accounting for 86% of Early Infectious Syphilis – EIS.
• Overall gonorrhoea notifications have increased by 86% since 2015 and men who have sex with men are disproportionately affected by gonorrhoea in Ireland. Where mode of transmission was known, 65% of cases were among men who have sex with men in 2018.
It is obvious from this that the male homosexual lifestyle is very unhealthy. Those who seek to teach children about these lifestyles in a “non-judgemental” way are endangering the future lives of those children. In the past we called such people “perverts” because their actions perverted the minds of children. In the past parents actively sought to protect their children from perverts. We were admonished never to talk to strangers and our parents always wanted to know where we were. But, the digital world has led to a greater acceptance of perverted lifestyles and, in Ireland, it is now government policy to promote perversion to primary school children.
One of the jobs of Catholic parents is to put themselves between their children and those whose actions will harm their children. Catholic parents must stand in the way of these people and deny them access to their children.
We Are Ruled By Madmen – Legio Sanctae Familiae
[…] putting pressure on the primary schools to teach this nonsense to very young children. My previous Article looked at Leo Varadkar’s disingenuous words in support of corrupting primary school children […]