2007 - 2020

The Law of Unforeseen Consequences

tebbitWho’d have thought you’d ever put Norman Tebbit (‘semi-trained polecat’) and Brian Wilson (the ‘Highland communist’) on the same page? But then, who’d have thought you’d have seen George Galloway leaping to the defence of Nigel Farage? The Union divide puts people floundering about in company they’d probably never keep but the twisted logic of deference to the British State is a funny matchmaker. Strange Days indeed.

The path between here and Autumn 2014 is going to be a rocky one, but few could have imagined the Constitutional intervention put forward by Norman Tebbit this week as the prospect of a Lesbian Queen emerged as a referendum game-changer.

Clearly we had all been focusing on the constitutional consequences of the annulling the Treaty of Union, then along comes this body-blow to the Treaty of Crowns and before you know it  the whole panoply of grovelling, flag-waving British monarchy could come crashing down in a heap of pink tiaras, brought down by the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill.

The shrewd old Tory grandee pointed out the less obvious problem with basic social equality , stating:

When we have a queen who is a lesbian and she marries another lady and then decides she would like to have a child and someone donates sperm and she gives birth to a child, is that child heir to the throne?

It’s a question we’ve all been worrying about Norman. As food banks fill up and austerity hits home, I’m sure many households are thinking: ‘But what about a future artificially-inseminated heir, how will that affect the continuity of the Battenberg dynasty?’

Then, in comments which (worryingly) appear to show that he seems incapable of distinguishing between homosexuality and incest Tebbit joked that the change could allow parents to marry their children as a way of avoiding inheritance tax:

It’s like one of my colleagues said: we’ve got to make these same sex marriages available to all. It would lift my worries about inheritance tax because maybe I’d be allowed to marry my son. Why not? Why shouldn’t a mother marry her daughter? Why shouldn’t two elderly sisters living together marry each other?

As the British establishment implodes in a fit of it’s own reactionary ridiculousness, Tebbit stands as testimony that all that is wrong about Britain stuck in a 1950s timewarp and ruled by this outmoded Westminster elite. But so does Brian Wilson who today claims that @theSNP ‘s policy on immigration “border on the ridiculous” – this from the party who’s own position on Dungavel has been one a shameful one.

These policies – colluded to by Labour and whitewashed by Wilson – were driven not by the human rights of children but by the political expediency of tribal party politics and sacrificed on the altar of the Union.

Are we seriously to believe that we in Scotland couldn’t deliver a more humane, flexible, progressive and appropriate immigration policy than that presided over by the UK? Such as the case of the Ay family detained for 13 months – or countless cases of abuse at the hands of British authorities and under British regulations.

Is this really all we aspire to in Scotland?

This is the Britain of yesteryear, let’s step forward to a more progressive future and leave these old men in the darkness.

Comments (0)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Someone has to start a band up called Lesbian Queen.

    Incidentally, I wonder if Norman Tebbit has been watching a bit too much Alan Partridge? Specifically Series 1 of I’m Alan Partridge, episode 3 (the farmers one):

    “If you see a lovely field with a family having a picnic, and there’s a nice pond in it, you fill in the pond with concrete, you plough the family into the field, you blow up the tree, and use the leaves to make a dress for your wife who’s also your brother.”

    Unfortunately for Norman, the reason it’s funny when Alan Partridge says it is because he’s a caricature of the type of person who holds ridiculous conservative views and thinks the Daily Express is a good paper. So what does that make Norman…?

    1. Charles Patrick O'Brien says:

      I read the Express,not because its a good paper but for the crosswords (that I use when I read it) just like to know what the enemy is thinking.

  2. annie says:

    My youngest daughter is a Lesbian DJ. She ‘came out’ 3 years ago at the age of 18. No big deal to either her family, friends or community (and we live in Larkhall).

    These so called politicians are walking dinosaurs, silly billy old fossils who need to move on. The times they are, indeed, a changin’.

  3. annie says:

    Actually, I should have said that my daughter is a DJ who just happens to be a Lesbian.

  4. So after laughing my head off for some while…………..

    So let me get this right. If the queen marries a man, has sex and produces an heir, that’s OK, BUT if she marries a woman and procures sperm from a donor and produces an heir to the throne, thats not OK, according to Norm.

    To me, as a biologist, from either route half the DNA comes from the royal lineage, so both are as legitimate as each other. Now I do not know, if at present, the lesbian queen heir would be described as a bastard, as not derived from a church sanctified marriage

    Also, where does that leave a married heterosexual couple that has fertility problems (either male or female). Would we not just let the royal lineage die out and get on with some more inetresting stuff, like building a better of society.

    At any rate, it just shows what Tebbit has been thinking about in his repressed fantasies- lesbians royaly and loads of dosh- Dirty auld bugger. Lol

    1. Juteman says:

      What if the sperm donor was Catholic?

      1. Yes and there is that to think about as well. It is a truly depressing retorgrade society that is the UK.

  5. mhairi says:

    Not sure about whether it would be OK for a queen, but it seems that it is fine for a consort. Apparently Lizzie was conceived by artificial insemination. At least with a Lesbian Queen you would be guarenteed that it was her child, no guarentee that Lizzie is actually Georgie boy’s offspring.

    I think we need a DNA test – we may have an imposter on the throne.

    1. That would be reall inetresting. Was that also the case for Maraget as well? If was only Elizabeth, then it would fall to Maggie’s heir, Viscount Linley. If both were proved to be illegitimate (in the eyes of household law), it would then fall to Richard, Duke of Gloucester, eldest son of, Henry, the third son of Georve V.

      But after looking all that up, I think I have wasted enoughtime on this bunch of inbred, swivel eyed idiotic descents of suasage-sucking loons.

  6. Tom Webster says:

    A nice attempt to link the two foolish sets of statements to the union but it doesn’t really work. Tebbit’s nonsense is a mixture of stupidity, prejudice, homophobia and the old retort to any suggestion for better LGBT rights of ‘but where will it end?’ Wilson’s unionist scaremongering based upon misinformation and selective evidence. So as an assessment of each item separately, I agree. To suggest that nonsense like Tebbit’s is evidence of the particular foolishness of ‘British establishment’ which we would be freed from after independence is, I’m afraid, forlorn. Unfortunately there has been opposition to same sex marriage within Scotland, by Scots and on similar grounds. Homophobia does not respect national boundaries. The small steps in the right direction taken by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland regarding gay ministers was taken in the face of evangelical opposition, for instance. And similarly, there are, regrettably, also flag-waving monarchists here (hence Salmond’s watering down of the consequences of independence to prevent losing their vote through monarchy-worship.) It is good to deride and expose Tebbit’s nonsense; it is good to deride and expose Wilson’s foolishness. It is less helpful to suggest they are both equally connected to issues of independence.

    1. Juteman says:

      Thr link is that the folk that live in Scotlanf could vote out nutters, if we control our own country.

    2. bellacaledonia says:

      I didn’t connect them – they are parties joined at the hip and daily campaigning for the Union and defending each other. Of course Wilson and Tebbit are very different beasts but their outlook of deference and social conservatism belongs to a bygone era.

  7. douglas clark says:

    I don’t want to live in a country that see’s Norman Tebbit as even a minor person.

    1. wanvote says:

      Or worse still, sees Brian Wilson as a communist.

  8. Wullie says:

    I’ve always viewed Brian Wilson as the Mrs Mac of Scottish politics, the wee sour nippit face of the character in Take the High Road fits him to a tee.
    And a finger in more pies than Jack Horner to boot!

  9. Piobaire says:

    Wilson is neither Communist nor Highland. He is a fully paid up member of the UKOKIA. He is the worst kind of plastic lefty. Spouting cod radicalism (and plenty bilge) through the West Highland Free Press, he continues with the line that Westminster will deliver. He has his beady little eye on the cheque conveyor belt coming in from Amec energy. No change is absolutely imperative.

  10. jdmank says:

    what really troubles me is the people like Norman were seen as being sane enough to run this country, OMG! anyone got a bike I can borrow?

  11. Barontorc says:

    Is Brian Wilson so corrupt that even he has trouble knowing ‘which way is up’ in his arguments for the betterment of the Scottish people?

    It used to be called ‘amoral’, but in some cases, a la Foulkes, Harris, Wilson etc, etc, the morality aspect has been long submerged by self-aggrandisement and self-gain. These characters are morally totally bankrupt, hence, no surprise that Wilson pitches in for Farage.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.