This chapter should be read with particular attention by Kuwako, who is (or purports to be) an anchor on NHK Watch9, and by Arima and Okoshi, who are probably manipulating her as a puppet.
If you are going to talk about Japan, the world, politics, diplomacy, etc., as an anchor, you must have studied at least this much.
The fact that a person like Kaji, who has no education, no study, and no verification, but only talks about pseudo-moralism, is the anchor of NHK's flagship news program is a God-forsaken outrage.
It's a behavior characteristic of leftist pedophiles if you will.
It is the flagship news program of the Japanese national broadcasting company, so it cannot be dismissed with a sneer or a laugh because it is a news program about us, the Japanese people.
It is about the intellectual level and intelligence of the Japanese people.
Fascism to force the resignation of Senator Sugita
The "Mere Old Man" is hale and hearty with his mouth, but his feet are on edge.
After breakfast, he had nowhere to go.
As usual, he browsed through newspapers and magazines.
Among the articles, the one that was the center of discussion was a comment by Mio Sugita, a member of the House of Representatives of the Liberal Democratic Party.
She contributed an article to the August 2008 issue of "Shincho 45.
The article's main point is as follows.
There are LGBT people in the world.
LGBT stands for L for lesbian, G for gay, B for bisexual (having sexual feelings for both men and women), and T for transgender (Sexual consciousness is inconsistent between the brain and behavior)
In other words, LGBT is their abbreviation.
The "Mere Old Man" does not know the details of the term.
Ms. Sugita claims that LGBT people have nothing to do with the birth of children and do not have children, which means they are not productive.
The "Mere Old Man" thinks that this is true.
However, the "Mere Old Man" thinks there is an exception in the case of "B" because a child can be born if the relationship is between a man and a woman.
If there is an objection to this argument, I would like to add that Ms. Sugita's statement is correct.
If there is any objection to this assertion, one can "refute" it without hesitation.
However, as soon as the criticism of Sugita appeared, many people reportedly gathered in front of the headquarters of the LDP, to which Sugita belongs, to protest and even to call for her resignation.
Resign from the Diet - this is an outrage.
If Rep. Sugita committed a legal or moral scandal, in any case, on what grounds and reasons can they demand her resignation in response to the editorial she boldly stated?
If they try to force it, they deny freedom of speech and only admit their own opinions - that is what the demonstrators call fascism and even Nazi.
Speech with speech.
First, Sugita's statement reads as follows: (1) "For example, ...... spending taxpayers' money on infertility treatment [is] ...... a good cause," she says in general terms, followed by "But will there be support for spending taxpayers' money on LGBT couples? She then goes on to say whether there is "support" for spending taxpayers' money on LGBT couples.
In other words, she is stating a fact, not a discriminatory statement.
(2) "They don't have children," and immediately after that, she states, "In other words, they are not 'productive.
In context, this meaning of "production" is not "production" in the economic sense, which is established by nature, labor, and capital, but instead in the sense of "the possibility of giving birth.
This word "production" is literally an idiom following the idiomatic phrase-making method called "ren-sentence," in which two identical meanings are daringly juxtaposed to determine the meaning, "give birth and bear.
The two words are connected by the concluding word "that is," which means "they do not produce children.
It is just a tautology that "they do not have children," i.e., "they are not productive (in a couplet sense).
How can this be a discriminatory statement?
Furthermore, LGBT life is a form of "cohabitation," not "Marriage."
The basis for this is the Constitution of Japan.
Article 24 of the Constitution states, "Marriage shall be solely upon the consent of both sexes and shall be based on the principle that husband and wife shall have equal rights. ......
The article says "both sexes," "only," and "husband and wife."
A same-sex union is a private act with nothing to do with the Constitution.
The "Mere Old Man" once wrote about it in his previous book, "The Hypocrites in the Media."
Please refer to his previous book, "Hypocrites in the Media" (p.159).
The only way to socially and legally establish LGBT as a marriage is to amend Article 24 of the Constitution of Japan.
Why don't you insist on it?
Is there nothing else to do but play the ding-dong game of intimidating demonstrations?
