also think that Obama is a communist so I am not going to give them much regard.
you might be interested to reflect upon whose initiative led to the decriminalizing of homosexuality
Both the 1967 legalistion of homosexuality and clause 28 were both master-strokes of backbench Parliamentary democracy.
The legalisation of homosexuality was first proposed in the House by Humprhrey Berkely, the then pretty much openly gay Conservative MP for Lancaster. His bill got a second reading and it passed 164 to 107. Then Parliament dissolved so the bill fell.
Leo Abse, the then Labour MP for Pontypool who became the main sponsor of the bill because Berkely lost his seat. His argument to encourage his collegaues to vote for it suggested that homosexuality was a mental illness, but rather than punish the illness, he illness should be treated before boys become men.
Not really the most Liberal of arguments, but it did allow some of the more macho MPs to support the bill. There was no Government support for the bill. So Abse used the power of backbenchers to get it through. He persuaded the Government to do two things firstly to grant it some time, to stop it being being "spoken out" and then if they were not going to support it on whip, to allow a free vote so that the Government was not seen as opposing it on whip.
So it became law. Very bad law, in that as with most backbench legislation many factors are not taken into consideration. Gay sex was illegal (and to some extent may still be) if there is a couple in one room and someone else in the house (they do not have to be in the same room). Threesomes were illegal and even gay nightclubs were effectively illegal.
Clause 28 was equally a back bench measure which was effectively a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
Lord Halsbury (an independent Peer), proposed a Bill in response to books available in ILEA libraries and some other (largely London) local Authorities, entitled “An Act to refrain local authorities from promoting homosexuality”.
The main books at the time that caused the controversy were, "The Playbook for Kids about Sex", "Jenny lives with Eric and Martin" and "The Milkman's on his Way". The appropriateness of these books and the age group to which they they were targeted even today I would question.
Despite the publicity surrounding the bill and of course the Daily Mail headlines, the bill was opposed by the Government as unnecessary, unworkable and open to misrepresentation.
Nonetheless, it passed through the House of Lords. They had a habit of giving the Governement a bloody nose then. The bill was adopted in the Commons by Jill Knight (MP for Birmingham Edgbaston) in response to similar books being prroduced by Birmingham and Liverpool LEAs.
The Government made clear it would not support the bill and it failed.
The campaign for a law to control these publications did not end with the defeat of the bill. Members used another bill, a Government bill to introduce it. At Committee Stage of the Local Government Bill, David Wilshire introduced an amendment for a similar law. This became Clause 28. It was again championed by Jill Knight and with the bill having gone through Parliament, the then Minister for Local Government, was essentially forced to accept it in to the bill.
Despite its passage, the Government made clear through the then Department of Education and Science, "Section 28 does not affect the activities of school governors, nor of teachers,..", "...It will not prevent the objective discussion of homosexuality in the classroom, nor the counselling of pupils concerned about their sexuality."
For better or worse, these moves to force an unwilling Government to take action are unlikely to ever happen again. That is bad for Parliament and the Country as the Executive is not properly or effectively tackled.