Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Anti-gay bishop in trouble after inflammatory Muslim comments

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Sister Mary Clarance 8 Oct 2007, 2:33pm

    So, if I read this correctly Michael Nazir-Ali cannot sit in the same room as someone he has a difference of opinion with (ie. those who ordained Gene Robinson).Why don’t they all just go along, thrown Gene in the river and if he doesn’t drown, burn him alive? If it was good enough in the Dark Ages, it should be good enough now.

  2. Oh dear. I can *so* understand the poor Bishop’s dilemma.After all, think of all those many many reported times that Christ himself ‘found it difficult’ to be around those whom the high priests of the time (who, of course, just like the Bishop, knew exactly who were the virtuous and who should be doing all the repenting) considered to be ‘sinners’ and ‘unclean’…Oh. Ah. Hang on….

  3. Robert, ex-pat Brit 8 Oct 2007, 8:14pm

    Michael Nazir-Ali is a classic case of homophobia in the C of E, nothing new there, but the majority of them are unchristlike anwyay.

  4. Gordon Hall 14 Oct 2007, 9:31pm

    look, homosexuality is wrong the bible says so, you can go on and on about how times have changed but we cannot pick and choose what part of the bible we believe and what we dont, the bible is from God and therefore as God has been around forever the Bible is true foreverand must be treated as that. i agree totally with Michael. Its not what we believe to be right, we all have differences of opinion but we MUST follow scripture and the laws the bible teaches and base our opinions around that.

  5. Sister Mary Clarence 15 Oct 2007, 12:41am

    Wooh Tiger, get off your high horse there and check what the scriptures actually say.It is questionnable to say the least whether the Bible does actually make reference to homosexuals. The Greek and Hewbrew translations give a much different view to the English ones.Romans 1:26 – Heterosexual men and women going against their basic nature and engaging in homosexual Pagan orgies – so bum sex is okay if you are actually a full on homo.Corinthians 6:9/Timothy 1:9 – Men who sexually molest boys — and the boys that they abuse – that would be paedophiles, which I’m sure you are aware is not the same as homosexual. Jude 7 – Bestiality: Men engaging in sex with males of another species — angels in this case. Whilst most of us have probably had a few dogs in our time, it is only figuratively speaking.

  6. Christians pick and choose scripture every day. What about the bible’s ban on shellfish? Christians ignore that one because its obviously nonsense. Christians follow or ignore parts of scripture which are compatible or incompatible with their own beliefs. Its not scripture that makes some Christians behave the way they do towards gay people, it’s their own deep-seated bigotry which they find compatible with scripture.

  7. wil thompson 15 Oct 2007, 12:00pm

    where in the bible does it say homosexuality is wrong? For example, take the story of Sodom and Gomarrah. Reading Genesis 20 makes it very clear that the crime was attempted rape and violation of the laws of hospitality, NOT homosexuality … but homosexual rape. Later on in the bible, God destroys towns for heterosexual rape. The condemation in the book of Leviticus only applies to the Jewish priestly caste (the Levites) and not the ordinary person.

  8. Robert, ex-pat Brit 15 Oct 2007, 1:11pm

    Gordon, it also states in the bible that it is permissible to kill or stoning of your wife for adultery as well as one’s children; husbands are supposed to be away from the marriage bed if their wives are menstruating and intercourse is forbidden during that time; the eating of shellfish is forbidden; marrying your brother’s wife is forbidden, adultery is forbidden and so is divorce; how come you bigots and hypocrites deliberately pick and choose what you do and don’t like, but with impunity deliberately pick and choose one scant questionable reference from Leviticus which is arguable at best? Quit the cherry-picking and doublestandards.

  9. Robert, ex-pat Brit 15 Oct 2007, 1:16pm

    Phill, I totally concur. I posted similar comments in another area in response to Gordon Hall’s comments. Christians have ignored a lot of references in the bible that put heterosexuals in a very bad position. They’re not supposed to commit adultery; marry their brother’s wife; shouldn’t eat shellfish; should stay away from your wife during menstration (no intercourse either); you shouldn’t wear clothing of more than one type of thread; you are allowed to murder or stone your wife for adultery and kill your own children if they disobey you; you’re not supposed to divorce, the litany is endless, yet the bigots and hypocrites perpetuate the doublestandard by deliberately using one short reference in Leviticus to justify discrimination against us. They forget, it wasn’t Jesus Christ who wrote any of it, but men.

  10. Sister Mary Clarence 15 Oct 2007, 2:39pm

    To quote Rev. Mel White, co-founder of Soulforce ….”A recent study quoted by Dr. Peter Gomes in The Good Book found that 38 percent of Americans polled were certain the Old Testament was written a few years after Jesus’ death. Ten percent believed Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife. Many even thought the epistles were the wives of the apostles.This same kind of biblical ignorance is all too present around the topic of homosexuality. Often people who love and trust God’s Word have never given careful and prayerful attention to what the Bible does or doesn’t say about homosexuality.For example, many Christians don’t know that:Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior. The Jewish prophets are silent about homosexuality. Only six or seven of the Bible’s one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way — and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it’s understood today. Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says about homosexuality don’t know where the verses that reference same-sex behavior can be found. They haven’t read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don’t know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven’t tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption that the Bible condemns homosexuality is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research. The consequences of this misinformation are disastrous, not only for God’s gay and lesbian children, but for the entire church.”He goes on to say “Most people who misuse the Bible DON’T search the Scriptures. They simply find a text that seems to support their prejudice and then spend the rest of their lives quoting (or misquoting) that text.”Ring any bells Gordon?

  11. “The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn`t mean that God doesn`t love heterosexuals. It`s just that they need more supervision.” he he he

  12. David Griff 15 Oct 2007, 5:25pm

    Let’s face it it’s questionable whether the bible says anything about anyone or any act or anything at all that is relevant today

  13. Robert, ex-pat Brit 15 Oct 2007, 6:08pm

    Sister Mary, have to agree with you on that. The bible is full of conflicting passages, some contradictory.What is interesting is that the Vatican has some manuscripts that were supposed to be part of what we now know as the bible. These manuscripts are believed by several scholars to reveal a very different depiction of Jesus, the disciples, the role of women and the issue of being gay, probably a favorable one. These same scholars believe that the manuscripts are so counter to what the major religions believe to be are core of their belief systems, that they were forbidden to be included. It is so transparent why the Vatican refuses to release these important relics. We should all demand that they be opened up for all the world to see and learn. My suspicion is that if they did, it would signal the end of the church as we know it.

  14. I still can’t understand why we are having these debates about religion and homosexuality. It seems to me that we have two groups of people – people of faith and GLBT people – who have opposing views and who seem to talk at each other and who will never meet in the middle (if, indeed that is desirable, which I don’t think it is). It seems to me that we in the GLBT communities don’t ask enough the simple question: “Do people of faith have the entitlement to impose their values and beliefs on people who do not agree with them?” As a gay man, of course I would say the answer is a resounding “no”. As I have said before, organised religion is very much about power and only a little about spirituality, and arguing with religious fundamentalists only engages with them according to their rules and not our own.

  15. I was a Christian once and always understood that the whole point of Jesus was that he was god made flesh to bring the real final ultimate message. If you’re a christian then surely christ’s word is the most important, otherwsie stick with the old testament and be Jewish, and as has been pointed out jesus mentioned homosexuality ONCE, ie NEVER, so homosexuality is obviously irelevent to Jesus, christianity’s GOD, so why on earth do any christians gfeel the need to bang on about it? That said i have to agree with David, and frankly now i’m not a christian any longer i have no more obligation to believe in their god or his teachings than i do in those of scientologists or even worse Muslims. Ofcourse there are LGBT believers, i have some sympathy for them BUT i don’t think we should indulge any religion by debating with them, about what there non existent god may or may not have thought, if he did exist except he doesn’t. It’s pointless. It’s like arguing with Dvid Icke about what shade of green the lizrd men who secretly control the earth really are…Let them believe as much vile gobbledegook as they want. the point is if i’m not a christian i’m NOT obliged to take any notice.

  16. oops meant to say “jesus DIDN’T mention homosexualit once” !

  17. What a vile hypcrite. I wonder how he views his fellow Bishops in the UK some of whom are well known to be Gay?He must live in an odd world if he thinks the Church isn’t already stacked high with Gay Bishops, Priests and Deacons!

  18. At least Nazir-Ali has said what a lot of others have noticed.As for the muslim council of Britain spokeman, where is he when we have islamic imams openly calling for our deaths (as did the imam of Manchester recently and others that do so on a regular basis).And the “inter faith dialogue” (that we’re always hearing about in the UK and Western Europe) in islamic countries is noticeable only by its absence.Homosexuality is illegal in all but 1 of the 56 islamic States. Until that statistic improves (and there seems to be no sign of it in any islamic country), these spokesmen for assorted islamic groups, who constantly play the victim card (or should that be teddy?) can go whistle. Particularly as they seem to think freedom of speech is restricted to them being able to preach hatred against all and sundry.

  19. Gordonwhy should I take notice of what it says in your “holy” book. I’m an atheist, not a god-botherer. Why should your superstition rule MY life?

  20. Robert, ex-pat Brit 7 Jan 2008, 8:04pm

    Arch bigot Bishop Nazir-Ali is just another christo-fascist and a hatemonger. Remove their government funding paid for by you and I and you remove much of their power. Let them go out and find real jobs instead of spewing their usual venom against us and others. I’m an atheist and I don’t much care for religion of any kind but I respect another’s right to worship in whatever way he or she sees fit; freedom of religion is one of the guarantees of democracy, but we should also have the right to be free from religion which is a choice. Let those who believe keep it to themselves, in their homes. It does not belong in politics, a dangerous precedent to say the least. Maybe this bigot and his ilk need a lesson history.

  21. I agree with Luke – the hypocracy of the so-called muslim spokesmen is contempable. They howl with rage when anyone criticises them but continue to spew out their hideous homophobic hatreds. The Bishop of Rochester may have ignorant notions on gays but he is spot on this time. White liberals living in their ivory towers should venture out of their cosy la-la lands and see what is happening in areas of West London, Bradford or Birmingham where non-muslims of all colours and other faiths are made to feel like aliens, subject to abuse, intimidation and even violence as Muslim values are forced on whole neighbourhoods. Many of these values, like attitudes towards women and gay people, are in direct conflict with those of our modern democratic society. It will soon reach a point when Muslim-majority local authorities will be refusing to conduct civil partnerships or licence gay premises, ending grants to gay youth groups, banning gay plays or films in theatres and cinemas etc and will be peddling homophobia in city schools. We should be clamping down hard on extreme muslim groups, promoting integration not apartheid segregation in our cities and actively encouraging our more enlightened muslim friends who do not share this backward medieval mindset.

  22. The Right Rev Michael Nazir-Ali needs to learn that this is Britian it is a multi-ethnical religous building interchange what he doesnt realise is that not all muslims are by goers and support the work for terrorism… if he thinks so he shld think again… or he be shot off with his head they say!!!

  23. I fear Kate may be retarded.

  24. I’ve just been looking over the arguments here and noticed this:”…we cannot pick and choose what part of the bible we believe and what we dont…”, says Gordon Hall (14th October)But that’s precisely what many Christian, and indeed Jews, are doing when they spout homophobic hatred but also wear clothing of mixed fibres, or eat seafood or pork or any one of several other actions prohibited in Leviticus and other parts of the Old Testament/Pentateuch.

  25. Robert, ex-pat Brit 21 Jan 2008, 1:27pm

    Chris, the old testament even forbids adultery and divorce and no man can marry his brother’s wife either, and it also permits polygamy, the stoning of wives and the killing of children for disobedience as well as the prohibition of masturbation (spilling one’s seed in vain). The christo-fascists get around it by saying…”oh well, the old testament only applies to the Jews” but they’ll single out that one questionable reference in Leviticus with impunity. So transparent.Religion deserves to be bashed back for the centuries of persistent bashing it has given us. If for exacmple a gay UK national happened to find himself in Iran facing execution, believe me, nobody would lose any sleep over it and no religious leader would decry it either. In fact, it would probably give them comfort.

  26. OMAR KUDDUS 21 Jan 2008, 1:46pm

    I am gay and a Muslim, and proud of it, but my sexuality does not define me..But why should I want to go onto another site, especially straight and look for anyone?M, I would love to agree with you, but am too polite. Do not worry the meds would have kicked in by now, for her.

  27. Why oh why does the gay comnnunity always turn on itself with regard to faith and being gay. I am an ordained church minister and studied the Bible, Ancient Greek and Hebrew for nearly 5 years. Both books of the Bible DO NOT condemn homosexuality. Leviticus is a purity code for the ancient israelites and the priest class. The passage often quoted as anti gay in the Book of Romans actually refers to men dragging up as women and women drabbing up as men to have transvestite orgies. The other passage refers to penetrating temple boys (pedastry) to cleanse one of sin after paying the priests for the privellage.The central issue here is that the athiests always seem to zoom in on the Christian believers in an attempt to vent their spleens, when in fact, they should be directing their anger at people like this Anglican Bishop. The vast majority of Christians are not raging homophobes trundling through the land like witch-finders or angry mobs of villagers with flaming torches and pitchforks. The majority are peaceful, decent, caring and affirming people. It is only the very vocal minority who campaign for their cause and mistaken beliefs that gain the headlines. Not surprising when the evangelical right wing is so well organised and funded by the likes of the Stagecoach bus company Chairman (Brian Souter) and huge royalties from the recently evangelicanised guy who wrote the lyrics to Sinita’s ‘So macho’ song.We should concentrate on campaigning that ANY bigotry based on sexual orientation is wrongful and must stop. We must also campaign and write to the major political party leaders to state that we object to anyone being appointed to a public office who have discriminatory views. After all, the Bishops are appointed by the Prime Minister and his advisory committee, not selected by individual or ordinary church members. The sooner that the Church of England is dis-established (separated from the state as the official church), the better.Everyone start writing to David Cameron and tell him that if he appoints anyone who is a homophobe, we will all vote against him at the next elections. After all, the mess that Labour are making it seems possible the Tories may be elected next time around.Direct action is the only way forward. The pen and the vote are mightier than the sword. Instead of moaning about things – protest. After all, we are officially recognised as a nation of Protestants.It was once said about the rise of hatred, intolerance and nazism…. “Bad things happen, because good people do nothing to stop them”.

  28. To tony i would love to talk to you about the bible in regard to homosexuality. I grew up in the church and always wanted to learn Hebrew and Greek (I only studied Arabic and Latin so far). And would love to hear more of your views on the bible in it’s original text. You can e-mail me at maggiemaximus@aim.com

  29. Robert, ex-pat Brit 12 Feb 2008, 1:30pm

    Tony, you said..”The central issue here is that the athiests always seem to zoom in on the Christian believers in an attempt to vent their spleens, when in fact, they should be directing their anger at people like this Anglican Bishop. The vast majority of Christians are not raging homophobes trundling through the land like witch-finders or angry mobs of villagers with flaming torches and pitchforks. The majority are peaceful, decent, caring and affirming people.”Tony, I assume you’re talking about people who attend church regularly? If that is the case, do you really believe that the majority are that affirming when it comes to Gay issues? I don’t. In order to be a christian, according to Williams, you have to abide by scripture which includes that infamous reference in Leviticus. In a belief system, you’re supposed to belief in all of his tenets, you don’t get to “cherry-pick” those parts that don’t appeal or are uncomfortable. Polygamy is allowed according to “scripture”, as well as the killine of one’s wife, refer to wwww.fallwell.com. Why do many your fellow practicing christians say then that homosexuality is incompatible with scripture? Aside from the United Church of Christ and the Metropolitan Community Churches, the rest of them adhere to this offencive and derogatory reference. How do you and others like you respond to that? Why aren’t you all going after Williams on these issues? Nobody in authority dare challenge him. Why?

  30. Robert, ex-pat Brit 12 Feb 2008, 1:32pm

    Dear Editor, I’m not sure if you’ve read my prior postings but since yesterday, I’ve been unable to access Reader’s comments via haloscan. I now have to scroll over any comment, right click on my mouse and select properties whose window displays the URL of the commentator. From there I now have to cut and paste to my browser to open the comment and to be able to respond. Why is this happening, assuming you’re supposed to have fixed the problem? As far as I’m concerned, nothing has been resolved. Please address this problem, thank you.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all