Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Quakers agree to hold gay marriages

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “Quakers Say Gays Can Have Their Oats”

    *picks up coat and leaves*

  2. It will be interesting to see how the government handles this, as it goes against legislation.

    I am pleased the Quakers have stood up to be counted on this.

  3. Good old Quakers . . . let ever one “Quake” with there genorosity to LGBT people . . .

    Truly an inclusive, upstanding and tolerant relgion . . . very few Churches are worthy of drawing upon the name of Jesus . . . the Quakers are one of them.

  4. This really is significant. A church going full-steam-ahead to allow same-sex marriages in the UK! Great! Love it!

  5. Simon Murphy 31 Jul 2009, 1:43pm

    “The question of legal recognition by the state is secondary”

    Oh no it’s not. It is forbidden by law for the Quakers to hold a gay marriage. If they proceed with marrying gay couples the government has a choice – to either legalise ALL gay weddings or risk outrage and condemnation by refusing to recognise same sex marriages.

    Silly as the Quakers religious beliefs are I am impressed that they seem much less hateful than most organised religion.

  6. Andrew Rendle 31 Jul 2009, 2:00pm

    Simon: I am a Quaker at the Yearly Meeting Gathering in York, so maybe I can explain where that line is coming from. We are not saying that state recognition is irrelevant, rather it is that a lack of state recognition will not stop us from doing what we feel that the divine spirit requires of us. And that is to recognise and support same-sex unions as marriages, equal in all ways to mixed-sex ones.
    As Quakers, we don’t talk about theology very much, but one bit of Quaker theology is in our understanding of marriage as a union of two people brought together by the divine spirit. Quakers do not “marry” couples, we recognise that god has joined the couple in marriage and report that to the state; we have been doing this for opposite-sex couples long before the state recognised our doing so, and are now going to do so for same-sex couples whether or not the state will recognise it. In the absence of state recognition some couples may well choose to have a civil partnership as well, but even if they don’t we will accept and support them as a married couple in the eyes of god.

  7. Brian Burton 31 Jul 2009, 2:16pm

    Andrew Rendle,
    All I can say is God Bless Quakers. (I’m a Gay Christian) You show courage and Leadership, sadly lackig in other Religious orders and sects. We have atheists commenting on the Pink threads too. At least one of them I noticed commended the Quakers for agreeing on Gay marriges.

  8. This is brilliant news. We all now need to help to put pressure on the government to allow the legal recognition of these marriages. We do already have churches that perform same-sex marriages, such as the MCC, but the Quakers have more clout as a larger, older organisation. (That is not to say that the MCC isn’t a good organisation.) This decision helps make a stronger argument for marriage equality.

  9. Huzzah!

    I don’t know anyone could take issue with “The question of legal recognition by the state is secondary.” as it seems quite a simple concept (even before special Quaker belief factors) – if I were to get married myself, by any or no rite, I wouldn’t hesitate to refer to myself as married rather than be beholden to laggy old politics.

    I’m pretty sure that’s a common LGBT stance across the globe, but it’s always nice to see other groups proving of like mind.

  10. This is what I just sent to my MP. With this decision fresh I think now is a good time to get the issue on the table;

    Dear Mrs Harman

    I am writing after having heard the news of the Quakers’ decision to recognise same-sex marriages and to seek legal recognition for those marriages from the government. I want to express my support for marriage equality and I hope the government will do all it can to allow the recognition of same-sex marriage.

    Currently the law creates an inequality and fails to give gay people the same rights as heterosexual couples. Civil partnership provides an equivalent to civil marriage, but many heterosexual couples have religious marriages which are legally recognised, but same-sex couples are denied this right.

    There are many same-sex couples who have had marriages in gay-friendly churches such as the Metropolitan Community Church. This group will significantly increase following the decision of the Quakers. It is wrong that these people cannot get any legal recognition of their marriages while heterosexual counterparts can. The civil partnership does not provide legal recognition of these marriages.

    A recent poll showed that 62 percent of the British public support gay marriage, yet the government does not go along with the majority opinion. I have a civil partnership with my partner and I can testify that it does not provide the same status as marriage. People in civil partnerships are often reminded that they aren’t married.

    When the government brought in the civil partnership scheme I was supportive and I thought it was a very positive step in the right direction. However, I think it cannot be seen as the end of the process of providing equality. Full marriage equality is the ultimate goal and it is gathering momentum globally. More and more countries are opting for marriage equality, especially those which previously had some form of partnership recognition. Now it looks as though Albania may beat the UK to this important equalities milestone and as more and more countries do this the UK’s civil partnership scheme will look increasingly outdated.

    Civil partnerships were a good idea at the time but the create a two-tier system in which heterosexual people are ‘more equal’. The exclusion of gay people from marriage is not so much of a gay rights issue- it is perhaps more of an issue of religious freedom. The state is morally wrong to tell religious institutions such as the Quakers or the MCC that they refuse to give legal recognition to the marriages they perform.

    Please can the ‘stepping stone’ of civil partnerships be retired in favour of full marriage equality which will give both gay and straight couples an equal right to choose whether they have a civil or religious marriage.

    The basic universal human right to family life should include the right to have people’s marriages recognised. My husband is no such thing in the eyes of the law. I have greatly admired the way in which you have fought for equality and human rights and this is a part of the reason I have voted for you and I am happy to have you as my MP. I really hope that you can now continue that fight and support marriage equality.

  11. Well done, Quakers!

    Andrew Rendle: “As Quakers, we don’t talk about theology very much, but one bit of Quaker theology is in our understanding of marriage as a union of two people brought together by the divine spirit”

    I’m not religious, but that’s a much fairer and more sensible idea than any other religious view I’ve read about. Thank you for explaining that.

  12. Delighted to see the Quakers following in the footsteps of Liberal Judaism. Let’s hope that there’s an option for gay marriage in all the various religious strands!

  13. Simon Murphy 31 Jul 2009, 4:46pm

    I was not bashing the Quakers when they said “The question of legal recognition by the state is secondary”

    My point was that it will be HIGHLY relevant when it comes to discussions with the government on why a gay couple who marries in in a Quaker ceremony does not get the same rights as a straight couple.

    Who knows – maybe Britain may overtake Albania when it comes to gay rights again.

    I wonder if Stonewall will oppose the Quaker’s actions?

  14. Vincent Poffley 31 Jul 2009, 5:23pm

    The practices and beliefs of a particular religious hobby group are neither here nor there. The important thing is what the law of the land provides, and at the moment it does not provide equality. Religion is entirely irrelevant to the question of marriage.

  15. Robert, ex-pat Brit 31 Jul 2009, 6:41pm

    Tony, well said, I couldn’t have said it better. The thing is, civil partnerships, PACS, and other forms of unequal unions will NEVER be the norm for gay people across the EU or around the world for that matter. Marriage, whether some of us like it or not, or want it or not, IS the universal gold standard. That will NEVER change. Same-sex marriage now available in seven countries, maybe eight if Albania gets on board, far outnumbers anything that civil partnerships and other types of unions could ever surpass. Its time for the UK to take the next and final step, a short one at that, but don’t expect much help from either Labour or Conservative parties. Both are too deferential to the established cult of the land, the C of E.

  16. I’ve been straightening out the spare room. So many things accumulated over the years.

    Time to get rid of some old music; among them ‘I can’t get no satisfaction’.

    Thanks, Quakers for giving me a hand to clean up my act.

  17. Brian Burton 31 Jul 2009, 8:19pm

    Gorden Brown knows very well which way the wind is blowing but his feet are stuch in the quagmire of religon and it’s oppersition to Gay Marrage anyway. I think when Gorden is finally sent packing, we might get somewhwere.

  18. Rick George 31 Jul 2009, 9:02pm

    Unless David Cameron is his replacement of course

  19. Tim Hopkins 31 Jul 2009, 9:30pm

    I guess that lobbying the Tories on the GB wide basis would be a good idea. Meanwhile a campaign is underway in Scotland to get same-sex marriage here (which is under the control of the Scottish Parliament). If you’re interested, click on my name below to get to the Equality Network website, select Priorities from the Policy menu along the top, and scroll down to Same-sex marriage.

  20. David Skinner 31 Jul 2009, 9:41pm

    No doubt these queer relationships might claim that they are just as loving, consensual, committed, respectful, caring, involved, inclusive and diverse, as that of straight couples , but to judge by the rate at which twentieth and twenty first century forms of straight marriages have been encouraged to break up, this is no recommendation -that is unless they can show that queer marriages are inherently more stable, co- hesive, secure, strong and united that of the straights.

    But the gay community does not really want to replicate traditional marriage. When the gay community are offered marriage there is not exactly a stampede. The evidence shows that marriage does not suit the gay life-style. What they want is the acceptance and recognition, the goods and services associated with marriage but not the essential nature of it. But it is straight-like marriage which is easiest to sell to the wider straight community.
    Even those who do want marriage – especially gay men – tend not to see a need to restrict their sexual activity to their menage. At the ideological level as well, there are strong homosexual voices which have little interest in conservative argumentation for same sex marriage. They deeply resent the homophobic implications of a negative view of homosexual practices which don’t mirror conventional straight marriage practice. ‘Freed of the constraints of marriage, gays are presently free to explore guiltless pleasures of sexual abandonment … Some gays worry that the marriage license will deprive them of their avant-garde status. Instead they’ll become retrograde, tarnished imitations of the bourgeois coupling they hold in contempt. The monogamous, straight marriage does not fit in with a homosexual lifestyle which in their own view is at the very cutting edge of modern , progressive 21st century , technological , post modern life. Why should they follow the conservative straight model.? Why should they limit their menage to just two and to life- long commitment? Why put any constraints on their relationships? A characteristic of the homosexual community is its love of risk, abandonment, shock and rebellion. One only has to attend the grotesque, leering, mocking and strutting spectacle of gay pride and Mardis Gras exhibitionism, or read Peter Tatchell’s gospel, called Outrage , to see the true face of sexual diversity – or should I say diversion?. This is the real face of the LGBTs.

    But the strident , progressive homosexual voices has largely gone silent – self-censorship must be at work -until the goal of gay marriage is reached. … you don’t win the right to marry by telling the world that queer people’s lives are as confusing, messy, tattered, and complicated as heterosexual lives. You win the right to marry, it seems, by presenting to the world, and to the courts, the most acceptable, most homogeneous, most lovable, most traditional couples (preferably with kids if possible) you can find.

    It was the straights, back in the 60s who started to unravel marriage and today we are reaping the whirlwind.

  21. David Skinner – while I welcome you blaming straight people for something, most of what you say is simply untrue. It’s akin to me saying that I know a number of straight men who cheated on their wives, ergo all straight men are adulterers and only enter into marriage as a deceit. Crap.

    As you seem concerned about upholding monogamy and moral behaviour in marriage, why don’t you concentrate on encouraging ALL married people, straight or gay, to be faithful to their spouse? Or is it just gay people who bother you? (That was a rhetorical question)

    Now I must go. I’m off to post insulting rubbish and spurious ‘evidence’ on a Christian forum. Christianity, of course, doesn’t interest me at all, but I like to read every thread assiduously because..er..well, I like to refute points…er..right? In fact, I like to read all the articles a number of times while tutting to myself at regular intervals to remind myself just how much I like…er…..DISlike Christianity.

    If you find LGBT people so distasteful, why do you visit an LGBT site? You won’t convert anyone here. You’d be better off doing something truly Christian with your time.

  22. David Skinner 31 Jul 2009, 10:46pm

    Iris, the temptation for most men to cheat on their wives, either in the act or just in their imaginations is universal. It goes along with being a fallen human being. Why do you think that couples being wedded make vows if there is not the possibility that they might, through human weakness, break them?

    “Wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife, to live together according to God’s law in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour and keep her, in sickness and in health? and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?”

    If this is difficult for men and women who, in their union, produce children ( the effect of which ought to be to bind the marriage even tighter), how much more difficult will it be for relationships that are not bound together by blood ( IVF, surrogacy, adoption etc) and that are not predicated on the view expound by Jesus Christ in Matthew 19.

    And Iris, if you find the Christian view on marriage – that still underpins western European society- so distasteful, why don’t you emigrate to terra homo? I wouldn’t mind if you kept to your ghettos, like Brighton, but your attempting to move out and infiltrate into our schools, touching the apples of our eyes, our children, is bound to attract my attention and a public that is slowly waking up to the threat posed by the diverted. I come to Pink News because I need to gather intelligence.

  23. Personally, Mr. Skinner – I love the fact that you visit this site and make comments – i find them very amusing!

    Keep up the good work.

  24. PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

    Please ignore David SKinner and do not reward him with the thrill of a reply.

  25. Michael, Liverpool 1 Aug 2009, 12:23am

    David, I don’t know if I should assume from your comments that you have some sort of inverted respect for the gay community? Your command of the English language is commendable, and I’m seriously considering putting your quote as to what constitutes the homosexual lifestlye on a T-shirt. Well done! I will wear the T-shirt at next year’s Pride.

    What you seem to have missed, however, is that marriage in the Bible is portrayed in many different ways, and not all of them are of the Adam and Eve model. Amongst the different examples of marriage in the Bible are polygamous marriage, levirate marriage, prisoner of war marriages, slave marriage, and indeed same sex marriage (the partnership of Jonathan and David is an example of same sex marriage. Jonathan’s father referred to David as his son in law in I Samuel 18:21). Most Christians, however, believe God will only accept the Adam and Eve model, but scripture itself challenges and contradicts this viewpoint. The examples of marriage I’ve given were all affirmed and blessed in the Bible.

    When the government eventually gets around to debating the future of marriage, I would argue that they break away from this idea that not only does it have to be between people of the opposite sex, but that it doesn’t always have to be between two people. Should it not be upto individuals themselves how they wish their relationships to be recognised in law, and not the state? Presuming these people are consensual and of age. It is my belief that the state should not intervene on people’s relationships as a whole. Isn’t this a gross violation of an individuals priate life?

    Furthermore, I would add David, that your idea that it is the homosexual lifestyle that is at odds with marriage is slightly misguided. You now know that there were lots of ways to be married in the holy scriptures themselves!

  26. David Skinner:

    As far as I’m concerned, and in the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that you have evry right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access if open to all, without exception.

    It occures to me that you may very well make sense to some of us, and I am wondering how we could learn more about you and the religious organisation that you represent so well and with such courage, determination and generosity.

  27. Simon Murphy 1 Aug 2009, 2:10am

    David Skinner has admitted that he is into sheep.

    Please ignore him.

  28. John M.J. 1 Aug 2009, 3:51am

    Mr. Skinner,

    Back here again so soon and still attempting to sell your discredited and faulty version of our Christian faith – as Michael at Comment 24 ably pointed out to you.

    I read your Comment (19) and ended up thinking that it would have been very much better – but just as spiteful, ill-informed, opinionated (rather than factual) and Satan inspired – had you used your own words instead of extensively quoting an unattributed source in your usual deeply dishonest way. Would you care to tell us all exactly where your words in that Comment came from instead of passing them off as your own?

    As for your ridiculous and unsupported statement at Comment 21 that …the temptation for most men to cheat on their wives, either in the act or just in their imaginations is universal, well, that simply beggars belief and says far more about you and the immoral circles in which you move – supposedly Christian circles I presume – than it does about men in general. Of course, those weren’t your words either: once again you were dishonestly quoting another writer without attribution or acknowledgement as well as making a sweeping statement of prejudice which cannot be proved, then assuming it to be a given fact and building an argument on it.

    Now, tell us whose works you are quoting from and stop trying to pass off the words of others as your own; then provide factual, statistical proof to back up your wild statements about men and about gay men in particular. Finally, please stop trying to pass off assertions and opinions as facts – try to argue like an intelligent adult and admit only provable facts as evidence.

    You said …Iris, if you find the Christian view on marriage – that still underpins western European society- so distasteful, why don’t you emigrate to terra homo? but Iris never said that she finds the Christian view on marriage distasteful: that is merely you, in your usual nasty way, twisting the words of another person to suit your own ends. That is an intellectually dishonest ploy usually used in arguments and discussions by people who hate and enjoy hating, and I warned you about that sort of dishonest twisting of what people have said some weeks ago on another thread at this site when you attempted to do the same thing to me.

    Back to the businness in hand – who wrote your words for you and can you support those assertions with facts?

  29. Mr. Skinner:

    Just a wee drop of liquid soap detergent in a quarter cup of warm water will wash out your mouth and leave your breath as fresh as could be.

    Quack, quack!

  30. Bishop Ioan 1 Aug 2009, 4:56am

    Oh dear, David certainly has missed taking his meds tonight.

    Mr Skinner, I resent you tarring the entire community with the same brush. I do not think everyone has to live my way but I am married to a lovely woman in a monogamous marriage. We do not “club”, we do not do drugs, nor anything that you imagine to be done by gay people. I am sick to death of your fundamentalist BS on this board. You don’t want marriage equality because people might find out that many couples are just like their straight counterparts. Since you come here to supposedly “gather intelligence” (something you are sorely lacking in–and I don’t mean the gathering of information), has it dawned on you that the LGBT community is far from secretive? I submit that you come here to verbally dump excrement on our community. You are no Christian and I question your heterosexuality since you seem to spend so much of your time on a gay site–methinks the lady doth protest too much.

    David, go home, read your Bible and work out YOUR OWN salvation “in fear and trembling.

  31. John M.J. 1 Aug 2009, 5:46am

    Mr. Skinner,

    You said: If this is difficult for men and women who, in their union, produce children (the effect of which ought to be to bind the marriage even tighter), how much more difficult will it be for relationships that are not bound together by blood… thereby introducing two points of heresy and two points of philosophical error

    The first point which you imply is that marriage is solely about the production of children. It is not. Marriage is about the union of a couple in, and through, love. Many heterosexual couples choose not to have children, or cannot have children, but such a choice or circumstance does not in any way invalidate such unions. For you to suggest otherwise is nonsense and it is also a heresy which the Church has long argued against. Many Christian Churches will argue that children are best raised by married parents but no reputable mainstream Church will ever argue that the purpose of marriage is the production of children; nor will any mainstream Church argue that the children of any relationship should be used as pawns, mere pieces on the chessboard of life, to underpin or reinforce a relationship – …to bind the marriage even tighter… as you phrase it – because children are not, in the mainstream Christian worldview, bargaining chips or building blocks but individuals in their own right with needs and responsibilities which have to be met by all the adults around them not just by the parents’ solo efforts. The mainstream Churches’ use of Godparents as visible witnesses for the binding of a congregation to a child in the Rite of Baptism simply asserts that view, but it’s obviously not a view that you can hold and so you slip, once again (as you do so often), into gross heresy.

    The second point that you imply is that relationships have to be bound together by blood in order to be easy – …how much more difficult will it be for relationships that are not bound together by blood… – and that too is a heresy for the Blood in question is, and must always be, in mainstream Christianity, the vows taken over and during the Mass – the Body and Blood of Our Lord as represented by the bread and the wine at Communion – and not the blood of the children of a union. Quite simple, you have wilfully and deliberately misinterpreted the meaning of ‘blood’ in the mainstream Christian Churches and twisted meaning, once again, to suit your own prejudices.

    Furthermore, you have yet again, referred from your version of the Bible as if it is literal fact. How often do I, and others here, have to explain to you that the Bible is not literal fact, that it is not the dictated word of God but the Word fed to us through the fallible minds of men who wrote down what they think that they heard and, naturally and as all reasoning Christians belonging to the mainstream of our Faith believe, coloured what they thought that they heard with their own prejudices.

    You referred to Matthew, Chapter 19, yet you paid absolutely no attention to the huge problems surrounding that text. For a start off the Gospel of Matthew was written at least one hundred years after Christ’s Ascension which would have made Matthew impossibly old at the time it was written. Secondly, that Gospel is not written by one person but by at least four people and, despite tradition, it is not the first Gospel but is more likely to be the third Gospel written. Thirdly, it was not originally written in Hebrew and then translated but was originally written in Greek and translated back and forth into various of the ancient languages (which gave rise to the idea of The Gospel of The Hebrews) and the version which we use is a heavily bowdlerised version with many spurious additions. Fourthly, using modern scientific methods we can apply the tools of recension to Matthew’s Gospel and detect at least three, probably four, precursor documents from which the authors of that Gospel selectively quote.

    Then there is the problem of the translation of individual verses. New Testament Greek is not easy and the problem is further compounded by our ancestors’ love of word play and their need, at a time when Christianity was illegal, to deliberately obfuscate meaning so that only the existing faithful could understand what was written. Even the early Church did not believe that the Apostle Matthew was the author of the Gospel which bears his name; indeed, St. Jerome did not believe that and we can see, quite clearly, in the writings of Epiphanius the confusion which existed about this Gospel at the very beginnings of our Faith. Tellingly, not one, not one single one, of the Fathers of the early Church asserted that Matthew wrote the eponymous Gospel in question in your comment, neither did any of them assert absolutely that it (Matthew) is a valid Gospel.

    Yet you threw Matthew Chapter 19 into the fray as if it was some sort of clincher – as if it had some spurious validity in front of which we must all give way. Many of the verses, the majority of the verses, in Matthew Chapter 19 stand out linguistically as having been written into this Gospel at a much later date and, therefore, probably have no real validity as a report of the words that Christ actually spoke. Indeed, the actual words used are couched in the Greek vernacular of a period much later than the rest of that Gospel and would appear to have been added in to it about one hundred and fifty years after the rest of the text was compiled. Yes, yes, I know that arguably similar words appear in both Luke and Mark but they too have been tampered with and are equally as suspect as Matthew is.

    When will you ever learn that you cannot just chuck Scripture around in indiscriminate fashion and expect, demand, as you do, that it will clinch the argument and prove you to be correct. Rational argument demands a much more reasoned approach than you appear to be capable of – it also demands some intellectual rigour which you do not, obviously, possess: deeply immersed, as you seem to be, in error, and mired, as you obviously are, in soul destroying heretical beliefs.

  32. Vincent Poffley 1 Aug 2009, 5:51am

    To repeat: marriage has no intrinsic connection to religion whatsoever. Religious groups simply parasitise human social needs and cultural forms with their own overlay of strange ideas and practices. This is why all religions tend to stick their noses in most at the important times of life – birth, marriage and death. It is a pernicious and self-serving falsehood that many of them spread when they make the outrageous claim that their particular brand of superstition invented our social institutions, much less are responsible for the fabric of our societies. We made our gods and our religions, they did not make us, and we can unmake them just as effectively.

    Humanity has outgrown religion. We no longer need it and in many cases it is downright harmful. Quakerism is one of the most benign strains, but it still contributes nothing to society that society couldn’t have anyway. Buddhism is another. Friendship, love, respect, understanding, charity, inspiration, comfort, community, fellow-feeling – all these things we can and will do anyway. We did them long before religions emerged in prehistoric human cultures and we will continue doing them long after the last stone from the last church has fallen on the last priest.

    Let those with a fondness for ritual and ceremony and particular cultural trappings dress up our universal human institutions any way they will. But the moment they try to impose their preferences on others they go too far, and the moment they try to claim any unique custodianship of the things that matter to everyone they must be shouted down.

  33. Now that I think of it, Mr. Skinner, go jump in a lake.

  34. Vincent Poffley:

    It’s easy to see you’re no slouch. Your point of view is clear and quite acceptable.

    However, wouldn’t you think that tolerance for rational faith is a value that we would do well to bring with us into our journey into the 21st century? The Quackers, for example.

  35. Vincent Poffley 1 Aug 2009, 6:19am

    There is no such thing as rational faith. Faith is, by its very nature, irrational – it is simply the incomprehensible and quite useless practice of believing things without evidence. The reason the Quakers are so pleasant and tolerable is because they rely very little on faith and very much on reason – in the form of good common sense for the most part, and a recognition of the realities of human equality.

  36. Of course. What was I thinking?

  37. John M.J. 1 Aug 2009, 7:07am

    Mr. Poffley,

    I disagree. I think that there is such a thing as Rational Faith. Rational Faith may be founded in an irrational, for you, belief in God but the rationality of Rational Faith is what happens after that. The acceptance of good rather than evil, the acceptance of scientific evidence above superstitious belief, the acceptance of evolution – physical and philosophical. The acceptance, generally, that science and logic informs our world and should inform our worldview. The acceptance of secular government over theocratic rule.

    Rational Faith may, as far as you are concerned – and you may be correct – starts from an irrational premise or belief. However, I claim Rational Faith because of what I, and millions of others, believe comes next. It’s what we do, what we believe in, after the moment of Faith that you should use, in my opinion, to judge us by.

    In other words, I think that it is where our Faith(s) lead us that marks us out as Rational, or not, not where our Faith(s) started from (which, I admit, can seem to you and to others to be pretty irrational).

    I believe that if our Faith(s) deny new and well supported scientific knowledge then they are irrational but if our Faith(s) can accomodate new knowledge and can adjust dogma to fit facts and belief to fit truth then our Faith(s) is(are), at least to some extent, Rational.

    I also disagree that we Faithful believe things without evidence. The evidence may be a delusional activity taking place within our own heads but that is still evidence, for the activity, whatever it may be, takes place and causes us to believe. That activity, that evidence as I would have it, may be a fault, a delusion, but it is still present and it is that which causes us to believe in our irrational, as you see it, first premise. We do not function in our belief without evidence – even if that evidence turns out to be nothing more than a disorder of the brain (or the correct functioning of the brain, on the other hand, and it turns out that it your brain that malfunctions!).

    Interesting. Thank you for sparking this off. A very enjoyable sideline for which I thank you for you have given me much food for thought.

  38. What he said!

  39. John M.J. 1 Aug 2009, 7:53am

    Mr. Skinner,

    You said: If this is difficult for men and women who, in their union, produce children (the effect of which ought to be to bind the marriage even tighter), how much more difficult will it be for relationships that are not bound together by blood…

    Once again, could we have that in your own words as opposed to the unattributed words that you choose, in your usual untruthful fashion, to pass off as your own?

    Alternatively, just tell us where you are quoting them from.

  40. John M.J. 1 Aug 2009, 8:05am

    Mr. Skinner,

    I’m waiting for your attributions, your references. What’s taking you so long?

    Surely you kept track of the works that you plagiarised!

    Oh, for heaven’s sake, even you couldn’t believe that I wouldn’t recognise the idiot quotes that you have attempted to pass off as your own words!

    Come on, own up. You’re a robber and a plagiarist.

    Have the courage, man, to admit your sins and your stupidity!

    Well, no, of course you can’t. You, of course, must always be correct – that is the nature of your delusion, isn’t it?

  41. This is excellent news – wonderful that it encourages the anger of our fundie friends too. Quakers have always been a step ahead of other religions.

  42. Well done Quakers! Keep up the good work and yet another step in the right direction.

  43. God bless the Quakers! WHAT A FIRST THIS LOOKS _ A RELIGIOUS ORGANISATION ACTING IN THE SPIRIT OF GOD AND LOVE. THIS MAKES ME SO HAPPY. A GLIMOUR OF LIGHT FOR ONCE!
    THANK YOU QUAKER FRIENDS Xxxxx

  44. The Quakers (unlike the Catholic church) always seem to fall on the right side of history. So it is not so surprising that they are the first Christian denomination to have reached such a decision.

  45. nicholson 1 Aug 2009, 9:47am

    great.

  46. DS Post 21: “And Iris, if you find the Christian view on marriage – that still underpins western European society- so distasteful, why don’t you emigrate to terra homo? I wouldn’t mind if you kept to your ghettos, like Brighton, but your attempting to move out and infiltrate into our schools, touching the apples of our eyes, our children, is bound to attract my attention and a public that is slowly waking up to the threat posed by the diverted. I come to Pink News because I need to gather intelligence”

    Thank you for that explanation of why you visit Pink News, but, as I’ve assured you before, there is NO ‘gay agenda’. No-one here’s out to destroy society or recruit children – that’s impossible anyway as one’s sexuality is innate. And why would LGBT people need to recruit children anyway (apart from the fact that the very idea is offensive)? LGBT people are being born all the time to STRAIGHT parents.

    As for destroying society, I’m guessing you mean by acting in an immoral way? Ok, I’ve just sat here and thought about ‘immoral’ people I know, people whom I’m pretty sure you’d agree were immoral. Guess what? ALL of them were straight – but that’s irrelevant anyway because immorality is nothing to do with one’s sexuality.

    I seem to remember assuring you there was no such wicked plan by LGBT people on another thread recently before I went on my work course – yes? Read what I said there. When I’m with my girlfriend we talk about TV, books, films, the weather, food and drink, holidays, etc etc. I can promise you world domination doesn’t get a mention.

    You’ve given men a pretty bad image in your post, saying they are all potentially unfaithful. So, you should be very much in favour of marriage between two WOMEN then? ;)

    What you say about gay marriage lacking biological bonds isn’t true. People marry because of love, not out of a sense of duty. Also, people who adopt children, from my experience, love them every bit as much as if they were their own flesh and blood.

    You scream fear to me, Mr Skinner. I wasn’t joking or being unkind when I suggested in another thread that you might benefit from speaking to a counsellor.

    Oh, and I didn’t ‘move out’ from Brighton. I’ve never been to Brighton in my life, but following your logic, I presume you’ve recently emigrated from the Holy Land?

  47. David Skinner 1 Aug 2009, 10:14am

    Michael from Liverpool, (comment 24)

    The Bible does not condone polygamy. Neither did it whitewash the lives of its main “heroes” who were all sinners. It shows humanity for what it is – desperately and hopelessly fallen. The greatest of them had human frailty. David is shown with warts and all. What for instance does Psalm 51 tell us about him, or Romans 7 tell us about Paul? No sir, the bible describes dramatically the consequences of polygamy in the lives of the Patriarchs and especially in the live of those of Jacob, David and Solomon. Jesus Christ and the Apostles laid great emphasis on the need for monogamy.

    As for the Jonathan and David being homosexual this really is clutching at straws.
    Jonathan and David were bosom pals. John 15: 13 says, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” It was the same love that Christ showed us.

    Jonathan loved David as he loved himself. He loved David, as he should have, since David had committed himself to glorifying God and fulfilling His will even at the expense of his personal safety. The Hebrew word ‘aheb, translated “love,” in the story of Jonathan and David nowhere else describes homosexual desire or activity. Rather when homosexual relations are in view the word yada, translated “know” in the sense of “have sex is used, as in Gen 19:5 and Judges 19:22

    As for 1 Samuel 18 :20: if you are suggesting that when Saul said to David, “Now you have a second opportunity to become my son-in-law,” that David was already Saul’s son in law, through being married to Jonathan, but was now being offered a second marriage – this time with Michal, ( which would make him bi-sexual), you are ignoring the fact that Saul is actually referring to the first opportunity that he gave to David ( but which he had refused) to marry his other daughter, Merab. Now he was being offered a second chance of marrying another daughter.

    Finally, as for it being up to individuals themselves to decide what and what is not marriage, we already have those who practise incest, paedophilia, pederasty and bestiality arguing for recognition and using precisely the same arguments that you put up, i.e., that if the individual wishes to describe his or her sexual relationships as “consensual“, “committed” and “caring,” who can complain?; but even then, so what if the relationship is not of this conventional nature? Whose definition of consensual, committed and caring are we to accept? What right has the state to interfere in the private lives of its citizens, anyway?

    Well Michael, I don’t know if you have noticed but the government, presently run by and for the benefit of homosexuals, the chief of which is Peter Mandelson, legislates for every breath and sneeze that we make. In fact the Department of Education is no longer called as such but, instead, the Department of Children Schools and Families. The DCSF bypasses parents and invasively interferes with a child’s development as soon as it can talk. Now that I call state interference.

    I am sure that the mother of Baby P and her boyfriend also felt that what they did to the little boy was of no concern to anyone else.

    I would not mind, Michael, if people like yourself were to keep your sexual lifestyles yourself, but then you turn round and demand that we the public, not only accept your diverted habits, but that we also pick up the colossal health and social services bills incurred, through unwanted pregnancies, abortions, rapes and sexually transmitted diseases.

    When a man and a woman wed, this is not a private affair, simply because it involves parents, children, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins. They become part of system that exists not for their immediate pleasure but in order that society remains co- hesive, stable, secure, unified and flourishing. I don’t know if you have noticed, Michael but western European families are dying and soon will be outnumbered by those of Muslims who are out breeding us. That should be a happy prospect for you.

    Dietrich Bonhoeffer, sitting in a Nazi prison cell, once wrote a wedding sermon for a niece who was about to be married. In it he said, “Marriage is more than your love for each other. It has a higher dignity and power, for it is God’s holy ordinance, through which he wills to perpetuate the human race till the end of time. In your love you see only your two selves in the world, but in marriage you are a link in the chain of generations, which God causes to come and to pass away to his glory, and calls into his kingdom. In your love you see only the heaven of your happiness, but in marriage you are placed at a post of responsibility towards the world and mankind. Your love is your own private possession, but marriage is more than something personal – it is a status an office.”

  48. This thread has been hijacked again . . . the thread is about the following

    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages
    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages
    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages

    I repeat this because it is time to celebrate and ignore those who cannot because they are still stuck in thier homophobia . . . like Mr skinner.

    The “Good News” is that the Quakers as AdrianT mentioned earlier are streets ahead of other religions.

    This has already got Mr Skinner Quaking in his boots, hence is rantings . . . leave him to stew in his hatred.

  49. David Skinner 1 Aug 2009, 12:07pm

    Bentham (25) When you say that “ in the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that you have every right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access if open to all, without exception.”….I have to reply that our present “democratic” government, that is ruled by un elected homosexual personnel, such as Ben Summerskill and Angela Mason and the un elected, diverted, homosexual Prime Minister, Mandelson , is determined to take away this priceless freedom. Lord Waddington may have won a reprieve for freedom of speech but the government has vowed to overturn this demotic vote no matter what the Lords or the general public think.

  50. “The “Good News” is that the Quakers as AdrianT mentioned earlier are streets ahead of other religions”

    Indeed, John K. If only more religions concentrated on love rather than preaching hate and creating divisions. To me, such sowing of fear and dissent is the doing of the paranoid and those who feel compelled to mark themselves out as superior or special. I don’t know very much about the Quakers, but I seem to remember that they encourage everyone to participate. Maybe this fairer outlook has informed its decision on gay marriage?

  51. Brian Burton 1 Aug 2009, 12:26pm

    David Skinner,
    In truth we Feel sorry for such a pathetic creacher as you.
    You cast your reams of platitudes at us and constantly quote bible passages. Your plea’s to us give us the impression of sheer brute force and we certainly rebel against that. Tragically, there is no element of beauty in any of your words, for they are just dull words. Benthom and John M.J. continue to humiliate you because of their superior interlect, their humanity, their pure goodness. Your faltering steps are doged by people, those you should be learning from, as the afor-mentioned.
    You need harmony of body and soul but you have seperated the two and invented an identity that is void of anything we need or require.
    I happen to be a Gay Christian (And proud of it!) My faith has made me whole. I belive that Christ did not die to save people, but to teach people to save each other. Because you lack humanity in your dealings with those you oppose. I think God will deal with you in a simular fashion at the end of your worthless life. The past, the present and the future are but a moment in the sight of God, and in who’s sight we should try to live. Time and space, succession and extension, are merely accidental conditions of thought. As in life, anything can be what we want to make them. Remember this dear David, that imagination is the quality that enables us to see things and people as in their ideal relations. I listened to Benjamin Brittain today and his ‘music for the young musician and I thanked God for him. He was in a Gay relationship for many years untill his death. There were Christians before Christ of course, the unfortunate thing is there has been none since.

  52. Iris, my sentiments exactly . . . The Quakers are truly a “Christian” church as they put into practice Love, Compassion and Understanding which means they desrve to say they are really following the ministry of Jesus . . . unlike a number of other Churches and people we could mention . . . but I am just choosing to ignore them in favour of “Celebrating a truly progressive Christian church . . .

  53. Robert, ex-pat Brit 1 Aug 2009, 1:23pm

    David Skinner, civil marriage which is what marriage equality for LGBT people is all about has absolutely NOTHING to do with the religious component, or religious marriage. Further, secular governments issue marriage licenses that do NOT mandate procreation which is a choice and not binding to validate anyone’s marriage in western culture. Have you heard of invitro fertlisation or surrogate mothers? Hundreds of thousands of straight women use this method because their significant other is infertile, both gay and straight. Your one man one woman procreation mantra is beyond flawed and weak at best to justify a ban on same-sex marriage. Your Adam & Eve fable in Genesis implies that they must have committed incest to populate the earth and their children in turn among themselves, how else could it have happened if they were purported to be the first parents of the human race? Your sky pixie didn’t exactly smite either of them for that now did “it?” Now run along, go play with your fellow cultist psycho talkers.

  54. RE: comment 19 by D. Skinner.

    I am a Christian and, although I do not feel my sexuality has any bearing on the argument I am about to bring, I am straight.

    I was attracted to Christianity because of the message of undeserved and unconditional love it brings. That God who created the universe could love me enough to send his own son to die for me, despite all the worst things I’ve done (of which there have been a lot) is indescribably brilliant and beautiful. As a christian I choose to bring that same message of love and acceptance and hope to other people. That is what the world needs to hear. Do you not know that love yet, or did you just not realise that God came to the world and died here to save us and not condemn us? As christians, surely we should be imitators of that.

    I think you are entitled to your opinion, as we all are. I do wonder how you think this is the best way of voicing it though. I do wonder how you think what you have been doing in this forum has been a good message to people. Mostly though… I wonder why you thought it was more important to be sitting at your computer and condemning people instead of bringing hope and a message of God’s unending love. This is not what my faith and my relationship with God is about anyway. I would say that to all christians here. I don’t want to judge you but I do want you to look inside and ask yourself if this argument is worth it. For some of you, it will be because it is about your life and your rights to decide etc. But for others, is it worth bringing people even more uneccessary hurt?

    I don’t want to witter on anymore, I reckon you get the point. Frankly I’m disappointed that seemingly intelligent people who say they are christians (and I have no reason not believe it) are bickering over what is clearly not the main issue or message of their entire faith.

    “LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOU HEART AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH. THE SECOND IS THIS: LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR AS YOURSELF. THERE IS NO COMMANDMENT GREATER THAN THESE.” -Jesus Christ. (Mark 12 vs 30-31)

    Why don’t you go away and use your energy to be productive and do this if you are a christian reading this. After all, there is GOOD NEWS to be spreading, don’t you agree? So let’s spread it and stop upsetting others and being counter-productive on this Saturday afternoon! Enjoy!

  55. RE: comment 19 by D. Skinner.

    I am a Christian and, although I do not feel my sexuality has any bearing on the argument I am about to bring, I am straight.

    I was attracted to Christianity because of the message of undeserved and unconditional love it brings. That God who created the universe could love me enough to send his own son to die for me, despite all the worst things I’ve done (of which there have been a lot) is indescribably brilliant and beautiful. As a christian I choose to bring that same message of love and acceptance and hope to other people. That is what the world needs to hear. Do you not know that love yet, or did you just not realise that God came to the world and died here to save us and not condemn us? As christians, surely we should be imitators of that.

    I think you are entitled to your opinion, as we all are. I do wonder how you think this is the best way of voicing it though. I do wonder how you think what you have been doing in this forum has been a good message to people. Mostly though… I wonder why you thought it was more important to be sitting at your computer and condemning people instead of bringing hope and a message of God’s unending love. This is not what my faith and my relationship with God is about anyway. I would say that to all christians here. I don’t want to judge you but I do want you to look inside and ask yourself if this argument is worth it. For some of you, it will be because it is about your life and your rights to decide etc. But for others, is it worth bringing people even more uneccessary hurt?

    I don’t want to witter on anymore, I reckon you get the point. Frankly I’m disappointed that seemingly intelligent people who say they are christians (and I have no reason not believe it) are bickering over what is clearly not the main issue or message of their entire faith.

    “LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOU HEART AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH. THE SECOND IS THIS: LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR AS YOURSELF. THERE IS NO COMMANDMENT GREATER THAN THESE.” -Jesus Christ. (Mark 12 vs 30-31)

    Why don’t you go away and use your energy to be productive and do this if you are a christian reading this. After all, there is GOOD NEWS to be spreading, don’t you agree? So let’s spread it and stop upsetting others and being counter-productive on this Saturday afternoon! Enjoy!!

  56. Brian Burton 1 Aug 2009, 5:03pm

    Lindsey,
    What a Splendid Person you are, God Bless You.

  57. David Skinner 1 Aug 2009, 6:46pm

    John you obviously look very intently into how, when, where and why the Bible was written. It seems to me that in your own intellectual strength you seem to be saying that you have come to the conclusion that it is riddled with so many errors, contradictions, mistranslations and misinterpretations that it cannot be relied upon at all. And yet you profess to believe in the person of Jesus Christ. And so what evidence and proof do you have for His existence apart from the Bible? If we cannot trust in the accuracy of the Bible what other source is there for revealing His person, what he did or what he said? But maybe Jesus Christ is whatever you want Him to be?

    If you say that your soul knowledge of the mind of Christ comes from the Holy Spirit, the Bible says that the Spirit’s ministry is always through and in association with the written Word of God, not beyond it or in addition to it. The Holy Spirit and the Word operate together.

    Calvin wrote, “The heavenly doctrine proves to be useful and efficacious to us in so far as the Spirit both forms our minds to understand it and our hearts to submit to its yoke.”

    Hebrews 4:12 For word of God is living and active, sharper than any two- edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow , and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

    1Peter 1: 23 You have been born anew, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding world of God.

    John 14:23 – 24 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

    John 15: 25 – 26″All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

    John 16:12 – 15 “I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you

    2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

    Maybe John instead of weighing and measuring the Bible as a scientist would do under the microscope; you need to try trusting your life with it.

  58. Michael, Liverpool 1 Aug 2009, 7:34pm

    David, how well versed you are with the Bible, you’ve made this abundantly clear now and I applaud you. Surely though, you must realise that for every verse you quote, if one looks hard enough, there will be another verse somewhere elso to counter it. If you wish to live your life by this book then so be it, but not everybody does. You may feel it your duty to spread your version of God’s message, but sorry to dissilusion you, you live in a world with over 6 billion people, many of whom do not believe in a God, and many of whom believe in different Gods to your own. Do you not understand that you and the rest of the religious right sound so sanctimonious and self-righteous that almost all of society has stopped listening? You’ve come on here to disparage gay people, have you not had enough? Or have your made it your life’s mission to rain on the parade of a minority who is slowly gaining the rights it has fought so hard to get?? If this is the case, you are a sad sad loser. Open your mind and your heart, that hate inside you will eat you up one day.

  59. David Skinner 1 Aug 2009, 7:57pm

    Lindsey, I would go along with most of what you say about grace and unconditional love but if you are referring to John 3 :16 that says:
    “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

    …I would say that you need to carry on and read the rest of the passage:

    18ff “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”

    As for a message of hope Lindsey, God has dealt with our sin by sending His son to pay the bill for our rebellion, and there is indeed no more condemnation. As a consequence of His death, the slate is clean, we are released from the power of sin and we are assured of an eternal inheritance.

    But if we continue in sin, we are trampling on the cross of Christ and only storing up terrible judgment for ourselves

    Hebrew 6:4 -6 also says:
    “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

    Hebrews 10 :26 – 31:
    If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

    We do not presume on the love and sacrifice of Christ by continuing to knowingly and deliberately commit sin .Corinthians 6 9-11 says “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

  60. Michael, Liverpool 1 Aug 2009, 9:10pm

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  61. David Skinner 1 Aug 2009, 9:12pm

    Michael from Liverpool( 56) you said that I live in a world with over 6 billion people, many of whom do not believe in a God, and many of whom believe in different Gods to your own. How right you are; here are figures:

    33% adhere to one form or other of the Christian faith; 21 % to one form of other of Islam; 14% to Hindhuism; 6% to Buddhism; 6% to Chinese traditional ;6% to primal- indigenous ( including African ); 0.22% Judaism; 0.36% to Sikhism . That leaves 13- 14 % of non -religious( humanists and agnostics) and around 2.5% who would claim that they were atheists.

    However, if we take a definition of God as being that of which nothing greater can be thought, then we are all religious, for if you think that man is that which nothing greater can be thought, then that is your god.

  62. Michael, Liverpool 1 Aug 2009, 9:42pm

    To be honest I think the universe is far more complicated for us mere mortals to comprehend. Maybe, just maybe, we don’t have the ability to understand what ‘God’ is, and are we so audacious in our infancy to presume we know him/her? We still don’t fully understand why we exist, Christ, we haven’t even landed on another planet yet. Does any human really know how the mind of a creator (if there was one) ticks? To live solely by a book written 2000 years ago, however wise and full of ‘truth’ you may see it, is not only lacking in intelligence, but potentially damaging to the future evolution of humanity. Your references so far have been from one book, and even in the world of writers this is seen as plagiarism and, therefore, academically dishonest. That is the problem with people who only ever quote the Bible, it’s one track minded and no real research has gone into their arguments. Can I honestly ask what your purpose is on this thread? I initially came on to celebrate what was a small step in the right direction for human rights. All I can deduce from your comments, is that you are here to give people an RE lesson, and a lesson in Christian morality. Is that right??

  63. @David Skinner (Thread 57)

    All books are open to interpretation, so is the life and ministry of Jesus Christ; but one cannot deny the inspirational accounts of the person of Jesus.

    When it is alleged that Jesus asks us the visit the imprisoned feed the hungry, or cloth the naked; this of cause is going to question the depth of our humanity

    Unfortunately I see more humanists putting these alleged words of Jesus into practice in the 21st century than I do Christians . . . this are an interesting contradiction. However, the Holy Spirit it is alleged has always worked in mysterious ways.

  64. David Skinner (49):

    In the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that you have every right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access if open to all, without exception.

  65. John M.J. 2 Aug 2009, 4:07am

    Mr. Skinner,

    You obviously don’t have the ability to reason embedded in your brain. On numerous threads and on many occasions I, and others, have amply demonstrated that the Bible is not, and cannot be, the literal and trusted truth and yet you persist in your heretical belief that it is. You deny, heretically, the truth existent within the Church and you raise up your Bible in place of God.

    You said:

    Maybe John instead of weighing and measuring the Bible as a scientist would do under the microscope; you need to try trusting your life with it.

    No, never would I trust my life in Christ and my immortal soul to such an error- ridden text. You do, and that is the mark of your heresy and the mark of your fault and the mark of Satan upon you.

    Your Comment (57) amply demonstrates just how far gone into sin, heresy and evil you actually are. You cannot see past the Bible to God and you cannot commune with the Spirit and know Christ for you are caught up in ancient words and have no understanding of Christ and his message, other than the permission for evil (always the mark of a Biblical literalist) of the Pharisee.

    You said:

    If we cannot trust in the accuracy of the Bible what other source is there for revealing His person…

    Thousands of sources exist from ancient times. Do you honestly think that a movement like Christianity would have gone undocumented by ancient writers? Are you so naive as to think that the Bible is the only reference which documents the beginnings of our faith? The earliest reference to the Christ which we have is on a bowl excavated by the renowned French marine archaeologist Franck Goddio that has inscribed upon its surface “DIA CHRISTOU O GOISTAIS,” which means, as anyone apart from you would know, “by Christ the magician” or, “the magician by Christ.” Before you run away with some nonsensical and magical idea let me tell you that ‘goistais’ (literally ‘magician’) has many meanings including the one which you and I would prefer to ascribe to that word when talking of and about the Christ.

    The bowl, itself, has been dated to the period in which our Christ must have lived – that is to say somewhen between 100BC to 100AD, and is generally accepted by we scholars as being, so far, the earliest indication – vastly predating the Bible on which you rely so heavily – of the factual existence of Christ.

    Numerous other artefacts and writings also witness to the Christ’s Earthly Ministry. If you want to know more about the independent of the Bible sources which detail the Christ’s Ministry then you could do worse, much worse, than to start with Encyclopaedia of the Early Christ (Garland reference library of the humanities) edited by Everett Ferguson. Therein you will find 977 articles by 135 qualified scholars of various academic and ecumenical backgrounds, with coverage extending from New Testament times to approximately 600 A.D. The entries cover persons, places, doctrines, and practices and include some articles on modern scholars important to the study of early Christianity. The entries vary in length, but each begins with a brief definition, or identification, followed by chronological or topical development. There are excellent short bibliographies following each article that give patristic citations, editions, translations, and studies. The articles, you will be pleased to know, avoid technical language and provide good basic summaries of the material.

    The ‘Catholic Encyclopaedia’ documents, also, quite extensively and at great length, the non-Biblical sources which justify our belief in the Christ, His existence and His teachings. I recommend it to you for it details Tacitus, Suetonius and Pliny the Younger and their writings about the Christ and early Christianity – as well as many other early writers whose works have come down to us. That great encyclopaedia also documents the great Jewish historians who wrote about the early Christians – Philo and Flavius Josephus to name but two – and both of them, unwillingly and unwittingly, bear proof of the existence of our Christ and to the nature of his teachings.

  66. Mr. Skinner:

    In the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that you have every right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access is open to all, without exception.

  67. John M.J. 2 Aug 2009, 5:01am

    Then, at Comment 57, you go on to quote Calvin for Heaven’s sake – he whose limited understanding of God and time caused him to enter into the greatest of heresies and to expound the doctrine of predestination in a completely superstitious way and at variance with all logic and against the teachings of Christ – as he, in his deliberate wickedness, must have known. But what is worse, much worse, you then go on to quote Biblical passage after Biblical passage despite the fact that you have been told, repeatedly, by me and many others, that your reliance on such passages is faulty at best and, at worst, heretical; and we have told you, time and time again, as clearly indicated in the Book of Wisdom in the Apocrypha, that you must use your God-given powers of reasoning and your God-given powers of analysis to determine what is true in our Faith.

    Yet, despite being told what you have to do you wilfully, and contrary to God’s will, persist in your errors, errors in Faith and in Doctrine; you commit heresy in your writings and delight in disturbing the faithful and, by your presence here at this site, you are limiting salvation and the chances for salvation, which is the worst sin of all! Do you honestly think that God is proud of you at this moment? Do you honestly believe that your wickedness in denying salvation to others by limiting the Christ’s love is a delight to God?

    I daresay that you believe, as Servetus believed, that there is no suprastitious component to our belief. Instead, you willingly impose a superstitious component upon yourself when you elevate the Bible to the very centre of your belief, when you elevate the Bible, and your irrational and superstitious belief in it (as if it contained some magic, some sense of spells and potions), to the very point, the central belief point in your soul that God and the Spirit ought to occupy; in your heart and in your brain you have substituted the Bible for the Living God of our Faith. I pity you, Mr. Skinner, and I will pray for you and I will pray that our God will overlook your mischief and your wilful heresy and admit you to the Kingdom.

  68. David Skinner:

    In the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that you have every right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access is open to all, without exception.

  69. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 6:38am

    BB7-(I’m a Gay Christian)
    BB51- I happen to be a Gay Christian (And proud of it!) My faith has made me whole.

    Talk about delusion!!! Going to church doesn’t make you a christian no more than sitting in a garage makes you a car. By teh sound of things your so called faith has made you a hole…to fall in.

    Your language is a disgrace and would not be acceptable in a Christian church.

    1. grubby, pathetic little life
    2. the poor deluded queen!
    3. you are the prophets of BAAL
    4. I want to have rampant sex with him.
    5. Jesus was gay. He loved the company of his “sailor”
    friends
    6. and the sake of being fucking fabulous.
    7. prepare a big gay party for you
    8. I f*cking hate the lot of your queers,
    9. that they might be with him in bed and that he might send
    them out to gay bars….”
    10. Christian beliefs are so childish and immature
    11. Every one of us should appear in a Porn Film just once
    12. Christ did not die to save people, but to teach people
    how to save each other.
    13. such a pathetic creacher as you.
    14. What a Camp Clara Cluck!
    15. reality check ponce.

    In 10 you said christian beliefs are childish and immature. That means you must be childish and immature. That is no surpise to me.

  70. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 6:46am

    JMJ65-The ‘Catholic Encyclopaedia’ documents, also, quite extensively and at great length, the non-Biblical sources which justify our belief in the Christ,

    How very interesting. When this was quoted on another topic the writer was told it had no validity at all. Typical of you homos, you quote what is convenient for your heresies and debunk it when it is not in agreement with you.

    What does the Bible say “A double minded man is unstable in ALL his ways.”

  71. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 7:03am

    Sugar Plumb Sweety of Treats,
    At least You show that you are reading and digesting all our comments we make to ‘YOUR UNHOLINESS’….. YOU CESSOPOOL! Why don’t you crawl back into It?

  72. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:15am

    JK63-Unfortunately I see more humanists putting these alleged words of Jesus into practice in the 21st century than I do Christians . . . this are an interesting contradiction.

    Don’t make me laugh!! Most charity organisations were started a 100 years or more ago by Christians. The Salvation Army is one of the biggest charity organisations in the country. Barnado was a Christian; Mueller was a Christian. It was a Christian, William Wilberforce that successfully got the English Parliament to outlaw slavery. Education for the masses was started by the church and taken over by the state. Hospitals were started by the Church and taken over by the State. World Vision is one of the largest Christian organisations in the world helping people in third world Africa. Jackie Pullinger who was a Christian went into the walled city in Hong Kong and helped the people to kick their drug habit. Teen Chalenge, the most successful drug rehabilitation ministry in the world was started by the church. YWAM,a christian organisation started a centre in Amsterdam to help street kids and crack addicts. Charles Colson another Christian started Prison Fellowship. They give assistance to prisoners and their families whilst they are in prison and help them reconnect with society when they are released, housing them in halfway houses to help with the transition. Brother Andrew a Christian from Holland arranged supplies to Hezbollah when they were trapped in the Golan Heights. Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham started a charity that arranges millions of christmas parcels for children in third world contries. Compassion is a christian charity that aranges sponsorship of third world children. Childcare Worldwide is a Christian charity that helps children survive through feeding programmes, medical and special care. United Christian Charities provide disaster relief. International Orthodox Christian Charities, has distributed more than US $226 million in relief and development programs in 30 countries. Healing Waters international is a Christian ministry reducing water related deaths in developing countries. That is just a few I could think of quickly. There are thousands more but I guess becuase they are Christian you can dismiss then with a throwaway line that you specialise in and it is clear that you only see what you want to see.

  73. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 7:23am

    Benthom,
    See Skinner list 1–15 all those true things I said about him? I wish the Crud would stop praising me for telling him God’s own truth. The pathetic, deluded one, I’ve got him rattled. I’ve now told him to crawl back into the Cesspool he crawled out of!

  74. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:25am

    I50-If only more religions concentrated on love rather than preaching hate and creating divisions.

    If you care to read my previous post, you will see that the church has very valid credentials as a loving, caring organisation. I don’t expect you to admit to that fact as you tend to see only what you want to see.

  75. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 7:27am

    Sugar Plumb Fairy,
    What the Hell is the Point You are trying to make? you scatter-brained Syclops.

  76. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:36am

    L55-After all, there is GOOD NEWS to be spreading, don’t you agree?

    I think you will find Lindsey that when verses from the bible that speak of God’s love have been posted the response has been supercilious and childish comments full of foul language especialy by Brian Burton and a few others.

  77. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:40am

    BB51- I belive that Christ did not die to save people, but to teach people to save each other

    Can you show me where the bible says this? I won’t hold my breath as I have never had a response to over 20 requests for evidence.

  78. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:45am

    R53-Your Adam & Eve fable in Genesis implies that they must have committed incest to populate the earth and their children in turn among themselves, how else could it have happened if they were purported to be the first parents of the human race?

    I was told off the other day because I implied that homos didn’t know everything, so why are you asking this quesiton? With all your superior knowledge of the Bible I am surprised you don’t know the answer to this one as it is so obvious.

    I have to laugh really. You hate the bible with a vengance and you spend all your time quoting it. Bit of a waste of time really because you have a tendancy to miss the point or just do verse-mining to prove your point and ignoring the fact that understanding the bible is not done by quoting one verse.

  79. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 7:58am

    ML62-Your references so far have been from one book, and even in the world of writers this is seen as plagiarism and, therefore, academically dishonest.

    You do talk rubbish. First of all the bible is not copywrite in its original language. It is available for any to quote. Second, it is only plagurism if the person involved is publishing the words to make money and only if they are using a particular modern version of the bible. Third, the King James Version has no copyright on it so anyone can quote from it. Fourth, quoting from the bible is not plagurism because no one is saying it is their own work. Anyone with any intelligence would know it is not their own work as no one has made any false claims of authorship.

    In essence Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the “use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.”

    Plagiarism is not copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author’s reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship.

  80. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 8:02am

    BB71-YOU CESSOPOOL! Why don’t you crawl back into It?

    Now that is what I call a very gracious and uplifting Christian response!!!Not.

  81. Sugar Plum Fairy 2 Aug 2009, 8:05am

    BB76-you scatter-brained Syclops.

    Another of BBs gracious christian comments. Not. And the word is Cyclops.

  82. Sugar Plum Fairy:

    In the interest of the freedom of speech inherent in the best form of government the world has ever seen, Democracy, I’d like to say that all have every right to visit and comment on any site in Cyberspace where access is open to all, without exception.

    Quand je t’ai soupçonné d’être un imposteur, tu m’as dis que je te faisais rire, t’en souviens-tu, cotelettes de singe, Monkeychops?
    Tu souffres d’une maladie mentale, mon cher ami, et tu devrais te faire soigner.

    For the benefit of my friends her on Pink News, that translates as :
    “Do you remember when you told me that I made you laugh when I exposed you as an imposter, Monkeychops?”

    At the time, if you remember, Monkeychops, who is of French origin, was passing himself off as a globe-trotting diplomate who had a particular dislike for the scent of human urine in the streets of Gilbralter.

    We don’t dislike you, really Monkeychops – or Sugar Plum Fairy or Stewart Cowan – whichever name you like, because you do have the right to speak your mind.

    But how would it be if I went to your church services, and grabbed the mike and started giving every one a very elaborate recipe for beef stroganov while a believer was expounding on a biblical verse?

    Similarly, we sometimes completely miss the point of these threads. We are here to express our opinions and our reactions to the news that the Quackers have agreed to hold gay marriages.

    All we do is express our opinion, and respect the democratic right of others to express their opinons on this subject. We really expect no less nor no more from ourselves.

    On the other hand, being in a democratric country proud to allow anyone to express themselves publicly, there are often activists of all kinds who are welcomed to set up a soapbox in one of the parcs, or even in Trafalgar Square, and to speak openly about their life’s passion.

    Those who are interested will stop and listen, and nobody will ever be seen as hogging the spotlight while talking about a wide spectrum of the most interesting topics.

    It’s true that we ocassionally digress from the topic on these threads. In fact, I, myself have done it many times.

    However, digressing from the topic really adds nothing to the subject at hand. It’s like talking about biology during a mathematics class.

    After all, nobody has asked for opinions about the teachings of ex-gay fundamentalist extremists. Maybe one day PinkNews will run an article on the subject and then opinions on the subject would be both timely and precious.

    All that is needed here, it seems to me, is an expression of either being happy or unhappy about the Quackers decision to hold gay marriage.

    It is, after all, history in the making in Great Britain.

    Freedom of speech is one thing, Mr. Fairy, but bulldozing your way through a China shop is another, right.

  83. Ah, SPF is back. And his brand of bible-infused wisdom:- Literal bible interpretations, despite the glaring contradictions. No independent though. Childish insults an tantrums and hissy fits. Ah, good old SPF. But, oh, he has a degree is computers, folks. Its true, he told us as much. He found on on-line it seems, one where you can get a science degree without believing or understanding any science! Wow, isn’t that just amazing.

    So, SPF explain again to me the dinosaurs please? Where are they in the bible?

  84. Will:

    Good to see you here.

    We really should get ourselves organized, you know. These mindless atcks will never cease, and we would be so much more efficient if we could get together as a group to talk this over.

    It’s a shame nobody responded responded to Adrian’s attempt to organise us in May. We would be ready now for the fundies and more capable of making this site more attractive to the younger generations. Let’s find a way to talk about it.

  85. SPF – all these postings of yours are rather manic . . . as well as LJC (Lord Jesus Christ) what other recreational drugs are you on?

  86. This thread has been hijacked again again and again. . . the thread is about the following

    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages
    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages
    * Quakers agree to hold gay marriages

    I repeat this once again because it is time to celebrate and ignore those who cannot because they are still stuck in thier homophobia . . . like Mr skinner and Mr Sugar Plum Fairy.

    Their manic rantings is realy about how the Quakers decision has got them quaking in their boots. . . let the homophobes squirm

  87. John K:

    What about you, John? Don’t you think we would be more efficient if we organized somehow? I don’t know what I mean exactly; we would have to kick it around; brainstorm it.

    These natterings from idiotic fundies are nothing short of disruptive. I’m sick of them, especially today after reading about the shootings in Israel.

  88. Bentham

    I agree with what you are saying.

    I am also tired of Fundamentalist Exgay or Antigay Christians hijacking these threads; either to evangelise for their Nazi Jesus, or pass on their warped homophobic religious inspired hatred.

    Ironically, their may be an answer for us in the Bible. Biblically speaking, if the real sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is inhospitality, It is really not on that when you are invited to a party that you rape your quests. It is alleged that God will get an angry. . . and so God should.

    These Exgay or Antigay Christians have been invited to our party by virtue of it being an open forum, and this is the way that they behave at our party
    * Their Hijack our threads
    * Their peddle their homophobic hatred on our threads
    * Their try and use our threads to promote their hated inspired Christianity

    Basically, since there are “Fucking” with our generosity . . . we should get angry.

    I have no compunction in banning them.

  89. John K:

    I don’t believe I have the leadership qualities to initiate something, but if we could get the guys together – you know who they sre – we could ‘devise’ a plan. Ha ha.

    Think about it, OK. These guys are rentless; I think they get paid by the line, like in the days of Charles Dickens!

  90. I know it’s a corker, but look at how much time we waste. We could be browsing interesting sites, e-mailing…hell, I could get my laundry done.

    I doubt that SPF will show up today – they don’t ‘work’ on Sunday, remember. This would be a good day to move this thing along, except that I’ve been up all night (it’s 7.30 a.m. here), and I’ve got to get some shut-eye soon.

  91. David Skinner 2 Aug 2009, 12:02pm

    John, Thank you for extra biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ.
    .
    However though these facts are encouraging they do nothing towards making sense of them. What do they mean for us in the 21st century? What do they mean to you?
    However, not only does the Bible not conflict with history, but it goes on to tell us the meaning behind these facts, about the nature of man, our origins; it tells us why we are here and it tells us where we are going.
    Above all it explains the nature of God and his purposes.

    It speaks of this with authority and declares that it is the only authority. The first chapter of John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

    Every letter in the New Testament opens and closes in the name and authority of Jesus Christ.

    You however, have decided to set yourself up as the final authority, for you say to me,

    “you have been told, repeatedly, by me and many others, that your reliance on such passages is faulty at best and, at worst, heretical; and we have told you, time and time again, as clearly indicated in the Book of Wisdom in the Apocrypha, that you must use your God-given powers of reasoning and your God-given powers of analysis to determine what is true in our Faith.”

    Again you say:

    “Yet, despite being told what you have to do you wilfully, and contrary to God’s will, persist in your errors, errors in Faith and in Doctrine; you commit heresy in your writings and delight in disturbing the faithful.”

    You use words like God, Christ, Faith and Doctrine but these are content-less words, detached from the Bible. . Buzz words onto which you can hang any meaning you like. To you new revelations come independently of the Bible .But from whence do they come? May I suggest, that they are not of the Spirit of Christ but from the deceiver, the anti- christ – from the very pit of hell.

    The language you use, John sounds very much like that of Roman Catholic Church, during the middle ages when it burnt and tortured to death true followers of Christ.

    Sugar Plumb Fair, I was wondering when the cavalry might show up. What kept you?

  92. Bentham . . . As if by magic, further evidence for our conjectures appears . . . There must be a God after all – lol

  93. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 12:26pm

    Bentham ,
    The Shootings in Isreal will serve as a sign that Gay men and woman will be brought closer together from now on. The Skinner type SCUM should really be ignored.

  94. Brian Burton . . . too true, and it is interesting how these Fundamentalists ignore the fruits of their labour.

    When they argue “The wages of sin is death” . . . what they fail to understnand is that the “Sin of homophobia may result in many more deaths”

    Sadly

  95. John K:

    It doesn’t matter to me if you believe there’s a God or not.

    If you can trust me, we’ll talk about this again. It’s only going to get worse.

  96. In honor of the Quakers, here’s somthing I found on BBC – Religion & Ethics:

    Quakers – the Religious Society of Friends

    Quakers are members of a group with Christian roots that began in England in the 1650s.

    The formal title of the movement is the Society of Friends or the Religious Society of Friends.

    There are about 210,000 Quakers across the world.

    In Britain there are 17,000 Quakers, and 400 Quaker meetings for worship each week. 9,000 people in Britain regularly take part in Quaker worship without being members of the Religious Society of Friends.

    The essence of the Quakers
    Quakers believe that there is something of God in everybody and that each human being is of unique worth. This is why Quakers value all people equally, and oppose anything that may harm or threaten them.

    Quakers seek religious truth in inner experience, and place great reliance on conscience as the basis of morality.

    They emphasise direct experience of God rather than ritual and ceremony. They believe that priests and rituals are an unnecessary obstruction between the believer and God.

    Quakers integrate religion and everyday life. They believe God can be found in the middle of everyday life and human relationships, as much as during a meeting for worship.

    What Quakers believe
    Among key Quaker beliefs are:

    God is love
    the light of God is in every single person
    a person who lets their life be guided by that light will achieve a full relationship with God
    everyone can have a direct, personal relationship with God without involving a priest or minister
    redemption and the Kingdom of Heaven are to be experienced now, in this world

    Quakers want to make this a better world
    Quakers work actively to make this a better world. They are particularly concerned with:

    human rights, based on their belief in equality of all human beings
    social justice
    peace
    freedom of conscience
    environmental issues – Quakers seek to live simply so as to reduce the burden on the world
    community life

    Holy Books
    Quakers do not regard any book as being the actual ‘word of God’.

    Most Quakers regard the Bible as a very great inspirational book but they don’t see it as the only one, and so they read other books that can guide their lives.

    Holy Days
    Quakers do not celebrate Christian festivals such as Easter and Christmas.

    Worship
    Quaker communal worship consists of silent waiting, with participants contributing as the spirit moves them.

    Are Quakers Christian?
    Although outsiders usually regard the movement as a Christian denomination, not all Quakers see themselves as Christians; some regard themselves as members of a universal religion that (for historical reasons) has many Christian elements.

    Tolerance is part of the Quaker approach to life, so Quakers are willing to learn from all other faiths and churches.

    Where the names come from
    One story says that the founder, George Fox, once told a magistrate to tremble (quake) at the name of God and the name ‘Quakers’ stuck.

    Other people suggest that the name derives from the physical shaking that sometimes went with Quaker religious experiences.

    The name ‘Friends’ comes from Jesus’ remark “You are my friends if you do what I command you” (John 15:14).

  97. It’s amazing to find there is a Christian religion in which members use their brains and do so in the spirit of their religion rather than letter by letter

  98. “Sugar Plumb Fair, I was wondering when the cavalry might show up. What kept you?”

    He was too busy printing out his new degree off the internet, and colouring it in.

    The carvery of stupidity, riding into the den of intelligence and science. Beautiful.

  99. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 1:19pm

    David Skinner,
    You have tried and failed to name and shame everything I stand for.
    The reason I condem you is because I belive that you are the Devil-incarnate. You tempted my Lord in the wilderness 2,000 years ago. I cannot forgive Saten, only people. You are Saten, why did I instinctivley tell you the other day, to ‘Get Behind Me?’ Being a true Christian, God provides me with the insight to recognise the Devil when it appeares as you have. I pray God to protect us here from your evil.

  100. Sugar Plumb:

    Yoo-hoo, put on your black net stocking and your 4-inch heels and get over here to help poor Mr. Skinner.

    Appears to me you two haven’t been properly introduced, Sugar Plumber. Oops, there’s a leak under my sink, could you spread out your tiny fairy wings and get into that tight space. That’s a good little fairy.

    Now, don’t forget; you are the cavalry so make sure to toot your horn when you come riding into the valley of death. Who-o-o-o-o!

  101. Brian Burton 2 Aug 2009, 4:07pm

    Sugar Plumb and David Skin. are to wed in Abu-Dabi in the Spring.
    Blessings from the Abu-Dabi Government reads as follows: May you have many sons and may your camels have many humps.

  102. Mihangel apYrs 2 Aug 2009, 4:54pm

    well Skinner is back from his “holiday” and SPF is ranting his nastiness.

    Why don’t they understand that for many of us their god is no more real than the tooth fairy, and that their religious marriage has no more validity than becoming “blood brothers” by cutting our thumbs and rubbing them together.

    Religious marriage is legitimised by the marriage certificate – a secular document. For the majority of us it is only that document that we want – no one pretending to speak for a god saying we can marry.

    And for every other comment made of a religious nature by these people, all I can say is, if you want us to take you seriously:
    prove a god exists
    prove that this god is your god
    prove that s/he says what you say s/he says.

    To a “on balance of probabilities” standard (see I made it easy or you!

    I don’t mean this as an attack on thise here with a faith because you’re not trying to impose it in that way that our trolls are!!

  103. Mihangel ap Yrs:

    How’s it going?

    I don’t know if you’ve read through the last dozen posts, but I mentioned to Will and John K. about getting organized to ‘welcome’ fundies on PinkNews.

    There is strength in unity and it is fair to say that these nutters are both distracting and disruptive. They add nothing to our discussion on these interesting articles. I myself have thought of leaving Pink for another gay site where fundies rarely show up, but I’ve become ‘attached’ to all the regulars here. Aw-w-w-w, ain’t that sweet!

    As I was saying to John, I don’t have any definite idea of how we could organize, but if ever a project like this could get off the ground, you would be a valuable part of the team.

    You don’t have to answer right away; give it some thought and let me know sometime…or not.

    It’s just that I’m so fed up with fundies showing up and taking up so much of our time. They will never change, and something tells me we are in for a backlash now that the wonderful Quakers have changed the course of history in the UK.

    Brian: Ditto for you of course, pal. Your point of view is as precious as any. We don’t have to agree on anything except that we do not care for fundies. The trick is to get together in cyberspace as a group. This technology can be baffling to an old fart like me. Ha ha.

  104. Yeah, Bentham, I agree. Lets make these 2nd century dimwits as uncomfortable as they can be on this site.

  105. Will:

    Phew. Good man. To communicate privately, you can become a member of PinkNews by clicking on ‘My’ at the upper left hand bar of the front page here. No big deal; you can use a nickname if you want.

    Then you can contact Adrian who is on page 4, I think. If that doesn’t work, let me know here or on another thread. I just send Adrian a message about this. We can do this.

  106. I’ll go do this then.

  107. Done. Profile set up, and left a message for Adrian.

  108. Sugar Plum Fairy; “If you care to read my previous post, you will see that the church has very valid credentials as a loving, caring organisation. I don’t expect you to admit to that fact as you tend to see only what you want to see.”

    How nice of you to judge me when you don’t even know me, and obviously are unaware of what I’ve posted previously.

    Yes, I’ve read your post, so why don’t you read mine? I didn’t say that the Church hadn’t done good things, I said it was a pity it couldn’t concentrate on doing good rather than spreading hate. Women, black people, LGBT people… Many (not all) ‘christians’ seem to feel a need to have someone to pick on. And all the fundamentalists coming on here and spending their time spreading hate can only mean that they’re NOT doing such charitable work as you mentioned.

    You think we’re sinners? Great, you’re entitled to your opinion, now get on with your own life and leave other people alone else we’ll start thinking that all your digs at us are actually a sign of your own insecurity.

    Will et al – your idea is good – even though I think that many times you’re banging your head against a brick wall. There’s none so blind as those who will not see – or however it goes. How many times have people explained things to DS and attempted to enter into a reasonable discussion? The guy’s seriously deluded. He thinks gay people are planning to take over the world/recruit children/infiltrate the armed forces. I honestly think some of these people are mentally ill – and I mean that literally not insultingly.

  109. Off topic but I just saw this story on msn which perfectly illustrates religious obsession over-riding intelligence:

    hXXp://news.uk.msn.com/world/article.aspx?cp-documentid=148950290

    A man prayed rather than seek medical attention for his sick daughter because the Bible says ‘God will heal’ – and his daughter died.

    Words fail me.

  110. “even though I think that many times you’re banging your head against a brick wall.”

    I hear you, Iris. But then again, the day we’re silent against this rampant stupidity and bigotry of these hateful fools, is the day we lose, and is the day reason is covered by the darkness of ignorance and superstition. I spent my life educating myself and opening my mind, and I find it difficult to allow degenerate people inferior in their mental abilities (like Skinner and SPF), to dare tell me what to do with my life, whether it be here on a gay site or in my day to day life…. my experience is people like the SPF are cowards in real life, and back down when faced with a superior mind in person. SPF, Hank and Skinner are the same type of idiots who tried to burn Galleo for his reasoning, and to give them free reign to spread their lies is to allow such a situation to return again…

    ….not while I breath, it wont! :)

  111. Hi Iris:

    I’ve been looking for you. You sure would be an asset to the group we are trying to put together to organize in function of dealing with these fundies. I’m looking for Lezbella too.

    Please consider it. You can find instructions in my post 105 above. You don’t have to; use your instinct, that’s the best we can do, right.

  112. John K., Mihangel ap Yrs, Brian:

    What do you say? Want more time to think about it? Take all the time you need. If you decide to be part of the team, check my post 105 above. If I can do it…you know the rest!!

    Anyone seen Mike?

  113. Hey I often read the boards but rarely post, I would like to say that DS and SPF do a great service to our boards, the incessant ranting and usual prescribed nonsense, often completly off topic from the actual article, is only highlighted for what it really is. Any gay person brought up in a religiously repressive environment and is seeking to overcome their own qualms with their sexuality will leave the boards with the confidence and knowledge in how to responde to these kinds of comments in real life, and the DS in particular only shines bright light on how wrong people like himself are, even if he wont conceed, i would like to think many hundreds of people visiting this sight have been greatly empowered agaisnt these people. However if possible i think there should be a button on each comment page for the us gays to use when religious fanatics pop by for an education, when pressed a random prescripted comment can be automatcally posted. its not even like David skinners posts make sense any way, so any random pick from the several thousand of great responses that have already been posted will pretty much keep DS amused long enough for us to get on with the article at hand and plus save our finger tips.

    I would like to ask SPF one question regarding post 72. If the idea that humanists follow the true teachings of Jesus more closely than chsistians makes you laugh could you please tell me why you unlike fellow christians like to litter these boards so much instead of actually being out there doing charity work. I suggest down of your pedestal and get of your arse and away from your keyboard and actually follow your own standard. I personally would question the whole concept of religious charity, as charity is supposed to be what is says charity. I dont want to dispel some of the very good work religious charitys sometimes provide but it is not charity when you exchange your good will in exchange for a platform to preech your own beliefs, expecially when the people you are helping are normally the vulnerable and needy… but anyhow that is perhaps something to discuss another day.

    Soo back to the quakers. nice work guys, much appreciated

  114. Lee . . . my sentiments exactly

    Humanist practice charity for the love of humanity . . . not for Jesus and a place in Heaven.

  115. @ 113

    “Hey I often read the boards but rarely post”

    You sound like someone who has really articulated your support, as well as your understanding of the hardships of the LGBT community.

    Your post today on this ‘board’ doesn’t really say anything that hasn’t been said time and time again, though.

    I’m just curious to know what motivated you to post today all of a sudden, that’s all, ‘cos it might help me to help others to break out of their apathy, know what I mean.

  116. At the moment I’m working two jobs to try and save up my pennies to go traveling, I do try and check the site as often as possible as pink news is a great source for LGBT information, but normally dont have enough time to post. got the evening off today though.

    I began visiting the site about 2 years ago when had just come out and found the site to be a great learning tool for all sorts of gay issues. I guess to begin with I was a bit too timid to post, comming out seemed more like a gradual process for me and took a while to build up my confidence having had a RC upbringing, no more needing to be said. I guess in the last 6 or so months i’ve felt a lot more comfortable in myself, I have posted on occasion but like I said I’ve been working an awul lot.

    Negating posts from the usual suspects who do often distract from the article, I do enjoy reading the discussions on the boards and find the the posts to be engaging and thought proving. I’ve been trying to build up my Cv recently, in school I foundmyself keeping hy head down and foucusing on maths and business and science work but having come out and found my confidence i’ve found it incresingly harder to just keep my head down and crunch numbers instead realising how much I like engaging with people, I’ve recently got a job in a care home for the elderly, which I find rewarding, but is more as a stepping stone to get exprience towards working in somesort of community based job. Once In a couple of months I’ll be able to afford to drop a day of my jobs to do some charity work and was hoping to find a LGBT charity that would take me on.

    I guess what I simly meant to say was for my my apathy was a confidence issue. Pink news and other media that give us access inspirational characters of our culture helped me get over it. All I need to do now is find a bit spare time and sometimes be a bit less cynical towards the Skinners of the world because sometimes I come accross as hating all religion but I do appreciate religions, such as the Quakers, who offer the same respect as they expect from us.

  117. Sugar Plum Fairy 3 Aug 2009, 3:36am

    BB71-YOU CESSOPOOL! Why don’t you crawl back into It?

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    BB73- The pathetic, deluded one, I’ve got him rattled.

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    BB75-you scatter-brained Syclops.

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    And the word is Cyclops.

    BB51- I belive that Christ did not die to save people, but to teach people to save each other

    Can you show me where the bible says this? I won’t hold my breath as I have never had a response to over 20 requests for evidence.

    I AM STILL WAITING FOR AN ANSWER

    W83-Childish insults an tantrums and hissy fits.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    JK85-as well as LJC (Lord Jesus Christ) what other recreational drugs are you on?
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    B87-These natterings from idiotic fundies are nothing short of disruptive
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    JK88-I am also tired of Fundamentalist Exgay or Antigay Christians hijacking these threads; either to evangelise for their Nazi Jesus, or pass on their warped homophobic religious inspired hatred
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    BB93-The Skinner type SCUM should really be ignored.

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    JK94-what they fail to understnand is that the “Sin of homophobia may result in many more deaths”
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    W98-He was too busy printing out his new degree off the internet, and colouring it in.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    BB99-The reason I condem you is because I belive that you are the Devil-incarnate.

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    B100-Yoo-hoo, put on your black net stocking and your 4-inch heels and get over here to help poor Mr. Skinner.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    BB101- Sugar Plumb and David Skin. are to wed in Abu-Dabi in the Spring.

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    W104-Lets make these 2nd century dimwits as uncomfortable as they can be on this site.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    1-108-I said it was a pity it couldn’t concentrate on doing good rather than spreading hate.

    See 72.

    I-108-I honestly think some of these people are mentally ill – and I mean that literally not insultingly.

    To paraphrase your own comment-How nice of you to judge them when you don’t even know them.

    I-109-Off topic but I just saw this story on msn which perfectly illustrates religious obsession over-riding intelligence:
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    W110-my experience is people like the SPF are cowards in real life, and back down when faced with a superior mind in person

    To use Iris’s words-How nice of you to judge me when you don’t even know me….

    L113- I suggest down of your pedestal and get of your arse and away from your keyboard and actually follow your own standard

    In the words of Iris-How nice of you to judge me when you don’t even know me….

    JK114-Humanist practice charity for the love of humanity . . . not for Jesus and a place in Heaven.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    B115-You sound like someone who has really articulated your support, as well as your understanding of the hardships of the LGBT community.

    Oh dear darling, get me another handkerchief please. I can’t stop crying.

  118. Brian Burton 3 Aug 2009, 6:46am

    Sugar Plumb Darling,
    I can see you disaprove of me calling you Cesspool, although I cannot in all my Christian honesty say sorry for something I truly Belive. Also I prayed To My Lord Jesus and thanked Him for rebuking you in the Desert when you tempted Him. We would however be interested in the fact that, you being a Satanist wheather you could maybe drop off the Planet and leave the Godly and Good people of Pink to run their own lives as they see fit.

    You have made a total hash of your own life and you are attempting to place the blame for the mistake that stupid cow of a mother of yours made when she threw you into the trash and brought up the after-birth–you unfortuneatley. We are all paying for your deranged mother’s mistake!

  119. Good Morning Brian:

    You really are an early riser. Hope all is well.

    This story has really moved me, and so many other people too. Who would have thought that the resistance to the inevitable would have been brought about by such kind, gentle, intelligent, good-living and certainly not activist-minded people as the Quakers.

    This really is an historic moment in the UK isn’t it? This date will go down in history.

    It is only the beginning, and soon Great Britain will be added to the countries who have legalized the fact that it is perfectly possible and natural for two human beings of the same sex to experience a genuine and lasting love for each other.

    O Happy Day!

  120. A three legged dog walks into a saloon in the Old West. He slides up to the bar and announces:

    “I’m looking for the man who shot my paw.”

  121. David Skinner 3 Aug 2009, 7:39am

    She used to have a boyfriend with a wooden leg, but she broke it off.

  122. David Skinner 3 Aug 2009, 9:14am

    SPF In case you are confused, I never posted the comment at 121. Obviously, in addition to tantrums, ad hominems and all the rest of it they are resorting sheer stupity. Maybe it is best to leave them to wallow in their own muck.

  123. David Skinner 3 Aug 2009, 9:28am

    Maybe I should not worry for anyone with half a brain will see that comments such as this one, and no doubt many more to follow, are completely inconsistent with all that I have said before. We all could play this game I suppose if we really wanted communication to completely breakdown. But thinking about it, communication, debate, enquiry and the ability to reason are the last thing one would expect on this site anyway. However,keep talking folks for we still need to hear what it is you are saying.

  124. Any one with even a quarter of a brain will see that, for all his hatred of homosexuality, endless rantings and hatred of other people enjoying life, he has nothing better to do on a saturday evening.

  125. David Skinner 3 Aug 2009, 9:46am

    Show me a piano falling down a mineshaft and I’ll show you A-flat minor. Har Har Har

  126. Will: “I hear you, Iris. But then again, the day we’re silent against this rampant stupidity and bigotry of these hateful fools, is the day we lose, and is the day reason is covered by the darkness of ignorance and superstition…”

    I completely understand where you’re coming from, Will. It’s infuriating to read the bizarre things that the fundies say, and how they use the Bible to justify their own bigotry while ignoring the parts that they choose. I also find it very disturbing how much some of them seem to revel in hate.

    Bentham: “Hi Iris:
    I’ve been looking for you.”

    Hi, Bentham. I’ll certainly consider joining the group. Don’t know if I could offer much, but I’m very interested in the idea of having a united response to these….I’m trying to think of a polite adjective….misguided people.

  127. John K,:

    In your post 3, you said:

    “Truly an inclusive, upstanding and tolerant relgion . . . very few Churches are worthy of drawing upon the name of Jesus . . . the Quakers are one of them.”

    I thought that was especially meaningful because you have often given me the impression that you are not particularly fond of religions.

    Of course, I agree most favourable comment.

    This news overwhelms me, although I am still under the shock of the killings in Israel. Their deaths will go down in history too, and they will inspire us just as Mathew Shepherd still inspires us.

  128. Hi Iris:

    Girl, Have I been looking for YOU!!

    Check out my post 105. See you there, and bring Lezabella!

  129. Oh, dear, we broke SPF! Now it seems he’s using sleep in lieu of answering a question. He must have been very, very tired listening to his daughter talking about her long day cleaning toilets and having to print out all those free “internet college” qualifications to impress us.

    Skinner: “But thinking about it, communication, debate, enquiry and the ability to reason are the last thing one would expect on this site anyway.”

    Yes, we don’t expect an ability to reason with someone like you who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and a talking snake gave some dizzy naked chick an apple to ruin gods day. Please, you’re noting but a medical curiosity, like our retarded narcoleptic friend SPF.

    Both of you are paragons of idiocy…. This is the word of the lord. Amen.

  130. Simon Murphy:

    In your post 27 you said:

    “David Skinner has admitted that he is into sheep. Please ignore him.”

    It’s a corker. I feel you’re right somehow. But as a lapsed Catholic who often has the impression of walking like I’m lost in a forest trying to salvage the best from the twisted spiritual life which I inherited as a child, I am haunted by the christian need to help as best as I can those who are not well.

    It’s not that I think it my responsibility to take on the weight of the world – nobody is asked to do that – but I seem to want to help those at hand who are among the needy, and to my way of thinking, and as someone who has worked for years as a Red Cross volunteer caring for the mentally challenged of all ages and of both sexes, it is very difficult for me to simply ignore David Skinner and other ex-gay fundamentalist hate-mongers.

    Homophobia is a mental illness after all, and it can be cured. I really believe that because I have seen it more than once during the course of my lifetime, particularly when a mother and a father overcome their irrational fear and embrace a teenage son or daughter who has come to terms with their ‘queer’ sexual orientation. I use the word ‘queer’ in its most complimentary sense, of course, being myself so proud to be 100% gay.

    Still, I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt because I have been reading ex-gay fundamentalist propaganda long enough to know that when there is no will to change or to heal oneself, a cure of homophobia is certainly a challenge as there appears to be other unknown factors contributing to their entrenched irrational fear; factors about which homophobes themselves are not even remotely aware.

    For example, I have met someone who had a lifelong irrational fear of spiders and who refused time and time again to even consider examining his interior scenery for the key that would have liberated him from this delibetating mental illness.

    It also appears that persons suffering from chronic homophobia will often become attached to domestic animals destined for slaughter, so that if Mr. Skinner has admitted to a fondness for sheep, then the pathological circle is complete, isn’t it.

    In that case, it will often happen that the patient will reverse his illness by projecting it onto his environment, e.g. justifying his illness by stating that he is well and that it is the others who are, shall we say, out of step.

    There is only a very short distance from such a pathological state to criminal behavior, as we have just recently witnessed in Israel.

    The fact remains, however, that we live in a cosmos where the positive will always overpower the negative, and the subject of this delightful thread will forever stand as proof of that, eh Simon Murphy.

  131. Will:

    To be fair to SPF, we must never forget that as Monkeychops only last month, he/she claimed to be an international, highly valued Diplomate who was doing us a favour by sharing just a little bit of his acquired wisdom with us, e.g. the hills of Gibralter reek of the odor of human urine.

  132. Hi Bentham
    Since most religions are pretty homophobic . . . it is true to say that I am not particularly fond of religions, but that is not the same as saying that I have no interest or time for religions, spirituality, theology or Christianity . . .

    Glad to hear that you found my comment about the Quakers encouraging.

    I find their “overtures” very encouraging:
    * Egmont
    * Fingels Cave
    * Cosi fan tutte
    Are my musical favourites . . . let’s hope the Quakers have another quavers to measure up metrically speaking. . . I like the up beat rhythms so far emerging from this religious movement.

  133. Sugar Plum Fairy 4 Aug 2009, 2:33am

    BB118-You have made a total hash of your own life and you are attempting to place the blame for the mistake that stupid cow of a mother of yours made when she threw you into the trash and brought up the after-birth–you unfortuneatley. We are all paying for your deranged mother’s mistake!

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    Don’t worry David, that is what children do when they are playing in the sandpit.

    AT124-Any one with even a quarter of a brain will see that, for all his hatred of homosexuality, endless rantings and hatred of other people enjoying life, he has nothing better to do on a saturday evening.

    Anyone with any brain at all, will see that for all your hatred of christianity, endless rantings and hatred of other people that do not subscribe to the gospel according to the gaystapo, you have nothing better to do at any time because you are so insecure and full of self loathing.

    I126- It’s infuriating to read the bizarre things that the fundies say, and how they use the Bible to justify their own bigotry while ignoring the parts that they choose. I also find it very disturbing how much some of them seem to revel in hate.

    It’s laughable to read the bizarre things that homos say, and how they use the bible to justify their own ignorance whilst ignoring the parts that don’t support their crackpot religion. I don’t find it at all surprising how much hate they have towards people that don’t agree with them as rejection breeds anger which breeds hate.

    W129-Oh, dear, we broke SPF! Now it seems he’s using sleep in lieu of answering a question. He must have been very, very tired listening to his daughter talking about her long day cleaning toilets and having to print out all those free “internet college” qualifications to impress us.

    Boring!!!!z z z z z z z z z z z z z z

    W129-Yes, we don’t expect an ability to reason with someone like you who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and a talking snake gave some dizzy naked chick an apple to ruin gods day. Please, you’re noting but a medical curiosity, like our retarded narcoleptic friend SPF.

    Boring!!! z z z z z z z z z z z z

    W129-This is the word of the lord. Amen.

    Don’t you mean the word of a clod?

    B130-Homophobia is a mental illness after all, and it can be cured.

    How do you know? You don’t even know what it is.

    JK132- Since most religions are pretty homophobic

    This statement shows that you don’t know what the word means.

  134. John M.J. 4 Aug 2009, 4:44am

    And in quoting Colossians 4:6 you have, Sugar Plumb Fairy, fallen precisely into the very heresy that St. Paul was warning you against – The Colossian Heresy, which is, as you so amply demonstrate by your reliance upon them, that strict regulations are nothing more than being in accordance with the commandments and doctrines of men which really have no value. Christ and the Spirit are what is needed to be a complete man, or woman, and that you singularly fail to see and rely, instead, upon a heretical and unChristian, indeed pagan and superstitious, interpretation of the Saint’s words.

    But what is worse, you have not put off the old man, as Paul commanded of you, you have kept that persona, and added to it a superstitious belief that the Bible, mere cardboard and paper, can stand in place of God. You are, you have become, the very model of exactly what the blessed Saint was warning us against in this letter – an excessive believer, probably a deranged believer, in rules and regulations which you, just like the pagans of old, have derived from spurious interpretations of sources and you have gone on to taint those rules with your own sin of hatred, which is behaviour that the Saint specifically warns you against in this letter to the Colossians.

    Theologically speaking you are on very shaky ground indeed when quoting Colossians 4:6 at this site for it is generally accepted by scholars that what St.Paul was referring to was not some Gnostic practise, not some hidden knowledge teaching or praxis at Colossae but that he was, rather, confronting his own inability to think widely enough and to be forgiving and charitable enough toward differences.

    In the passage that you wish us to consider the New Testament Greek word charis (and, let us not forget, there are huge problems inherent in translating New Testament Greek into modern English due to language shift and meaning slippage; not to mention St. Paul’s tongue in cheek style and his use of humour and contemporary literary references – the word ‘charis’ crops up in some very bawdy poems of the time and the Saint must have been aware of them for they were scrawled on walls all over the Empire and he could not have avoided them) which is usually translated as ‘grace’ can also mean many other things, including forgivness of the self for wrong practice and teaching or the having of charity and clean speech which castigate no-one. The way in which Paul uses ‘charis’ in this verse sets the tone for the rest of the letter but what tone we are supposed to take from it we can only guess at after all the elapsed years between us and him.

    The tone, however, becomes obvious for anyone who reads Paul in the original. It is about the Saint’s awareness of his own shortcomings and the entire letter, when read correctly and with suficient education rather than with your pagan, heretical and superstitious take on the words, is about reinforcing the Colossians’ belief in the riches of insight and glory given to them in Christ – and that is the classical interpretation which, if you care to look which I don’t suppose that you will for it will disturb your superstitious, pagan, literalist nonsense of a belief, you will find adequately explicated in Epitre aux Colossiens by Jean-Noel Aletti (published in Paris by Gabalda in 1993).

    So, now let us adress your use of words, meaningless words which you, and others like you, have coined in order to convey your hatreds and your pagan and heretical prejudices. Words like ‘gaystapo’ and Mr. Skinner’s nonsense words such as ‘terra homo’ or ‘planet homo’ (or whatever the precise usages were).

    These words are nothing but nonsense words: they are great sound-bites for your ten seconds of fame on some cheap and tawdry chat show, but they have no meaning other than to sound good and to desperately try to denigrate and to insult – your analogy to children playing in the sandpit is quite correct for that is precisely what you are doing and emulating when you employ those fatuous and made-up terms which do nothing more than reveal that you have absolutely no understanding of the love of Christ, no understanding of His forgiveness, no understanding of our God as a living God and no understanding whatsoever of the Church Universal or of the Bible which the Church wrote and authorises.

    For you it is the Church which is defined and authorised by the Bible, but the truth of the matter is that it is the Bible which is authorised by the living Church moved by the Spirit and the Christ who both still walk amongst us.

    Your pagan and heretical belief is precisely what St. Paul’s letter to the Colossians warns us against. If you knew anything at all, anything, about Biblical recension, about Biblical translation, about our Faith, and about our mainstream Church come to that, then you could never have posted such a superstitious, heretical,pagan and error filled piece at 133 as you did.

    Why on earth Mr. Skinner thought that you were the cavalry come to his rescue when, in reality, you are just another under-educated Biblical literalist who shuns the movement of the Spirit and condemns our God to hate as you do and implores Him to loathe and to strike I really don’t know.

    What is more, why on earth you should think that your deeply under-educated deployment of a highly contentious quote from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians should be some sort of clincher to your argument when even a first year Theology student could do better simply baffles me. Your ignorance of our shared Christianity is, quite simple, staggering. I don’t think that I have ever come across anyone quite as ill-educated as you are and quite as willing as you are, to deploy hate as fact.

    I’ll pray for you. I’ll pray that God will forgive you your obvious and manifold sins but it’s a stain upon my soul that I am going to find it very hard indeed to forgive your hatred and your paganism in the face of the One True God.

  135. Sugar Plum Fairy 4 Aug 2009, 6:26am

    W129-He must have been very, very tired listening to his daughter talking about her long day cleaning toilets and having to print out all those free “internet college” qualifications to impress us.

    This just shows how pathetic your attempts at intelligent conversation are. Because you have nothing to say you descend into ridicule because your damaged ego cannot cope with reality and your anger at your failed relationship with your parents sticks out a mile.

    You can’t bear to think that a Father would have a loving relationship with his daughter, so you choose lies and fabrication to cover the anger you feel when someone has something you want but didn’t have.

    It is obvious the truth for you is whatever spin you want to put on it. The fact that you are only revealing what a damaged creature you are hasn’t entered your head, which would be very easy as it seems to be empty.

    Your superior attitude is woeful and not worthy of consideration because pride always goes before a fall.

    My daughter by the way is a Client Relationship Executive at the McQuarie Bank and looks after the portfolios of investors so she is handling millions of dollars every day.

    No doubt you will now think up another childish retort to justify your pathetic existence and cover your foolish responses. Better to keep your mouth closed rather than make it obvious that you are an idiot.

  136. Sugar Plum Fairy 4 Aug 2009, 6:31am

    JMJ135-When are you going to say something intelligent?

  137. Brian Burton 4 Aug 2009, 6:56am

    Fairy Plumb Sugar,
    I say your idiotic non-de-plumb backwards because you are a very backward emrio of a person.
    John M.J. Is by far your superior interlect so you have to resort to your embrio status childhood and say ‘When are you going to say somethin intelligent?…..You Fake, you spec of dirt in the eye of our wonderful Pink News. May The God of Abraham strike you Dead!

  138. My god, its just an angry rant of consciousness, isn’t it? SPF, you’re one of the biggest bitches in this site…. and that’s saying something. Rant. Rant. Rant.

    How pathetic.

    And, really, who cares what you think, your a fool. Its just that simple.

  139. What do you expect Will?! This is fantastic. Another branch of Christianity now accepts gays and lesbains and values them as human beings for a change, instead of excluding, bullying and oppressing them. And, what do you know, they are seething, ranting and hollering like little children –

    They know they have lost – people are walking away from religion because of this toxic holy intolerance of others. But the Quakers have historically shown the way for the rest of Christianity – the first among them to call for abolition, for emancipation of women, the first to understand that homosexuality was a natural state of being and now this – that gays should deserve equality like everyone else.

    Reality Check-SPF’s, David Skinner’s, Hank’s privileged poistion of having their bigotry woven into state law is being eroded. When they say they are oppressed and persecuted, it’s because they can’t inflict their beliefs on others.

    Oh yeah, and if you don’t agree with them you are an intolerant nazi. They greatly insult the Christians who genuinely are hounded and persecuted, like in Iraq or Pakistan.

    They need to understand that religion will have no influence outside their heads or outside their churches. And if they think their conscience allows them to treat others as inferior or second class – like the right to refuse to serve a gay person, then society will treat them as such.

    All it takes is to realise that gay people are not predators, are not all sex maniacs, are not all spreading disease, and that science has answered almost all the questions relating to homosexuality.

    We actually make people ask the most difficult questins: what is marriage for?, why are we here?, what is the Good Life?

    We are specifically hated by the religious fundamentalists because our existence makes people realise, religion has all the wrong answers. We are not here to reproduce and reproduce, and drain away all the resources through overpopulation. Being honest about who we are, and making the best of life, and finding the loving relationship that makes us happy, giving others their space who are prepared to do the same in return – relationships are the very heart of the Good Life – that is what life is all about.

    Society on people who reciprocate tolerance. Ultimately, there will be no place for fundamental Christians like Reality Check, David Skinner and others, because they do not do this. They are reduced to screaming and ranting on PinkNews comments threads, settign up ludicrous websites like christian.org.uk or – in the case of Simon Calvert and Mike Judge – sending out spiteful press releases which the Daily Mail prints verbatim. This is not ideal, but it shows we are going in the right direction. Their rightful place is shouting in the street with placards, feeding the pigeons or selling pencils from a cup, and being laughed at by passers by.

    After all, even the Tory party is embarrassed about Section 28 hate laws now, and Sugar Plum Fairy knows, with religion dying in America, he will take his worldview to the grave with him.

  140. John M.J, Post 134 – what a pleasure to read that. Thank you for such an educated, eloquent response to SPF.

    AdrianT: “Being honest about who we are, and making the best of life, and finding the loving relationship that makes us happy, giving others their space who are prepared to do the same in return – relationships are the very heart of the Good Life – that is what life is all about.”

    Quite right. Relationships – our interaction with other human beings – are the key. Treating others with tolerance and respect is the way. Sometimes religion thinks it owns morality and decency, but only the bitter and self-hating would spew forth the vileness that people like SPF come out with. Most human beings don’t need a holy book to tell them to treat people with love and compassion.

    Back to the Quakers. I spoke to someone who attended a Quaker school and he told me they had collective worship where there was no leader of the service. He explained that that was because Quakers believe everyone is equal before God.

    That seems the very opposite of what many fundies want. They want to feel special so they denigrate other people. They think they own God and the Bible so they dictate to others what’s right and wrong, according to their own personal preferences. I often find them very arrogant, which isn’t an adjective I’d use to describe the Quakers, having heard and read a little about them.

  141. John M.J. 4 Aug 2009, 9:45am

    Sugar Plumb Fairy at 136,

    Actually, I just did say something very intelligent at 134. The fact that you cannot grasp my meaning or see it as intelligent comment merely indicates how far gone into heresy and pagan practices you actually are. What is more, your lack of understanding and your obvious inability to follow up the reference to Jean-Noel Aletti’s work which I gave you indicates even further just how closed to God and The Spirit your mind actually is.

    Apart from anything else you have obviously never been trained in the politenesses of proper discussion: it is not sufficient to answer, as you have just done, a considered reply with a mere one line gratuitous insult. If you want to make some intellectual impact then you have to develop your arguments in a rational way and expose them properly to criticism and to counter arguments.

    I have noticed that your style of reasoning is simply assertion drawn from your superstitious, psuedo-Christian (pagan) beliefs. That is an inadequate method of argument and contributes precisely nothing to any debate.

    I daresay that you will now through vast numbers of Bible verses at me which will put me to much labour as I explain their true meaning to you – the end result of which pointless effort will be to leave me feeling that I have cast my seed upon the stony ground of your heedless and wilful superstitious paganism and that you walk with the enemy of all Christians (the tempter into the ways of hatred, the evil one). Therefore, please don’t bother for I’ve heard it all before.

    I prayed for your immortal soul at this morning’s service but I came away with the feeling that I was too late and asking too much of Him – but maybe that was just my own mood rather than anything which He was trying to tell me about you. I am am sure that one day He will guide me towards loving you and that He will forgive you for your lack of true faith and belief.

  142. Adtian, you said it. If one christian organisation can accept gay marriage, well, its just possible others can too.

    Clearly the Quakers can see bast the dogma beyond an entrenched biblical view, and fair play to them, it shows an enlightened and true understanding of christian teachings. Its inevitable others will do the same, its just when is the issue. This is no different from so called christians using the bible as justification to keep slaves 200 years ago, and in time other churches will see how it is wrong to persecute others too.

    Of course that will leave our master of intelligent conversation, SPF, sitting on his own…. although I think that is probably the case already, such a distasteful and debase individual, no doubt has social issues when it comes to getting anyone to stand his company for more then a smoke break.

  143. Tolerance is only a useful value if it can be RECIPROCATED. You will notice there is no room for that in Sugar Plum Fairy’s world, and there is no room for dissent either. Ridicule him for his beliefs and that makes you a ‘nazi’!! That just shows, he cannot face the consequences of his beliefs.

    By the way, the Church of England had plenty of sugar plantations in the 18th century, where life expectancy for slaves was just months. What do you expect – a failed church which owes its existence to the family values of Henry VIII, and has always followed human morality – I cannot recall a moment when the Anglican Communion has ever taken a lead in anything on moral matters.

    Still, I wish the Quakers and the John MJ character above, every luck in stopping their religion from being defamed. Sugar Plum, Hank, David Skinner – these are manna from heaven as far as the ‘new atheists’ are concerned. As a non-theist myself I don’t mind their presence here. If people think christianity is all loving and caring – I just send them this link to show them why walking away from superstition is a necessity if society is going to live together in peace.

  144. SPF . . . if you are so bored.

    Why is it that you don’t just . . . P ** s Off!

    Why are you hanging around on this thread . . . bored stupid!

  145. Jean-Paul 4 Aug 2009, 3:34pm

    I love you guys, and that includes you Lady Iris.

    SPT, Skinner, you don’t deserve to be Lohn M.J.’s foot cushion.

  146. Jean-Paul 4 Aug 2009, 3:36pm

    That’s Mr. John M.J.’s foot cushion.

  147. Jean-Paul 4 Aug 2009, 3:48pm

    Jean-Paul, a.k.a. Bentham

  148. Brian Burton 4 Aug 2009, 4:29pm

    WELCOME BACK JEAN-PAUL,
    The Good News should say that The EVIL Skinner is Banned to the outer reaches of Mongolia. But, would’nt that be unfair on the poor outer-mongolians?

  149. Brian Burton 4 Aug 2009, 4:50pm

    Adrian T.
    Society to Live in peace…what a wonderful thought.
    The 1914 to 1918 World war was supposed to be the war to end all wars. Twenty years on and WW2 takes place, dead bodies piled high everywhere. Followed closley by the Korean War where many bodies were piled high everywhere. Then Vietnam, 20,000 American troops died and more thousands wounded. Now, the ‘War Fashion’ is kill an Afganistan reble and so it goes on and will never stop in your life-time Adrian and certainly not mine. Peace is a mythicle word and nomatter how we try, we cannot throw our net over to catch it.

  150. Sugar Plum Fairy 4 Aug 2009, 7:40pm

    If you leave alphabet soup on the stove and go out, it could spell disaster.

  151. And if you leave an idiot with a bible and go out, he’ll wrongfully think he has a brain.

  152. Jean-Paul 5 Aug 2009, 1:27am

    Will:

    I strongly doubt that Sugar has the kind of wit to come out with a pun like post 151. I suspect some rascal is trying to tell our dreary fundies to develop a sense of humour by posting exquisite puns in their names.

    For example, check out post 120, 121. Then in 123, Skinner more or less says that he has never had a sense of humour in his life.

    Post 125 takes the blue ribbon. A-Flat Minor! Get it? Love it!

    I think the ghost of the opera is in the wings. More. more, more!

  153. I though as much, but I thought I’d help carry the sarcasm along! :)

  154. “The Good News should say that The EVIL Skinner is Banned to the outer reaches of Mongolia. But, would’nt that be unfair on the poor outer-mongolians?”

    . . . it would be very unfair . . . what did they do to deserve that . . . lol

  155. JP: “…you don’t deserve to be Lohn M.J.’s foot cushion”

    I keep reading that as ‘Lindsay Lohan’s foot cushion’! *ashamed*

    I’ll be interested to hear about any Quaker same-sex marriage ceremonies that happen in the future. It’d be nice if the more reasonable religions like this showed up the bigots for what they are – bigots who put their own prejudices before their god.

  156. Tiglathpileser 5 Aug 2009, 12:29pm

    BB137-you are a very backward emrio of a person.

    Col 4:6 Let your word be always with grace, having been seasoned with salt, to know how you ought to answer each one.

    AT139-They know they have lost – people are walking away from religion because of this toxic holy intolerance of others.

    The churches growing the fastest are those that shun the sin of homosexuality, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    AT139-They need to understand that religion will have no influence outside their heads or outside their churches.

    The latest figures show that christianity is the fastest growing religion, but then the truth is not high on your agenda.

    AT139- All it takes is to realise that gay people are not predators,

    At a conference for homosexuals, William Allen said he had sex with over 2,000 boys, but then, truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    AT139-are not all sex maniacs,

    A diary of a homosexual showed that he had sex with 32 different men in a weekend, but then truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    AT139-are not all spreading disease,

    Over 80% of all AIDS cases in western society are spread by homosexuals, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    AT139-and that science has answered almost all the questions relating to homosexuality.

    And the APA has recently said that homosexuals are not born that way, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    I140- Treating others with tolerance and respect is the way.

    As long as you are not a christian judging by the violence you are guilty of if the reports I have on file are anything to go by.

    W142-Of course that will leave our master of intelligent conversation, SPF, sitting on his own…. although I think that is probably the case already,

    Sorry to burst your bubble W, but the churches growing the most are those that shun the sin of homosexuality.

    AT143-Tolerance is only a useful value if it can be RECIPROCATED.

    I agree, so when are you going to start showing some tolerance of those who have the temerity not to be beaten into submission by the gaystapo and say what they believe is the truth. Judging by the reports of violence against such people that I have on file, tolerance is a one way street for you.

    AT143- I cannot recall a moment when the Anglican Communion has ever taken a lead in anything on moral matters

    Of course you can’t because you only see what you want to see as in Wiliiam Wilberforce, an Anglican who succeeded in having slavery abolished, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    BB148-The Good News should say that The EVIL Skinner is Banned to the outer reaches of Mongolia.

    Col 4:6 Let your word be always with grace, having been seasoned with salt, to know how you ought to answer each one.

    For someone who claims to be a christian, you don’t seem too keen on what the bible says do you?

  157. “Over 80% of all AIDS cases in western society are spread by homosexuals, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.”

    Really? And you call your lies “truth” now, do you? How odd. These are all lies. You are a liar. And a liar is just a fool who talks too much.

    In fact, Sub-Saharan Africa in 2007 contained an estimated 68% of all people living with AIDS and 76% of all AIDS deaths, with 1.7 million new infections bringing the number of people living with HIV to 22.5 million, and with 11.4 million AIDS orphans living in the region….

    …and this is also where the “christian” faith is growing. The only place it is really. Coincidence? I don’t think so. Christian dogma is causing the spread of AIDS. How proud you must be.

    “but the churches growing the most are those that shun the sin of homosexuality.”

    No their not. Religion is on a serious decline in Europe. You’re a dying breed. And you know it.

    I’m curious by the incessant repetition of your statements. I’m no doctor, but there is definitely something wrong with you (duh!), medically I mean. The repetition, the refusal to engage in logical or civilised discourse, the pushing of your family as an “achievement” (your daughter cleaning toilets is not an achievement), and the staggering propensity to lie. OCD? Neurological disorders? But the lying… sheesh, you think we can’t see through that nonsense?!?

    All very worrying. For you.

    We, on the other had, don’t believe your lies. To us, you’re just a dying old fool.

  158. Wilberforce – LMAO. Well it was about time someone in the Church of England took on the issue of slavery – funny how it took Christians 1500 years of institutionalised Christianity for them to realize, slavery was wrong: some moral guide…
    The Quakers were committed to abolition long before him, and the best argument against it was from Thomas Paine, a non believer, in the 1770s, way before Wilberforce.

    Will can answer the rest though frankly, when people resort to defend their position with anecdote, they know they are out of the argument.

  159. Brian Burton 5 Aug 2009, 2:07pm

    That complete weardo is at it again under the guise of TingalTosser or some name similar to that.

    John K. sweet one, you read my comment to JP. What we want, what we really, really want is all Fundies to go back to their own claustrophobic little planets from wence they came! What we are really dealing with here is someone who thought life was a comedy show. Instead, it is a Tragedy. Some one said: When a thing is usless, it should be made beautiful, otherwise it has no reason for existing at all. This applies to you know who on this thread!

  160. Tiggy: “AT139- All it takes is to realise that gay people are not predators,

    At a conference for homosexuals, William Allen said he had sex with over 2,000 boys, but then, truth is not high on your agenda is it.

    AT139-are not all sex maniacs,

    A diary of a homosexual showed that he had sex with 32 different men in a weekend, but then truth is not high on your agenda is it.”

    I have no idea where you got all that info from, but it’s absolutely irrelevant. No-one’s suggesting that all LGBT people are perfect, and you tarring everyone with the same brush because of the actions of a small number of people is pathetic. I could use the same logic and say “Hitler was a Christian [yes, he was - he called Jews 'Christ-killers] and he was a murderous megalomaniac therefore Christians are murderous megalomaniacs”.

    Tiggy: “Over 80% of all AIDS cases in western society are spread by homosexuals, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.”

    Yours neither by the look of that statement. I suggest you read more about AIDS as you obviously know very little.

    Tiggy: “AT143-Tolerance is only a useful value if it can be RECIPROCATED.

    I agree, so when are you going to start showing some tolerance of those who have the temerity not to be beaten into submission by the gaystapo and say what they believe is the truth. Judging by the reports of violence against such people that I have on file, tolerance is a one way street for you. ”

    (“that I have on file”???!! Ooh, I’m quaking in my boots!) Using a word such as ‘gaystapo’ isn’t showing tolerance; refusing to read or comprehend corrections to your statements isn’t showing tolerance; refusing to accept that your interpretation of the Bible isn’t necessarily the correct one isn’t showing tolerance; implying that all LGBT people are promiscuous isn’t showing tolerance – need I go on?

    Tiggy: “And the APA has recently said that homosexuals are not born that way, but then the truth is not high on your agenda is it.”

    Ah :D Would that be the same APA that was apparently an expert on genes??

  161. Ohhhh, nicely put Iris! Better than my comment!

    :)

  162. Jean-Paul a.k.a. Bentham 5 Aug 2009, 4:02pm

    How do you make an egg laugh?

    Tell it a yolk.

  163. Jean-Paul a.k.a. Bentham 5 Aug 2009, 4:12pm

    Iris (155):

    …bigots putting their prejudices before God, eh.

    Yea, gives us a whole new meaning as to why Jesus would have, shall we say, disliked the Pharisees, e.g. so-called believers who worshipped papyrus scrolls instead of the God of their fathers, and who were power tripping telling ignorant people how to behave and where to put their hard earned shekels.

    Didn’t they have a fondness for tassels and things like that?

    Tassel Tiggy, hey, I just made a alliteration (a what?). Ain’t this a fun way to spend the day.

  164. Jean-Paul a.k.a. Bentham 5 Aug 2009, 4:33pm

    Brian (159):

    Something valuable that John M.J. taught us is that fundies are heretics within the framework of their own religion.

    I would push it one step further and say that Moslem extremists who butcher gays are heretics in the framework of Islam.

    Also that homophobes are mentally ill in the framework of humanity.

    After all, rubber rooms were invented for mentally ill patients who really believed they were Napoleon.

    Tassel Tiggy here is living in between worlds: he isn’t sick enough to be institutionalized, but he isn’t well enough to be socializing normally.

    As we say in French: Il fait pitié.

    Pass the roast goose, willya.

  165. Jean-Paul a.k.a. Bentham 5 Aug 2009, 4:52pm

    AdrianT (158):

    Is that the Thomas Paine who was born on January 29, 1737 in Thetford, England, who is best known as the author of “Common Sense” which appeared in January, 1776, and which sold 150,000 copies right off the bat, and who died on June 8, 1809?

    Yes?

    Oh well, everybody who knows anything about Democracy, which gives everyone freedom of speech, even the Tassel Tiggies, knows that Thomas Paine also published “The Rights of Man” in 1791. That was a rather sharp year for fundies wasn’t it?

    Hm-m-m.

  166. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 12:03am

    test

  167. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 12:09am

    Am I to understand that one is not allowed to post website addresses in these comment boxes?

  168. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 12:11am

    Ah. I guess not

  169. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 12:41am

    Well, what I wanted to say was that I have noticed that some people use reference to mental illness and stereotypes surrounding it to berate and insult commenters with whom they disagree. While I am aware of the sorts of sentiments expressed by those who usually seem to get these kind of responses and would myself not neccessarily agree with what they say or believe, I feel, as someone whose working life involves assisting people who genuinely experience mental health issues, that it is insensitive and demeaning to human beings whose lives are affected by mental illness, the circumstances and conditions they can find themselves in as a result, and the still very real stigma and prejudice they can face.

    Im sure that we can think of more intelligent and constructive ways to express our opposition without also demeaning those who may not neccessarily share the views of commenters with whom we disagree.

    I would like to gently and politely urge you all to visit some mental health websites to examine the wealth of information they offer to help increase your understanding and awareness of mental health/illness. Now since I dont seem to be allowed to give website addresses in these comment boxes I will simply recommend the website of MIND & also The Mental Health Foundation, both uk based organisations, and leave you to figure out how to find their sites for yourself. Thank you. Much Love.

  170. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 12:57am

    And a round of applause for the Quakers! Im sure Unitarians wont be far behind if indeed they dont already do it.

  171. Rick George 7 Aug 2009, 1:00am

    In fact I think I’ll raise the issue at the next meeting. Watch this space as the saying goes.

  172. Brian Burton 7 Aug 2009, 8:02am

    Rick George,
    Sorry you are MENTALY ILL you poor sod. Is it your identity crisis bothering you? Well, I’ve dun told you! Dun told you I did. You are the DEVIL and you want to leave your Devils Playgroung to Visit with The Good. Well I Dun Told YOU DEVIL Person Yall Git NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CHaaaaaaaaaaange OUTA US!

  173. Brian Burton 7 Aug 2009, 8:04am

    GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN.

  174. Actually Rick, the Unitarians’ position (or the one I am aware of near Newington Green in North London) – is that they will not do any marriages until gays can get married! Frankly I’d rather they took the Quakers’ stand…. (see link, click on AdrianT)

    Their sermons seem to be at the same time I come rolling out of the clubs :-)

  175. Brian Burton 7 Aug 2009, 1:09pm

    The Quakers Are qickly to become the Religious Force, well ahead of the puny efforts of the C. Of E. the none efforts of the R.C.s and quite simply ahead of the any Church you can name. The Insane, Religious Fundamentelists. Think they actually own Religion, have unshakable views on how the Scriptures should be interprated for their presentation to the world. And bore us all silly in the process. Even though I am a Gay Christian, I cannot and will not tollerate their kind of Dogma! We all want to do what we think is right, have our own thoughts and feelings on our own Sexuality. For Insane Fundies to come along and interfere with our prefered Lives is fundamentaly against our human rights.

  176. upandatem 9 Aug 2009, 3:26am

    Well I Dun Told YOU DEVIL Person Yall Git NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CHaaaaaaaaaaange OUTA US!

    Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.

  177. upandatem 9 Aug 2009, 3:43am

    I 160-I have no idea where you got all that info from, but it’s absolutely irrelevant.

    You obviously hadn’t noticed that everything is irrelevant if it doesn’t support your mangled take on things.

    “No-one’s suggesting that all LGBT people are perfect, and you tarring everyone with the same brush because of the actions of a small number of people is pathetic.”

    So are you as in Fred Phelps who appears on just about every homosexuals website, with the rejoinder that all Christians are like Fred Phelps. Obviously your blinkered view of like hasn’t allowed you to see that he is the ONLY one who does what eh does.

    “I could use the same logic and say “Hitler was a Christian [yes, he was - he called Jews 'Christ-killers] and he was a murderous megalomaniac therefore Christians are murderous megalomaniacs”.

    You do even though he was not a christian, but it suits your cause and helps you cover up your damaged egos so you deny the truth.

    “Using a word such as ‘gaystapo’ isn’t showing tolerance;”

    These offerings must indicate that you are intolerant and bigoted. They are all terms used by homos on this site.

    100. YOU CESSOPOOL! Why don’t you crawl back into It?
    101. The pathetic, deluded one,
    102. cultist psycho talkers
    103. you scatter-brained Syclops.
    104. crawl back into the Cesspool he crawled out of!
    105. The pathetic, deluded one
    106. idiotic fundies
    107. evangelise for their Nazi Jesus
    108. 2nd century dimwits
    109. rampant stupidity and bigotry
    110. degenerate people inferior in their mental abilities
    111. illiterate idiot.
    112. What a Camp Clara Cluck!
    113. Exgay Fundamentist Christian Nut case
    114. cruel pieces of scum
    115. You and your offspring are obviously vermin
    116. rampant stupidity and bigotry of these hateful fools
    117. retarded narcoleptic friend
    118. paragons of idiocy
    119. A monumental fool and a lair.
    120. We are all paying for your deranged mother’s mistake!
    121. is that he’s a prick,
    122. bring it on you bastered
    123. sad, rancid right-wing Christian
    124. just fuckoff.
    125. flapping around aimlessly like a retarded chicken
    126. Your endless manic homophobic graffiti
    127. homophobic, revoltingly self-righteous guy
    128. intellectually retarded old crackpot
    129. Who gives a monkeys f*ck what you think
    130. very backward emrio of a person.
    131. You Fake, you spec of dirt
    132. May The God of Abraham strike you Dead!
    133. distasteful and debase individual
    134. Stupid cow.
    135. A born Pratt
    136. this mad slag,
    137. Blinkered old hag.
    138. Sad ignorant female.
    139. you toilet!
    140. piss off and get a life.
    141. GoFuckYourself

    “refusing to read or comprehend corrections to your statements isn’t showing tolerance;”

    What corrections? I guess your ignoring the truth isn’t tolerance.

    “refusing to accept that your interpretation of the Bible isn’t necessarily the correct one isn’t showing tolerance;”

    And your refusing to accept the correct interpretation is showing intolerance.

    “implying that all LGBT people are promiscuous isn’t showing tolerance – need I go on?”

    Implying that all homos are not promiscuous isn’t showing tolerance. Need I go on?

  178. upandatem 9 Aug 2009, 4:45am

    I 160-”implying that all LGBT people are promiscuous isn’t showing tolerance – need I go on?”

    Even the homo’s back me up on that one!!!

    A survey by The Advocate, a homosexual magazine, revealed that promiscuity is a reality among homosexuals. The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.

    Unprotected homosexual sex is also a concern among health professionals. A survey in Ireland by the Gay Men’s Health Project found that almost half of homosexuals said they were having unprotected sex….

    The fact that many homosexuals appear to live their lives in sexual overdrive does not seem to concern leaders in the movement. In an editorial from the same issue (August 15) in which the survey results were published, The Advocate said: “[Homosexuals] have been proud leaders in the sexual revolution that started in the 1960s, and we have rejected attempts by conservatives to demonize that part of who we are.”

  179. Brian Burton 9 Aug 2009, 8:45am

    UPandwhatever?
    What are you Fundamantalists doing about the Birmingham ISLAMIC Fundamentalists? We are too easy Targets for you ‘Craven Cowards.’

  180. Brian Burton 9 Aug 2009, 9:37pm

    David Skinner,
    That list you run by us from 100 to 141–It is all you and you know I regard you as a CLOSET Queen! We will make tou admit it one day!

  181. Brian Burton 10 Aug 2009, 6:27am

    UPSKINNERSASS,
    Wellcome to my world, wont you come on in? Wellcome to my world, I think I need a Gin. Bollockchops Hank is on gay Sherlock. Arnt these Fundamentalist clowns like a piece of gum sticking on to the bottom of your shoe?

  182. “The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.”

    So what? Does this give you the right to persecute and deny the right of a human being?!?!?!? I am LEGALLY entitled to have as many sexual partners as I want. Do you think straight people are celibate, or something? Are you jealous, is that it?

    What a stupid bloody argument you make. You’re an utter fool who actually gets stupider with each post.

  183. Brian Burton 10 Aug 2009, 4:13pm

    Will,
    That list from 100 to 141 he is at pains to show us, it’s all him, the Bungling fool! Oh! I love it!

  184. 101. The pathetic, deluded one,
    102. cultist psycho talkers
    103. you scatter-brained Syclops.
    105. The pathetic, deluded one
    106. idiotic fundies
    107. evangelise for their Nazi Jesus
    108. 2nd century dimwits
    109. rampant stupidity and bigotry
    110. degenerate people inferior in their mental abilities
    111. illiterate idiot.
    112. What a Camp Clara Cluck!
    113. Exgay Fundamentist Christian Nut case
    114. cruel pieces of scum
    115. You and your offspring are obviously vermin
    116. rampant stupidity and bigotry of these hateful fools
    117. retarded narcoleptic friend
    118. paragons of idiocy
    119. A monumental fool and a lair.
    120. We are all paying for your deranged mother’s mistake!
    123. sad, rancid right-wing Christian
    124. just fuckoff.
    125. flapping around aimlessly like a retarded chicken
    126. Your endless manic homophobic graffiti
    127. homophobic, revoltingly self-righteous guy
    128. intellectually retarded old crackpot
    131. You Fake, you spec of dirt
    133. distasteful and debase individual
    134. Stupid cow.
    135. A born Pratt
    136. this mad slag,
    137. Blinkered old hag.
    138. Sad ignorant female.
    139. you toilet!

    All these words describe you perfectly upandatem. What’s wrong with honesty? Don;t you believe in being honest or telling the truth?

  185. Brian Burton 11 Aug 2009, 8:17pm

    Robbie,
    My sentiments exactley. Go to the top of the class. We have the ‘upandatem’ crud out-classed.

  186. Rick George 14 Aug 2009, 4:35am

    Adrian T re 174. I did raise the issue of gay marriage and what the unitarian position was when I attended church on the 9th. I have been a unitarian for about 2 years and also a quaker for a time before that. Your assertion is not an accurate representation of the unitarian position on gay marriage which is actually supportive though they are aware that it is not currently legally recognised. Unitarians are generally quite an open minded bunch and I have found them to be very positive and supportive of glbt people and issues as are quakers also. If they werent I wouldnt be one.

  187. 179-What are you Fundamantalists doing about the Birmingham ISLAMIC Fundamentalists?

    Nothing as I don’t fear them just the same as I am not afraid of you so I can’t be homophobic.

    179- We are too easy Targets for you ‘Craven Cowards.’

    Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.

    180-and you know I regard you as a CLOSET Queen! We will make tou admit it one day!

    Do you? By the way, who is David Skinner?

    180-Arnt these Fundamentalist clowns like a piece of gum sticking on to the bottom of your shoe?

    Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.

    182-”The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.”

    So what? Does this give you the right to persecute and deny the right of a human being

    Of course we mustn’t admit to the obvious must we. The article by your friend was posted to show that your contention that homos weren’t promiscuous was bullshit.It is a sad day when you can’t accept what your own tribe said. Shows how sad you are.

    182-Are you jealous, is that it?

    Jealous of being a screwed up, insecure, lonely, and a deprived excuse for manhood. I don’t think so.

    182-What a stupid bloody argument you make. You’re an utter fool who actually gets stupider with each post.

    As usual you show your complete and utter inability to make any comment that is near anything you could call intelligent.

    183-That list from 100 to 141 he is at pains to show us, it’s all him, the Bungling fool! Oh! I love it!

    Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.

    184-All these words describe you perfectly upandatem. What’s wrong with honesty? Don;t you believe in being honest or telling the truth?

    Yes I do that is why you hate it so much. Obviously you have missed the point again as usual. Someone said they were offended because I called them homos so I provided a list of the foul and abusive language that you use against those that do not fall at your feet in adoration and worship. But of course I realise that you think you’re perfect so you can be an abusive as you like.

    185-My sentiments exactley. Go to the top of the class. We have the ‘upandatem’ crud out-classed.

    Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.

    186-I have been a unitarian for about 2 years

    And here’s me thinking you were a Christian, although I had my doubts bearing in mind the offensive language you use.

  188. 21stCenturySpirituality 14 Aug 2009, 8:12pm

    upandatem, as a rule, I do not engage in name calling or insult, or use offensive language in my comments here. Other comments I have posted atest to that. The comment you are refering to is the one and only time I have chosen to use a more direct and confrontational style to express an opinion.

    I hardly think it is appropriate for you to lecture me about the use of offensive language, or talk down to me about spiritual values and morality. I mean, I would hardly call, what at times is nothing short of bullying, and the kind of demeaning, condescending, dehumanising, belittling language and sentiments and the sarcasm and name calling frequently engaged in by you and your posse of 10, or whatever it is, as representative or becoming of those who profess themselves to be people of God.

    Of the 34,000 seperate groups identified within Christianity, of which yours is just one, how do you assess which ones interpretation of the bible is correct from the confusing mish mash of contradictory claims made about what it means?

  189. 21stCenturySpirituality 15 Aug 2009, 2:02am

    With over 10,000 distinct religious groups around the world making similiar claims about infallibility and exclusivity how can you claim that your religion is any more or less valid than theirs? I mean, they say your wrong, you say they’re wrong, another one says that its right and that both you and the other one are wrong, the next one says it right and all three of you are wrong and on and on ad infinitum, so what makes you think in the grand scheme of things that you have any more of an exclusive monopoly on God and truth than they also claim to have?

  190. “.It is a sad day when you can’t accept what your own tribe said.”

    Stop being such a fucking idiot. If you are a demented christian freak, that doesn’t mean every christian is as sad as you, does it? The same goes for other gay people. What a completely stupid thing to say.

    “Yes I do that is why you hate it so much.”

    Well, duh. Who gives a toss? Seriously, who care? You have a few gay people for no real reason. I’d say many, many people can’t stand the sight of you. You’d be better off topping yourself in your council flat, at least you might be more useful being fertiliser to plants more intelligent and practical than you.

    You’re a buffoon. A very small and enormously stupid man.

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