Reader comments · Video urging action against gay employment rights to be shown in churches · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Video urging action against gay employment rights to be shown in churches

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Brian Burton 21 Jan 2010, 12:30pm

    The CCFON or whoever that may be, are a bunch of idiot reactionaries. And who the hell do they think they are? They don’t want equality, only their own version of equality…Bastards!

  2. more homophobes
    adoption agencies that closed could have stayed open if they obeyed the law as the bible says they should instead of placing their evil agenda above the kids they claim via lies to protect

  3. Andy Marshall 21 Jan 2010, 12:39pm

    The frightening thing, for me, is that this kind of dumming down of Theology can be attractive and gathers fans and financial sponsors.

    Sadly, honesty, humility and openness are never as popular as bigotry.

  4. From the news item – Interesting re-emergence of Mr Skinner

    “She also called for people to sign a petition set up by David Skinner. So far, it has been signed by more than 25,000 people”

  5. This is an absolute disgrace. Nothing short of an advert for the legalisation of homophobia. The fact that these churchs still only consider us as gay people because of what we do in bed rather than on the merits of us as people able to do a job is just plain sick. It shows them for what they really are and the sick minds they have. It never amazes me that the peple who preach about their right to discrimiate are also the ones clearly with the perverted minds. I’m sure they don’t just see their own followers for what they do in bed so why should we be any different?
    They should hang their heads in shame.

  6. So they say equality amounts to the state interfering in their church do they? Well, if they pulled themselves out of the dark ages and into the 21st century, then the state wouldn’t have deemed it necessary to interfere. So they’ve brought this on themselves and now they’re throwing a tamtrum over it. Well boo hoo!

  7. The Christian Institute is the largest organisation which represents these extremist views.

    Come and challange their presence on face book, with a like minded group from pinknews.

  8. “She also called for people to sign a petition set up by David Skinner.”

    Unfortunately he is still alive then :(

    I must try harder with the voodoo doll :D

  9. Telegraph news article concerning the equality bill

    “Bishop of Winchester warns Christians may have to give up public sector jobs because of secular agenda”

  10. Abi1975 . . . order more dolls – lol

  11. Gotta love it when christian organisations complain that their ‘freedom’ is harmed by not being allowed to persecute/oppress a type of person their magic book doesn’t like.

    because we all know the baby jesus was a homo – sandals, dresses and a close group of men that shunned women? what a raging homosexual!

  12. The petition set up by David Skinner is very usefull

    1. 25 000 + list of homophobes
    2. Included in the list are clergy
    3. Included in the list are doctors and other professionals

    This could be saved as an important record of those of wish to deny LGBT people equlaity liberty and dignity.

  13. Freedom to discriminate – how ‘christian’. And why stop at LGBT people? Why not resurrect the racism spewed forth in the name of god? Why not add a bit of anti-Semitism? Why not quote the sections in the Bible that make disabled people out to be inferior? Plenty of people who are different from you to pick on, isn’t there?

    That’s why we need anti-discrimination laws. And why should one group be allowed to disregard the Law? I particularly hate the way they single out LGBT people. I’d bet that there’s plenty of people they dislike, but they only feel safe picking on us. That’s why they seem obsessed with us. We’re all that’s left to victimise.

    Sad, sad people.

  14. I would not worry to much about these people, I checked to see how many hit’s there website was getting and it’s only getting just over a thousand hit’s per day, PinkNews gets over 20,000!

  15. Lucio Buffone 21 Jan 2010, 1:39pm

    Forget about the hatred for a minute. Can we just reflect on how bad her make up is ….. Really girl, you need to spend more time with homo’s we’d have you looking great in no time.cambiums

  16. Mumbo Jumbo 21 Jan 2010, 2:16pm

    Abi1975 said:

    “I must try harder with the voodoo doll”

    It’s a nice thought.

    But as we all suspect that Skinner’s obsession with all things gay marks him out as a repressed closet case, he will probably enjoy the thought of you putting a prick in him.

    Back on the subject of the upcoming vote in the Lords, I look forward to seeing how this breaks down in terms of Lib/Lab/Con peers.

    Somehow, I do not expect to be surprised.

  17. Once again they want extra rights. It’s a wonder that people with obvious mental issues are allowed not only the congregate but to have a place of power.

  18. Mumbo Jumbo 21 Jan 2010, 2:25pm

    Their committment to free speech and their confidence in the quality of their argument is illustrated by the fact that they have disabled the comments facility on YouTube.


    You can still click on “one star” to get the rating right down though…….

  19. Check out what “Christian Concern for our Nation”

    Really stands for . . . i.e extremist homophobic views

  20. “A government Equalities Office spokesman told the Daily Mail: “In the case of youth workers, a church is likely to be able to impose a requirement about sexual orientation if the job is mainly teaching a bible class.”

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    Will there be any other books the law will prevent LGBT people from being able to teaching?

    How odd!!!

  21. I hate hate these people and their creepy fascist agenda.

  22. “Churches will find themselves sued for not employing practising homosexuals.”
    they dont get sued when they dont hire a woman over a man so that just shows how biggoted their argument is

  23. Robert, ex pat Brit 21 Jan 2010, 3:31pm

    This is EXACTLY the same tactic religious cults in America use to justify the denial of equality and same-sex marriage rights. Typical. Nail the bastards with impunity, nobody, no cult, should be above or exempt from the law of the land.

  24. Charitable status 21 Jan 2010, 3:51pm

    Churches and religious charities need to be wary of importing the culture wars from the USA and preaching the politics of discrimination from the pulpit, in case they lose their charitable status:

    “…The Charity Commission also assesses the existence of benefit in a charity’s aims by accounting for any harm or detriment generated by those aims. Where supported by evidence, some legitimate examples of harm include environmental damage, danger to physical or mental health, promoting violence or hatred, and unlawfully restricting a person’s freedom.”

    Incidentally, apart from the environmental damage, all the other types of harm have been shown to be caused to gay people by the discrimination of the religious right in the US, proven by the personal and expert evidence given to the Federal Court in California over the last 2 weeks.

  25. At what point do these views become a mental health issue? Delusion: A fixed False belief.

    Mental Health practicioners will normally recomend a person is sectioned when they cause harm to themselves or others.


  26. Comments are disabled on the Youtube site with his video – I wonder why?

    CCFON is a Roman Catholic front organisation peddling homophobia on behalf of the vatican and the obnoxious “Wee-Frees” from Scotland that has Lord McKay – Thatchers’s Law Lord as its mouthpiece.

    What would they say about Iris Robinson then – “Christians who do not live up to Christian principles in their private life.”?

    CCFON – Christians who want a “cast them out” church not the inclusive “reach out” church of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    CCOFN – Nasty noisy bigots soiling the Bible with their hatred.

  27. Charitable status 21 Jan 2010, 4:15pm

    There’s a lot about donating money on their website, and this is how they deal with their lack of charitable status:

    “Under current law, CCFON / CLC are not eligible for charitable status because of our campaigning work so we are not able to reclaim gift aid as charities can.

    However we have now set up an organisation named ‘Faith, Truth and Hope’ which does have charitable status (registered charity number 1121897). Faith, Truth and Hope can receive gift aided donations that can then be used to support legally charitable aspects of the work of CCFON and CLC.

    We are very much in need, and always will be in need, of donations specifically to CCFON and CLC, but if you prefer to make a gift aided donation to ‘Faith, Truth and Hope’, please make any cheque payable to ‘Faith, Truth and Hope’ and send to the following address:”

    W1G 8AX

  28. Charitable status 21 Jan 2010, 4:18pm

    Sorry, I intended to delete the whole address, but the post code was off the screen.

  29. If David Cameron is so concerned that the Tory Party is seen as unbigoted and supportive of gay people, why doesn’t he do something really practical and (a) expel the loathsome bigot Baroness O’Cathain from his party – a woman who has opposed gays’ rights to adopt, opposed lesbians having access to IVF and tried to make it much harder for transgendered people to get surgery, and who tried to derail the Civil Partnerships law, and (b) issue a three-line whip on all Tory peers to vote against her amendment ?

    One bit of real action woul dbeat any amount of hot air. Don’t tell me that as a back bencher she can do whatever she likes – that’s true, but should she be doing it within the Conservative party, if we are to believe their claim to no longer be the ‘nasty’ party ?

  30. won’t be shown in my church. The only video playing equipment is in the parish centre run by a 68 year old gay man.

  31. Squidgy said “The fact that these churchs still only consider us as gay people because of what we do in bed rather than on the merits of us as people able to do a job is just plain sick. It shows them for what they really are and the sick minds they have.”

    Jonathan Ross promotes the same attitude every week on his Friday night TV show.

  32. Jennifer Hynes 21 Jan 2010, 5:31pm

    I find the whole thing disgusting and demeaning. What does she mean the “privatisation of faith”? That is what the various churches have been preaching since the Reformation anyway!

    I am pretty sure that the majority of Christians in the UK will not pay the slightest attention to this, other than to pray for these obviously misguided souls.

    I’m also pretty sure Jesus would not approve. After all, he took as a disciple one of the most despised and ostracised people in Judea… a tax collector. Jesus stands with the oppressed and persecuted, not with the oppressor and the persecutor.

  33. No doubt the among the pastors showing the video this weekend will be the same 170 religious leaders (pentecostal, evangelical, baptist etc) who jointly signed a letter, claiming to represent ‘tens of thousands of black Christians’ denouncing the Sexual Orientation legislation in 2006, in the daily telegraph.
    The full list of pastors is seen under the letter, if you scroll down, at:

    Especially when you read the letter, their belief that the only evidence for homophobia is what the media says, it raises suspicions: the congregations of some of these churches are large, a few go into the thousands. What are they telling their congregations about gay people? It alarms me given the popularity of ‘murder music’ in certain communities.

  34. Ironic that Andrea Minichiello Williams doesn’t support gay equality, given that she appears to be emulating gay icon Elvira on a bad hair day!
    Half of me thinks this is worth taking them to task over.
    On the other hand I’m also reminded of the complaint Homer Simpson makes when he’s barred from joining Springfield’s secret masonic lodge…
    “They won’t let me join their stupid club for jerks!”

  35. Religious ethos? Does that mean straight adulterers and divorced people cannot be employed? I don’t think so! Seems this type is merely another group of bigots who only use parts of the bible that suit them.

  36. What gets me is that these so called ‘religious’ people would be horrified if we judged them on their sex life and habit. So what give them the right to do the same?

  37. Oh, they’re SPECIAL, Squidgy…..

  38. Why not start a campaign for the right for dispensation under the laws against religious discrimination in institutions dedicated to scientific or statistical research? Surely belief in undemonstrated supernatural beings is totally incompatible with commitment to experimental and empirical principles.
    While we’re doing that, I think the pious should certainly be banned from running adoption agencies. Children should be adopted on the basis of established knowledge about their needs and how they are met, not supernatural doctrines.

  39. When will “David Skinner” make an appearance on this thread, and no doubt tell us more about the dubious virtue of the 25 000 + petition he has been weaving!!!

  40. Read the letter from David Skinner urging evangelical christians to sign the petition.

  41. BrazilBoysBlog 21 Jan 2010, 8:52pm

    For years, the laws of the land were fiercely anti-gay. We were told by the bigots to shut up and obey those laws. Now the tide is turning they don´t like it? Well, ain´t life a bitch!

    Obey the laws of the land, stop discriminating against others or go the way of those adoption agencies… CLOSE DOWN.

    You will not be missed!

  42. Here are some of Mr skinners views as to why he started the petition which now has over 26 000 signitures.

    The follwing extract which contains his views, was taken from an article “Equality Bill ‘will be amended’” on the Anglicam Mainstream website.

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    “David Skinner, a Baptist who started the petition, said: “I have spoken to many people who feel this is the first time they have been able to make themselves heard. They feel failed by their Church leaders.

    Mr Skinner also sees a secularist agenda controlling the Government’s actions which will not rest until society is rid of religion: “This doesn’t affect just Christians, although we’re the first in line, but it will be the Jews, and then the Catholics — and eventually, it will be rather like Nazi Germany. “There is no such thing as homophobia, because there are no such things as homosexuals. Homosexuals are the invention of a German in the 19th century who was a pederast.”

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    Equality Bill ‘will be amended’
    January 15th, 2010 Posted in News | Comments Off
    By Toby Cohen, CEN

  43. JohnK – So let me get this straight… according to David Skinner homosexuals don’t actually exist and we were all invented by a 19th century German pederast? And therefore homosexuals must be stopped? Am I reading this correctly?
    So by his own account he’s on a personal crusade against ficticious people who only exist in the imagination of a German pederast? And here was I thinking we’d tapped the full extent of his rubber room fantasies.
    Crack open the economy bottle of phorosine, it’s going to be a long shift down at the funny farm.

  44. You got it flapjack . . . and he has over 26 000 supporters

    Well 26 000 people who have signed his petition.

    By the way I have been researching Mr Skinner . . . He lives in the Blanford forum area of Dorset.

  45. BrazilBoysBlog 21 Jan 2010, 10:13pm

    ´there are no such things as homosexuals. Homosexuals are the invention of a German in the 19th century who was a pederast.´

    Surely this man is an incredibly good example why the right to free speech should be defended? Clearly each time he opens his mouth, he shows what a loony crackpot he is? Come on, let´s here some more of your opinions and theories Davy-boy.

    Seriously though, I am SO happy to know that I am merely a figment of some 19th century German pederasts imagination… Saves me having to worry about what to have for tea tonight! :-)

  46. Wow! :o Thanks for that, JohnK! So DS is a Baptist – I’m not surprised. However, I did just pinch myself to make sure I was real. Now I’ll be getting in my Tardis to tell all those Ancient Greeks and their like that a) they’re just figments of someone’s imagination, and b) they must also be time-travellers – or maybe the German was. Yep, it’s all making sense now.

    And people make fun of the CO$. This is just as nutty. But seriously, how disturbed must people be to believe this? It’s easy to laugh, but surely they must be ill?

  47. theotherone 21 Jan 2010, 10:46pm

    ‘Homosexuals are the invention of a German in the 19th century who was a pederast.’

    —ever get the idea that someone’s read Volume 1 of The History Of Sexuality and got completely the wrong end of the stick?

    What a silly, silly man.

  48. A question about terms, from the U.S.: When we say an item is “tabled,” we mean that it was withdrawn from consideration. Apparently there’s a different meaning in the U.K.? That an item was proposed?

    Just wondering.

  49. Hi Iris . . . I know

    “Seriously Deranged David of Dorset”

    The Blandford Forum area where David Skinner lives has has seven Baptist Churches.I have listed all seven below:

    Corfe Mullen Baptist Church
    01202 699 729

    Winton Baptist Church
    01202 488 993

    Longfleet Baptist Church – 01202 684 745

    Wimborne Baptist Church – 01202 882 908

    Parkstone Baptist Church – 01202 716 057

    Moordown Baptist Church – 01202 515 258

    West Cliff Baptist Church
    01202 767070

    Remember how last year on a pink news thread, David Skinner advocated that Christians may need to take up arms against gay people . . . not too difficult to believe in light of his recent argument about homosexuality published on the Anglican mainstream news site.



  51. Hookaaa . . . tells us more

  52. Stewart Cowan 22 Jan 2010, 3:20am


    Hope you spotted my name on the list. :-)

    Sorry that freedom is so offensive to you. Should Stonewall be forced by law to appoint Christians who don’t follow their ‘ethos’?

  53. That list of names has been most helpful in removing religious zealots from our databases including Mr Skinner and Mr Cowan.

    It was so nice of them to be so obliging but I’m a little confuses why Stewart Cowan was interested in a rimming site!

  54. Christine Rourke 22 Jan 2010, 8:46am

    Yes, Abi.

    It’s uncanny how often Stewart Cowan seems to be on here. I guess he likes our company. :-)

    I dare say he tries to convince himself that he is trying to “convert” us…. ;-)

    Well, it’s OK, Stewart petal. I am sure some of your naive supporters will believe that thin story.

    Reminds me of that scene in Naked Civil Servant, where the bullying closet gay pretends to beat up on Quentin, but really just wants to hold his hand and have fun, and is too scared to show it. ;-)


  55. The Bible = The Flag = Democracy = Our Way Of Life,
    all under threat from these awful gay people,
    that’s the gist of this rubbish.
    The “faithful” will lap it up,
    it’ll make their weekend.
    Ah well………….

  56. So it is okay for then to go out queer-bashing and going on about how ‘bad’ and ‘sinful’ we are but as soon as we ask for equal rights then they get upset and kick off!

    If they don’t want us fighting them through the political system then maybe they should stay out of it too . . .

  57. Peter G. Brown 22 Jan 2010, 10:20am

    If my church were to air this piece of crap, the congregation would walk out and the rector would be sacked. What christian churches would actually give any time to this bigotted nonsense?

  58. Stewart Cowan – your arguement is flawed. The fact you and your ilk seem only to judge people on what they do in bed shows you up for what you really are. Your a disgrace and I don’t believe for a minute God would agree with you! You make up your own rules, your own discrimination and them blame everyone else for when it all goes wrong. Grow up and get real!

  59. Whilst its sick they will show this piece of rubbish in some churches, I think its fairly safe to assume that the only churches it will be shown in, are those which are fiercely anti-gay rights anyway. So, in that regard it shouldn’t make a jot of difference.

    Its these sorts of people who are the cause of the sharp decline in church membership numbers anyway. Thankfully the vast majority of the public can think for themselves and know not to behave in a nasty way towards minority groups such as us LGBT people. When the church numbers (for the likes of the evangelicals) declines enough, their status should be downgraded to ‘Cult’.

  60. “Stewart Cowan – your argument is flawed.”

    Indeed it is. But Mr. Cowan is just another Iris Robinson… sanctimonious and hypocritical.

  61. …and someone who should be pitied. There’s no need to hate people who are different from you (or maybe strike a chord deep inside??) Why not have a look here?:

    See how the church has felt the need to discriminate through the ages? That’s HUMAN insecurity – nothing to do with God.

  62. Anna Metcalfe 22 Jan 2010, 1:48pm

    I’m saddened but not (unfortunately) surprised to read this story. Although such vocal pressure groups are very good at getting attention and scaring the vulnerable, they are not at all representative of the majority of Christians out there. For one thing, the message they are promoting is directly opposed to the teachings of Jesus!

    Although there are still far too many churches out there who are ignorant about the nature and needs of LGBT people most are by no means as biggotted as this. I’ve experienced inclusive Baptist and Anglican churches, for example – despite them having no or little experience with LGBT people before they met me.

    In addition, it’s worth emphasising that there are many Churches (e.g. the Metropolitan Community Church, the Quakers and the Unitarian Church) who are actively promoting exactly the opposite message and who welcome LGBT people with open arms. I also have no doubt the Lesbian & Gay Christian Movement and Inclusive Church will be organising their campaign to counter such misinformation from the so-called Christians behind the hate campaign.

    Anna Metcalfe
    Trustee, Metropolitan Community Church of Bournemouth.

  63. if they won’t employ “practising homosexuals” will they employ the ones that have perfected it lol in that case I might go for a job!

  64. Pat Seymour 22 Jan 2010, 3:07pm

    Sir Ian McKellen said yesterday that “The world is changing and sport is very slow to catch up.” Not as slow as the Christian Church sadly. I say this as a very disillusioned Christian who is at her wits end’ with the church’s institutionalized homophobia. Ignorant bigots who wouldn’t agree with anything else a church says or does see the church’s stance as an excuse to persecute gay people (like those ignorant bigots in the churches!).

  65. @Stewart Cowen

    * Christians do not have an inalienable right to be exempt from the law.

    * Christians do not have an inalienable right to discriminate, incite hatred or deny the dignity of LGBT.

    * Christians do not have an inalienable right to have their Life style choice prized above any other life style choice.

  66. Stewart Cowen and his ilk, together with as many petitions as they like, will not affect the principal point which is that the Government must implement the European Directive. This comment from the NSS site makes the point clearly:
    The EU’s equal opportunities commissioner, Vladimir Špidla, has served the Government with a “reasoned opinion” which is, in effect, a legal ruling that the UK must change the current legislation (i.e. the Employment Regulations) to conform to the Directive. The opinion says that “exceptions to the principle of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation for religious employers are broader than that permitted by the Directive”.

    The Government is urged to put the mistake right in the new Equality Bill as, indeed, it is trying to do. Under the new proposals being drafted by the government, religious organisations will be able to refuse to employ homosexuals only if their job involves actively promoting or practicing a religion.

    The relevant provisions, currently Schedule 9 paragraph 2(8), are however facing mounting religious opposition. But even if these provisions are not passed in the Equality Bill before the General Election, future governments will still be bound by the Commission’s ruling and be required to correct the current Regulations.
    This all means that such homophobes as Cowen, Skinner and the bigoted Archbishop of York are simply wasting their time. They will ultimately be defeated!

  67. BrazilBoysBlog 22 Jan 2010, 8:44pm

    @ Rick “if they won’t employ “practising homosexuals” will they employ the ones that have perfected it lol in that case I might go for a job!“…

    You are an unrepentant SINNER!!!

    …as indeed am I :-)

  68. BrazilBoysBlog 22 Jan 2010, 8:52pm

    I agree with the comments at 64/65 and 66 above.

    Thankfully these throwback dinosaurs are a dying breed. They are not on the side or right, neither are they on the right side of history. Their days are numbered and as rightly said above, times are a changin´

    Whatever the colour or political persuasion of the next government, this anti-discrimination employmment legislation WILL be implimented. Whatever fancy videos the hate groups produce, or however many bigots they round up to sign petitions online. :-)

  69. This doesn’t bother me at all. In the long run it will help to expose them for the rather nasty,smug dismal people they are,hiding behind their piety.

  70. 21stCenturySpirituality 22 Jan 2010, 11:39pm

    On a related matter, I have been instrumental in persuading the Unitarian General Assembly to join the Cutting Edge Consortium.

  71. 21stCenturySpirituality 22 Jan 2010, 11:41pm

    Still waiting to hear from John Denham about the ‘faith advisors’ panel though.

  72. Stewart Cowan 24 Jan 2010, 6:02am

    “I’m a little confuses why Stewart Cowan was interested in a rimming site!”

    What are you talking about, Abi? I didn’t know there were such specialised sites.

  73. Stewart Cowan 24 Jan 2010, 6:04am

    And it would be handy for everyone else to understand that disagreement and disapproval are not ‘hatred’. Suggest you get familiar with a dictionary…

  74. But it’s not up to you to disagree or disapprove of who people are. Not even a racist tries to justify their hate by pretending that people CHOOSE to be black – although, as you probably know, they HAVE used the Bible to ‘prove’ that God thinks ill of black people…

    Get on and live your life and stop setting yourself up as judge and jury. IF there is a god, I’m damn sure it’d be up to him or her to judge people not you. The idea is that you live your life according to what you believe god wishes – and other people do the same. You are not here as god’s mouthpiece – however much you might want to be.

  75. Stewart . . . disagree and disapproval of LGBT people all you like.

    There is nothing in the law which says that you cannot do that.

  76. Brian Burton 25 Jan 2010, 12:32pm

    Action against employment rights against prospective Gay employees! The aim of life in any given employment is self-developement. To realize our natures perfectly – that is what each of us is here for. People are afraid of themselves nowadays. They have forgotten the highest of all duties, to help each other.

  77. Stewart Cowan 25 Jan 2010, 1:37pm

    “To realize our natures perfectly”?? You’re wrong Brian.

    “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” 1 Cor 2:14

  78. Stewart Cowan 25 Jan 2010, 1:46pm


    “Stewart . . . disagree and disapproval of LGBT people all you like.

    “There is nothing in the law which says that you cannot do that. ”

    But people themselves label this disapproval ‘hatred’. Is it because it’s a good way to win an argument? You cannot believe how annoying and upsetting it is to care about the welfare of people’s souls and be accused for years of ‘hatred’.

  79. I care about your soul too, Stewart. I can’t believe that such obsession with other people will bring you much joy – in this life or the next, if there is one. Nor do I think Jesus would be very impressed by your attitude towards your fellow human beings. You saying your prejudice is grown from love and concern doesn’t make it so. It still comes across as bigotry – and weirdness too, if I’m being honest. Normal adult men don’t care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

  80. Stewart Cowan 25 Jan 2010, 7:46pm


    Jesus told people to repent and to ‘go, and sin no more’. This is what I am doing too.

  81. Stewart – you’re not Jesus…

    And note that Jesus didn’t add “And go round spreading discrimination in my name”. If you think that sounds harsh, have a look at the history of the Church – the discrimination against women, black people, etc. All that was done in Jesus’ name too – and any decent person would find that offensive. Do you really think that God sat back and applauded when black people were enslaved in the US? Do you think he clapped when women were burnt to death as witches? I don’t. If he or she exists, then I think he/she would be distraught at the twisting of his words to justify human hate.

  82. Stewart Cowan 25 Jan 2010, 9:29pm

    Iris, the Bible says that all men are equal, that we are all of ‘one blood’ that men are expected to look after their wives and children.

    It also says that homosexual behaviour is wrong. Like adultery and bestiality.

  83. Stewart Cowen . . . I have three words
    * Hypocrisy
    * Double standards
    * Misogyny

    . . . I am referring to polygamy in the African Churches, and how you Christians ignore this . . . why is that?

  84. “It also says that homosexual behaviour is wrong. Like adultery and bestiality.”

    Only in YOUR sick mind would being gay be on par with bestiality. It says very little for your education, intelligence, and your state of mind… not to mention your so called “christian love”.

    You are a clear example of those who select what they want to hear from the so called bible, and then use it as some kind of Circulus in Probando. Its a position of ignorance, one you are fond of taking, Stewart.

    But lets examine what you said. The bible says a lot of contradictory things, doesn’t it Stewart? How do you decide what to follow?

    Lets look at ONE set of examples from the bible in relation to your so called “condemnation of homosexuality”:- LEVITICUS, the one the sanctimonious Christians use to try oppress others so often, but like all hypocrites, seem to do it very selectively….

    – Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. As I am Irish, I assume this applies to Scots and Welsh, but not French? Can you clarify Stewart? Why can’t I own French? Which ones do YOU own Stewart?

    – I feels that eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, but you seem to think its a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Perhaps you can clarify, Stewart, in your vast wisdom, how you disseminate ‘degrees’ of abomination?

    – My neighbour wants to sell his daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her, Stewart? What would you be willing to pay for a slave girl, Stewart?

    – I know that a man is not allowed contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence. How do you tell, Stewart?

    – When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I kill them, Stewart?

    – I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it, Stewart? How have you killed according to biblical laws, Stewart?

    – Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have a friend who wears reading glasses. How would you smite him, Stewart?

    – Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die, Stewart?

    – My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14). How have you dealt with family members who defy gods law as outlined in the bible, Stewart?

    And one more point, is it not so that drunkenness and addiction to alcohol that a Christian must absolutely refrain from [Ephesians 5:18; 1 Corinthians 6:12]? How did you reconcile lying drunk in the gutter with your biblical laws, Stewart?

    I would be fascinated to hear your “erudite opinion” on these, Stewart….. please, enlighten me.

  85. Stewart, you didn’t fully answer my points. Moreover, you also seem to imply that women are inferior. But you only mentioned women, didn’t you? What about all those accursed black people? The disabled who’s very presence would pollute a temple? And interracial marriage that, as some people have said using the Bible as evidence, is against the wishes of God – what’s your view on that Stewart? Are you working to ban it?

    I would also be very interested to hear your answers to Will’s questions above. I mean that genuinely. Do one question at a time if you’re busy.

  86. Well said Iris. And to back up your well made points:-

    On women: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be quiet.” (1 Timothy 2:12)

    Indeed. Lets beat the women, eh? The bible tells us to.

    What about murder of ones child? “Then God said: ‘Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you’.”(Genesis 22:2)

    If I find a child that doesn’t agree with me, I shall endeavour to kill it…. at a place of gods choosing, of course.

    Or slavery? “Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse.” (1 Peter 2:18)

    Well, then… I’m off to Tesco’s to buy a six pack of Italians… they don’t clean much, but their cooking is fantastic!

    Its just a veritable wealth of stuff to allow us to oppress anything, any actions, and anyone, we so desire! Beautiful.

    I doubt Stewart will address these points, Iris. I usually find, the more “christian” they claim to be, the more blind they are to their own hypocrisy. Stewart is a classic case of dumb and blind being a lethal combination to ones intellect. His silence on this will speak volumes.

  87. I live in hope, Will :D Enjoy your six-pack, but watch out they don’t slip you a prawn and damn you to hell ;)

    Come on, Stewart – answer and let us understand how you think. And what are you wearing today? Not any mixed fibres, I hope. I’m trying to find the email of the Astronomer Royal for you. I heard him on the radio yesterday saying that the Earth orbited the Sun – a total contradiction of the Bible, yes?

  88. “Enjoy your six-pack, but watch out they don’t slip you a prawn and damn you to hell”

    Ah, yes. The abomination of shellfish. Quote right. Although, have you ever seen a four legged duck before? Apparently I’m not to eat one, if I find it:

    Leviticus 11:20 – “All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you”

    Hmmm…. seems eating a four legged chicken is as much as an abomination as being gay! Maybe being gay is not so bad, I’d hate to eat a four legged chicken, there’d have to be something seriously wrong with its genome! Although, KFC…..

    Any what about Irish Black Pudding??? Also seems to be a no-no:

    Leviticus 7:26 “Moreover ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings”

    Cast out for eating black pudding???? That’s a bit harsh. Still, the bible is the bible, we must obey literally, isn’t that right, Stewart? Practically all of Ireland would have to be cast out now. How shall we do this, do you think, Stewart?

    Here’s MacDonald’s out of the picture: Leviticus 7:23 – “Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Ye shall eat no manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep, or of goat.”

    Ah, cr*p. I like Big Macs.

    Oh, this is such fun, ins;t it Stewart? Literal interpretation of the bible makes LOADS of sense, I can see now how clever you are! Brava!

  89. Will, you’ve thrown my dinner plans into disarray :p I wanted to have a nice, quick take-away so I’d have more time to take part in the stoning of some divorcees tonight.

  90. Oh, don’t fret Iris, Stewart will come and tell us how it is all to be interpreted, won’t he? He won’t leave us here without addressing these bizarre inconsistencies…. he’s not that kind guy! He’s a Christian, after all! They’re great people, they love everyone and try to explain the bible to others without prejudice or hate. He wouldn’t wanting us thinking his a sad and uneducated hypocritical idiot, so he’ll want to show us all that there IS logic to all of this, and why he wouldn’t DARE be selective in his bible interpretations!!! He’ll come and tell us, you’ll see…

  91. Come on, Stewart. Enlighten us! There are many valid points above which I’m sure you’re just itching to respond to.

  92. Stewart Cowan 26 Jan 2010, 8:25pm


    What’s all this then? It’s a bit pointless trying to explain spiritual truths to people who ask questions sarcastically.

    If you’re serious about repentance and forgiveness then I’ll help you all I can, but it entails swapping pride for humility.

  93. “What’s all this then? It’s a bit pointless trying to explain spiritual truths to people who ask questions sarcastically. If you’re serious about repentance and forgiveness then I’ll help you all I can, but it entails swapping pride for humility.”

    Oh, classic. What did I tell you Iris? An idiot who doesn’t even understand his own bible.

    Translation of his response:- I am unable to answer any of your points, because you are all quite right about the contradictory bible, and because it shows up my obvious bigotry and stupidity in selectively picking lines from the bible to endorse my hatred, while not following the rest of the bible’s laws.

    Well done Stewart, brava! Simply marvellous demonstration of your low brow bigotry…. perhaps less humility yourself, and more intelligence, eh? Maybe read the bible next time? You sure do make me laugh!

  94. Stewart Cowen . . .

    Is Iris Robinson serious about “Repentance and Forgiveness?”

    I have heard no public confession from Mrs Robinson with regards her recently seedy and salacious adultery – which is an abomination before God. . . Isn’t it?

    Incidentally, I have not seen Mrs Robinson swapping pride for humility either.

    Curiously, The Evangelical Association of Ireland is in support of Gay Civil Partnerships . . . Isn’t it!!!

  95. Ok, Stewart – we’ll cut the sarcasm and leave the floor to you. Please, explain how you perceive the biblical examples quoted above. No sarcasm there and none intended. They are all examples of thinsg the Bible says and I, for one, politely await your response.

  96. Stewart – Sarcasm aside, you cannot expect to be taken seriously if you blatantly cherrypick the verses from Leviticus which suit your pre-ordained prejudices while disregarding the less socially expedient verses.
    I’ve heard the “Some verses are more culturally specific than others” argument and I’ve got to tell you that really didn’t cut the mustard. Each verse in Leviticus was literally true to the culture that wrote it, the cherrypicking is a subsequent phenonemon performed by people equally emersed in their own cultural prejudices.
    Either it’s a verbatim mandate for the masses or it’s a matter of personal taste just as if you constructed your own moral code. What I’d call a “broken paradigm”… that is to say, it can no longer sustain the cross examination of it’s many errors and inconsistancies under logical scrutiny.
    I don’t require pride to come to that conclusion, merely common sense.

  97. Dave North 27 Jan 2010, 9:30am

    I always find it rather amusing that most christian ceremonies refer to “Gathering ones flock”.

    The reference to worshipers as being sheep is quite poignant.

    Blindly following their leader.

  98. You disappoint me, Stewart. I was quite ready to enter into a dialogue with you, and give you a chance to prove Will wrong when he said you would make an excuse not to reply.

    It’s not pride to ask obvious questions. Not once – not ONCE – has any fundamentalist/Bible literalist given me a reasonable explanation of why some bits of the Bible count and others don’t. My suspicion, and the suspicion of everyone else who reads this, will be that it really is a case of ‘pick and choose’ to suit your own prejudices.

    You mention humility, but you don’t have the humility to consider other people’s opinions. Apart from Leviticus, which is only relevant to you if you’re a Jew, the other references to same sex physical relations in the Bible are NOT about loving, consensual relationships between two gay adults, they are about rape as a tool of humiliation and power (eg Sodom) and temple practices (eg Paul). NONE of the passages refer to gay people.

    There are gay relationships implied in the Bible – Ruth and Naomi, Jonathan and David, the ‘pais’ of the Centurion that Jesus healed and praised – but not one of those is criticised.

    You might dislike LGBT people, Stewart, but that doesn’t mean God does – however much you might wish that he/she did backed you up. But – it doesn’t really matter, does it? The diversity of the human race, and, indeed, all life on Earth is what makes it special.

  99. Iris, as you said ‘Not once has any fundamentalist given me a reasonable explanation of why some bits of the Bible count and others don’t’

    Stewart’s cop-out answer proves what we already know – they can’t. Its selective interpretation that allows them to pretty much validate any form of hate or prejudice without guilt. Its a natural opt out clause to thought.

    And very convenient opt out clause for them, it seem.

    And they then to shun any logical interpretation or questioning of their so called ‘bible beliefs’, such as the pick’n’mix beliefs of Leviticus.

    Let me highlight two scientific studies what back up why this is the case:-


    The more religious (not spiritual) you are, the less intelligent you are.

    Lynn, Richard; John Harvey and Helmuth Nyborg. “Average intelligence predicts atheism rates across 137 nations”. Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.03.004. Retrieved 2008-06-27.

    “Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population. Several Gallup poll studies of the general population have shown that those with higher IQs tend not to believe in God.” – Professor Richard Lynn, June 2008.


    Its proven that what you think God believes is actually that you want God to believe. For many religious people, the popular question “What would Jesus do?” is essentially the same as “What would I do?”.

    “Believers’ estimates of God’s beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people’s beliefs”, Nicholas Epleya, Benjamin A. Conversea, Alexa Delboscb, George A. Monteleonec and John T. Cacioppoc – Columbia University, New York, NY, and approved October 21, 2009 (received for review July 27, 2009)

    “Intuiting God’s beliefs on important issues may not produce an independent guide, but may instead serve as an echo chamber that reverberates one’s own beliefs.” – Epley, Dec 2009

    …..scientific studies telling us what we already knew, really…. and Steward, like the Iris Robinson of this world, prove these studies correct, over and over and over again.

  100. charlie farly 27 Jan 2010, 12:37pm

    Will, slavery, in Old Testament times was an economic reality. As it is today, even in some parts of Britain and certainly is in many Muslim countries, such as the Sudan. The unique aspect of Jewish slavery, as opposed to the slavery practised by the nations around them, as recorded in Leviticus and elsewhere in the Bible, was that slaves were to be treated humanely. Indeed Jewish years were marked off in seven years, the seventh, being called the Jubilee, during which all slaves, were freed, apart from those captured in battle from other races. Even still, they were to be treated humanely and protected from abuse as laid down in the Law.

    You must also remember that so -called civilised nations such as those Greece and Rome existed entirely on the backs of a huge slave population, whereas this was certainly not the case with the Jews.

    When it comes to the New Testament, Paul lumps slave traders along with those condemned by God. Indeed he encourages slaves, if they are offered their freedom to take it, but if this wasn’t the case he urges them to bear it patiently and work honestly for their masters as a witness. For Paul to advocate a slave uprising would have resulted precisely in the same result as that of the slave uprising of Spartacus – Annihilation.

    Doubtless so – called Christians misquoted the Bible during the 17th and 18th centuries, as Hitler ( who also claimed to be such) might have done with regard to the Jews, so as to justify slavery, but it was real Christians like Wilberforce and Abraham Lincoln who worked for the abolition of slavery. To ignore this fact is deliberately wilful. It is a truth that you just simply choose not to accept.

    Also, it is no good reading the Bible through 21st century eyes, one has to practise exegesis, ie., discover what it meant to the people to whom it was written at the time. Whatever, the practice of slavery as laid down in Exodus, Deuteronomy and Leviticus, it was a million miles away from that of the surrounding nations.

    One final thing to remember is that for the Jew, it was God who redeemed or literally bought back the Hebrews out of Egyptian bondage and slavery – not into autonomy but into His slavery which , paradoxically, is perfect freedom. Christians also see themselves not as free agents to do whatever they please but as slaves of Jesus Christ. The Jewish nation were bought to perform a task and that was to be an instrument of blessing to the entire human race. From out this race came Jesus Christ. Christ, who is God, reduced himself to becoming a Jewish baby and to become like us.

    Christ payed for us with His own blood and broken body so that we might be set free from the bondage of sin, the devil, this world, but not so that we might go off and live independently from God but so that we might be free to serve him. But the hope of the Christian is way more than freedom from our own destructive natures; it means that we have a future hope of eternal life – to be with God forever. As 1 Corinthians 1:8- 10 says, ‘However, as it is written: “No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him”— but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.’

    All your other objections and so -called contradictions in the Bible can also with patience and honest reading be resolved. But don’t think that these passages haven’t presented problems for Christians either- for example the question of the role of women and men in the church. But these arguments would be dispelled if Christians spent more time reading the whole of the Bible, rather than cutting out isolated bits that seem to support their argument. Certainly the LGBT Christian ministries, under Sharron Ferguson, mishandles the Bible in a way that I believe will bring judgement on her.

    Jesus Christ said in Matthew 5:17- 19 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    It also says in Revelations 22: 18 – 19 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

    Christ also said in Mark 9:42- 43, “And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.”

    . In a previous debate in the House of Lords, on the issue of gay adoption rights, the Honourable Baroness Howarth of Breckland said:

    ‘My Lords, I speak without a prepared speech but with a heavy heart. As a Christian woman, I find this an extraordinarily difficult and distressing debate. It is distressing because we are not really prepared to face the fundamental issue. I have listened to speeches in which noble Lords have said, “We respect gay people, but…”. The issue is not about rights; if it were, we would not be having this debate. It is about whether noble Lords accept gay people as equal human beings. Two hundred years ago, William Wilberforce made a speech in Parliament that freed black people to be equal human beings. I hope that this evening your Lordships will vote for these regulations. I have some quarrel with the way in which the regulations have been brought forward, but I hope that noble Lords will vote to underline that gay people are equal human beings with others. I say this as a Christian woman. I have listened to the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of York, and I listened to the Catholic archbishop on the radio this morning, a very dear and wonderful man……..’
    I have no idea whether the Honourable Baroness Howarth of Breckland is a Christian or not; only God can be the judge of that, but it seems to me that the whole of this statement is founded on a lie.

    “William Wilberforce made a speech in Parliament that freed black people to be equal human beings.” is deceptively linked with “but I hope that noble Lords will vote to underline that gay people are equal human beings with others.”

    Wilberforce did not work to make black people human; it was precisely because they were already fully human, made in the image of God – not determined by evolution to behave mechanistically but free to behave with dignity and responsibility – that he worked to free them from oppression, slavery and bondage. To suggest that the fundamentalist Christian is in some way denying the homosexual the freedom to become fully human is a disgraceful travesty of the beliefs and work of William Wilberforce, made worse because she is attempting to lead Christians astray. Probably I have misunderstood her comment about being burnt at the stake, but Jesus Christ said It would be better for someone to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than for them to cause children to be led astray, as is happening on an industrial scale with sex education programmes being promoted by this present government and which she no doubt would endorse.

    Sodomy, buggery, fisting, rimming, water sports, felching, scats, coprophilia, sado- masochism, whipping, giving the gift and bondage are dehumanising homosexuals and lesbians. Such bestial acts reduce them to lumps of meat.. Such acts do indeed lead to slavery, bondage and addictions that sooner or later lead to an early death and are totally inconsistent with the aims of Jesus Christ and William Wilberforce.

  101. Charlie farly – David…? The sexual acts you list are performed by straight people as well as gay, and so are utterly irrelevant.

    Will, didn’t accuse Christians of promoting slavery – he merely pointed out that it was condoned in the Bible. Wilberforce was indeed right to push for its abolition, but in the US Christians were using the Bible to justify slavery.

    If you feel you can respond the to the biblical passages above that Stewart didn’t respond to, please do. It’d be nice if you had time to respond to all the points there.

  102. charlie farly 27 Jan 2010, 2:07pm

    The zoophiles use exactly the same arguments for justifying their behaviour as do homosexuals.

    But the truth is that no homosexual gene has been found and even Peter Tatchell has said that it is unnatural.

    But suppose we were to do a little scientific experiment, so as to compare the genetic immutability of race or being black with being homosexual.

    If we were take a thousand black women and inseminate them with black semen and then if we were to remove the resulting embryos and implant them into a thousand white surrogate women, or incubators and then to have the resulting babies adopted by white parents, how many of the babies would be white? Not one. All would be black.

    If, however we were take a thousand lesbian women and inseminate them with homosexual semen and then if we were to remove the resulting embryos and implant them into a thousand so called genetically determined heterosexual, surrogate women, and then to have the resulting babies adopted by genetically determined heterosexual parents, how many of the babies of would be gay? Is it possible that none of them would be gay? Not one? Admittedly one cannot entirely screen out all environmental factors, but in the case of the black babies, no matter what environmental factors, every single baby would be black.

    Alcoholics, drug addicts, paedophiles, those with cannot stop telling lies , stealing, slandering or erupting in violent temper, or just simply who cannot help but think selfishly – in fact all of us, every single one of us, might also claim that we are what we are and we cannot change : “a leopard can never change its spots.” But this isn’t true. Jesus Christ healed the blind, raised the dead and transformed ordinary men and women into children of God. Admittedly the latter transformation, commonly called sanctification, takes a life time with sometimes seemingly three steps being taking forward and sometimes as many more backward, but Christians are continuously under construction. They pick themselves up and move forward.

    John 1: 12 – 13 says “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God..” Not of natural descent but born of God.

  103. charlie farly 27 Jan 2010, 2:08pm

    Iris, as I said, the Old Testament recognised the economic reality of slavery , the Jews themselves became the slaves of other Jews when they could no longer pay their debts or they fell into dire poverty. However after ever seven years, the Jubilee, all property was returned to those in debt including the freedom of those who had put themselves into slavery. Plus if you read the Bible you will see that the treatment of slaves was in some ways more humane than the way present day society treats the poor and marginalised. And I said Paul , lumped slave traders in with the damned. Not exactly someone promoting slavery.

    But Iris you are exactly right about so – called heterosexual men performing sodomy on both women and men. And this, if I may so, is not utterly irrelevant, for I maintain that there are no such creatures as straight and gay, only men and women, whose behaviour can be led into all manner of perversions.

    Even Gore Vidal says this:

    The Prime Minister’s wife, Sarah Brown, reportedly hosted a private lunch at 10 Downing Street in honour of a prominent American ‘gay rights’ activist, David Mixner, who has been described as the most powerful gay man in America and who is a vocal opponent of an ongoing campaign in California to protect the legal definition of marriage:

    David Mixner on another occasion, was asked if he thought whether gay sexuality was all about sexual passion or whether there was room for lasting relationships. Mixner answered , “ Well first of all I don’t see anything wrong with passionate relationships , or short term relationships if it is enriching ,and nourishing and exciting for the individuals involved, and healthy for both parties. I try not to put parameters around anyone else’s relationship if they are happy. But I think one the things that we have explored and maybe one the gifts we bring society is that because we have not allowed to be officially sanctioned our relationships – in a number of ways – then we have had to explore alternatives. And I think that in many ways that we are seeing that many in the heterosexual community are copying some of those alternative ways that people can be together, love each other in a healthy wonderful positive sense and the same time meet the needs of a very complex society in which we live in“.

    The homosexual is therefore held up as a role model for our children, as a means towards loving in a healthy positive sense.

    Folks really need to listen to what this man is saying which is that so called heterosexuals have a lot to learn from homosexuals whom he regards are at the very cutting edge, avant garde, of exploring all manner of sexual life-styles that are unhindered by constraints or self-control. Naturally Mixner’s philosophy has huge implications with regard to the stability, cohesion and the very existence of the family.

    Liam Nolan**

    Matthew Paris’ admission of promiscuity

    Let us all start to be heterophobic. Let us all condemn heterosexual fornication, heterosexual sex outside marriage, heterosexual sodomy, heterosexual homosexual acts , heterosexual incest, heterosexual polygamy, heterosexual polyamory, heterosexual bestiality, heterosexual sado- masochsim and heterosexual necrophilia.

    Does then leaves the so called homosexual free to commit all the above? It seems so.

  104. “Will, slavery, in Old Testament times was an economic reality. As it is today, even in some parts of Britain and certainly is in many Muslim countries, such as the Sudan.”

    So what? Does that mean its right to ‘own’ another person? No, it doesn’t. Yes the bible clearly says it is. In fact you only confirm my point that literal interpretation of the bible means picking and choosing what you want. Ergo, if you reject one part as wrong, then so can that same logic be applied to another.

    “Sodomy, buggery, fisting, rimming, water sports, felching, scats, coprophilia, sado- masochism, whipping, giving the gift and bondage are dehumanising homosexuals and lesbians. Such bestial acts reduce them to lumps of meat.. Such acts do indeed lead to slavery, bondage and addictions that sooner or later lead to an early death and are totally inconsistent with the aims of Jesus Christ and William Wilberforce.”

    This is utter nonsense. Have you any proof of these crazed statements? No, you don’t. Its personal and bigoted belief system, imposing your brand of hate on another. And bigitory is againts the teachings of Jesus, and an affront to human dignity.

    Well done, you must be so proud.

    In fact, it only shows that people like you and Stewart are the furtherest reaches from the message of Christianity. Its you who needs to follow the word of Jesus, gay seem to be already there, as my relationship with my partner is about love.

    Oh, and thank you for proving my two pints above, yet again, people like you clearly validate the two scientific studies I quoted in comment #99.

    Quod Erat Demonstrandum, I believe is the term most apt in this case.

  105. “Let us all start to be heterophobic. Let us all condemn heterosexual fornication, heterosexual sex outside marriage, heterosexual sodomy, heterosexual homosexual acts , heterosexual incest, heterosexual polygamy, heterosexual polyamory, heterosexual bestiality, heterosexual sado- masochsim and heterosexual necrophilia.”

    I believe what you have is called a neurosis, Charlie. You have a wonderfully sick mind there.

  106. charlie farly 27 Jan 2010, 3:32pm

    Charlie Farly says goodbye and if anyone submits a comment calling themselves Charlie Farly it aint me but a narrow minded,fundamentalist and bigoted farlyphobe.


  107. “if anyone submits a comment calling themselves Charlie Farly it aint me”

    Indeed. Paranoia is a way of life for you, isn’t it?

    Goes to show, a poisoned ideology is a poor substitute for human decency and compassion.

    Charlie and Stewart, and other similar people with corrupt minds, could learn a thing or two from gay people:- We seem to have a greater propensity for wanting to love our respective partners than they do.

  108. Will . . . I think you are spot on with regards . . .

    “Charlie Farly’s”

    Paranoia – Paranoia – Paranoia

  109. And poor Stewart…. couldn’t answer the questions put to him. Wasn’t able to defend his pix’n’mix bible.

    What a surprise.

  110. #103 – Charlie/David. I had high hopes of you there. You started with a coherent explanation of why slavery was in the Bible. But then….I’m trying to think of a polite way to put it….you just went off on a very strange rant, which made no sense.

    Let me be as brief as I can:-

    1) Regarding slavery, you AGREED with me when you said that we mustn’t look at it through 21st century eyes and that we had to understand it in the context of its time and place. YES! That’s exactly what I’m saying! I’m glad we agree! Things in the Bible were of their time and we shouldn’t use them as literal guidance today – eg we shouldn’t stone people to death for adultery.

    Yet apparently any mention of homosexuality – even though I’ve explained the time and context to you – still counts for you. That can only be described as picking and choosing to suit your own prejudices…

    2) Your bizarre list of sexual practices. Again – why???? What relevance does it have? Consider this: we had a local consultation about whether cyclists should be permitted to ride on the pavements. I didn’t agree with this. Now – using your logic – of the small number of people in the UK practising the sexual acts you listed, a few must be cyclists. Therefore in my argument, I suddenly start spewing forth all those things you listed with the implication that all cyclists enjoy scat, necrophilia, etc etc. That would not only be illogical, it would be completely mad.

    Seriously, do you not realise how weird you sound to anyone reading this?

    3) No-one here is claiming there’s a gay gene. People are born gay due to a combination of factors believed to be the EXPRESSION of some genes (that’s why identical twins could be one straight, one gay) and to hormonal influences in the womb.

    4) You said: “Let us all start to be heterophobic. Let us all condemn heterosexual fornication, heterosexual sex outside marriage, heterosexual sodomy, heterosexual homosexual acts , heterosexual incest, heterosexual polygamy, heterosexual polyamory, heterosexual bestiality, heterosexual sado- masochsim and heterosexual necrophilia.

    Does then leaves the so called homosexual free to commit all the above? It seems so.”

    I BELIEVE, although it’s not entirely clear from your rant there, that what you’re saying is that we only condemn things in staright people but think it’s OK to do them ourselves. I have no idea how you drew that conclusion from my comment that the acts you mentioned are not limited to gay people. What you wrote is a complete non sequitur.

    Let’s take necrophilia – I, and I would be so bold as to presume, EVERY LGBT person on this site condemns that in people – PEOPLE, whatever their sexuality. It would be like you saying ‘gay people are thieves’ and me saying ‘straight people can be thieves too’ – then you somehow taking that to mean I was saying it was OK to steal if you were gay but not if you’re straight. I’m sorry, but what you wrote there is just BARKING.

    5) Finally – you said “Folks really need to listen to what this man is saying which is that so called heterosexuals have a lot to learn from homosexuals whom he regards are at the very cutting edge, avant garde, of exploring all manner of sexual life-styles that are unhindered by constraints or self-control.”

    Sorry but a bit of sarcasm here – Yes, that’s right, we spend all day and night in a state of devilish debauchery before washing our hands in Satan’s spit. Er….no. Let me detail my last 24 hours or so for you. After lunch I went to work. I did a 24 hour shift with Disabled Adults, during which I talked about television, cakes, celebs, etc in my breaks with my colleagues. I got home today and my girlfriend had cleaned the house, done some washing and made me a nice tea, which we ate with a glass of wine, before snuggling up on the sofa (and that’s not a euphemism). I left her watching American Idol while I wrote this.

    Mundane, normal – probably very much like your day.

  111. “we spend all day and night in a state of devilish debauchery before washing our hands in Satan’s spit”

    LOL! Satan’s spit…. I have to remember that one :)

  112. Once again the fundies won’t finish an argument. Reminds me of that old lyric: “You cannot lose if you throw the race”.

    Nevermind, Will. Their silence (aswell as what they’ve posted here – particularly the weird sexual obsessions) speaks volumes.

  113. Rashid Karapiet 2 Mar 2012, 12:04pm

    What is the point of keeping alive comments fromTWO YEARS ago? Everyone’s moved on – even the ubiquitous ‘Jock S. Trap’…

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