Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Calls for East London to react to homophobic incidents

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The East End isn’t the only gay-free zone in Britain these days. Check out BBC children’s TV to see what I’m talking about.

  2. Er, the reason the LGBT response has been feeble is because any attempted response has been met with utterly hysterical screams of ‘Racism’.

    1. Paula Thomas 22 Aug 2011, 6:07pm

      Yeah, usually from Rainbow Hamlets and Out East.

      1. Exactly! Rainbow Hamlets don’t even answer the people they supposedly represent!!

      2. I agree completely.

    2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:18am

      Correct Talldave.
      -
      Which in a way is also a form of racism within itself not just homophobia.

  3. FKH8 goes for Muslim Christian Jew Hindu Sique and Atheist
    Remember the Arab Spring/Jasmin Revolution applies to all people!
    We will not be intimidated!
    And LGBT…Don’t forget
    Fight Back ACT-UP!
    It’s your life, this is your time here. Take your city back.

  4. Peter Tatchell 22 Aug 2011, 6:47pm

    I suggest that the East London LGBT Pride theme is: “Unite against all hate” or “East London United” or “Gays & Muslims united against hate”.

    We want to the event to be inclusive and unifying. Black, Asian, Muslim and Jewish organisations should be invited to participate and to provide speakers for the post-march rally.

    This rally should explicitly oppose all prejudice and hate, including racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, misogyny, transphobia and the victimisation of Muslim people.

    We should specifically advise that the EDL and BNP are not welcome and should not attend. If they turn up, we should liaise with the police to remove them. We want nothing to do with their politics of bigotry and division.

    1. Peter, unfortunately, there will always be prejudice when you have a ‘community forum’ such as Rainbow Hamlets in place. A forum that is more concerned about keeping alleged extremist faith groups happy, than working with the LGBT community.

      Admittedly, with the previous East End Gay Pride, Rainbow Hamlets had cause for concern due to underlying EDL links (which some organisers knew nothing of). However, I fear that unless the event is controlled by Rainbow Hamlets, they will do everything in their power to put a stop to any attempt to unite the community.

      1. I don’t think that is fair, Andrew: I thought Jack Gilbert’s piece in the Guardian last month was quite thoughtful. I think it’s that other group, Out East, in association with arch-moron Bob Pitt (‘Islamophobia Watch’), and Unite Against Fascism (which protested ALONGSIDE extremist fanatics last year) which causes all the trouble.

        1. Paula Thomas 23 Aug 2011, 9:38am

          What piece in the Guardian? I’ve searched their website and can’t find it. The only thing I can find is a press release blaming the criminal justice system, may be accurate but RH doesn’t propose to do anything about it.

    2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:29am

      Yes indeed, it needs to be for all who wish to stop hatred and who just want the community to live peacefully together.
      -
      One thing though, whilst I agree that there should be specific advice that the EDL and BNP are not welcome so too should the UAF also be not welcome since they do campaign with some extremists who fully support the death penalty for Gay people.
      -
      This needs to be a message of peace and acceptance and a message that as a community, hatred will not be tolerated.

      1. I agree with Jock, if BNP and EDL are side lined, then so should UAF. Pigs might fly first though.

        1. Ian Townson 26 Aug 2011, 6:56pm

          Sorry, I am confused. How do you equate UAF, an anti-fascist organisation, with the BNP/EDL which are fascist organisations?

          1. Yeah sure, you’re ‘confused’, Ian. Read it again:

            “they do campaign with some extremists who fully support the death penalty for Gay people.”

            Or is that acceptable to you?

          2. Which extremists do UAF campaign with that support the death penalty for Gay people. You should support your assertion with evidence please?

    3. Peter, how about including some womens equality too, I seem to remember there were also warnings to women to obey men and dress according to muslim men’s rules

    4. Another Hannah 23 Aug 2011, 11:36am

      I don’t think people should make a stand in this way. I think a very public and high profile as possible ceremony should be held to relinquish east london as a free danger free part of the UK, and it should be admitted that it is no longer safe for LGBT. Better to look after LGBT people and ensure their safety. Fight from where you are safe, and leave the government to deal with civil disorder and the destruction of British values and freedoms as they should. Go to where you can be free, live a good life, and not have to live in fear and danger. Build the power and resources of the LGBT people as much as possible in order to ensure freedom and a fight back when expedient.

    5. Peter I agree with you and the sooner there is a Gay Pride the better.

      1. If you want a Pride event sooner then join East London Pride on the 24th September
        http://www.eastlondonpride.org.uk/

  5. I wonder how many Muslims will turn up.

    1. zygo ville 22 Aug 2011, 7:53pm

      We’ll never know unless this event happens. Give Muslims a chance to turn up, and maybe many of them will.

      1. Exactly Zygo Ville! Not all Muslims are homophobic. Its that kind of mentality that breeds hatred.

      2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:32am

        Exactly zygo ville. Besides there are Gay Muslims too Booo.

  6. Gays & Muslims united against hate sounds great!

  7. Those that wish to demonstrate against homosexuality should do so peacefully and within the law. It undermines their position and jeopardizes future protest. Perosnally, I feel protest is futile on this rissue since the only homosexuals that change do so because they want to, not because of protest.
    The same applues to protesting about homophobia. It is a futile endeavour. Homophobia is lawful.. It is a mental inclination. Furthermore, the majority of those accused of homophobia are falsely accused since they do not have an “irrational fear of homosexuals”. The ir views can be rationalized using scripture, they are not in ‘fear of the ‘homosexual’ but rather they abhor homosexuality and homosexual practices.
    Marching to change these views is futile and unwarranted since people have al legal right to determine their own moral code , just as homosexuals have a right to their inclinations and practices. I

    1. you are defending bigotry
      homophobia shouldn’t be legal or accepted
      the ones accused of homophobia are homophobes

      1. You cannot regulate peoples thiouht or mental inclinations. Would you like to live in a facist State where even your personal thoughts are a crime?
        The only bigotry I see is on here, not to mention intolerance and Christianophobia and intolerance toward lawfully held opposing views.

        1. You have every right to believe what you like – we often see loony-bin types, wailing and screaming in city centres on a Saturday, bible in hand, or waving a placard, handing out leaflets explaining how man and dinosaurs co-existed, or depicting children snuggling up to lions, and they are laughed at or ignored.

          If you express nonsense and superstition and bigotry, based on no evidence, then it is high time others said what they think of you too, and high time you got used to it. As reported in Matt 10:22, you are expected to welcome the contempt of others who find your beliefs to be ridiculous, by your supposed (and, almost certainly, fictional) saviour.

          1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:36am

            Well said, AdrianT.

        2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:35am

          “Would you like to live in a facist State”
          -
          Yet that IS what you and your ilk want. Your just too thick to realise it.
          -
          What a fvckin hypocrite.

        3. @ Keith, as you must be aware everything you say about freedom of thought and scriptural rationalisation has also been used to justify racism and anti-Semitism. I take it you feel these are equally acceptable in today’s society? However, you will note that such attitudes have changed in recent decades in the UK even if neither racism nor anti-Semitism will ever be eradicated completely.

          1. Anti semitism is unpleasant and not scripturally justifiable, yet legal. Hatred of homosexuality is obligatory scripturally and also legal
            Put that in yer pipe and smoke it!

          2. Poor old Keith, I think it’s you who’s been smoking a bit too much in your pipe. Anti-Semitism is certainly not legal in the UK in that good and services cannot be lawfully withheld from Jews on the basis of their religion. You might also want to remind yourself that fortunately few people today believe in your precious (if random) ‘scriptures’ as devotedly as you do.

          3. Another cure for homophoibia keith is for the homophobe to stand on a chair in his underpants for fifteen minutes each day staring at the ceiling, has a good success rate if persisted with.

          4. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 8:46am

            Yep, as usual all Keith does is try to justify his own bitter hatred.

    2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:34am

      Oh what a surprise Keith and his obsession with “homosexuality and homosexual practices” again.
      -
      Weither it’s hatred or fear they are both irrational and both result in homophobia.

    3. Dave North 23 Aug 2011, 9:19am

      “Homosexual Practices”

      Who’s practising.

      I’m a bl@@dy expert mate.

      1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:32am

        LOL… good comment and practice makes perfect and honey that makes me an expert too!! :P

        1. Keith’s “Life style Choice” of lies deceit and misinformation, certainly appears to have been practiced to perfection.

      2. Obviously, increasing your lifespan is not a priority!

        1. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 8:49am

          What makes you think your hatred will improve your lifespan?
          -
          Your probably more likely to have a heart attack or stroke with all that inner anger.
          -
          You also forget that your own bitterness and hatred of us does affect our lives too, so yet more blood on Your hands.

    4. “Perosnally, I feel protest is futile on this rissue since the only homosexuals that change do so because they want to, not because of protest.” No homosexuals change full stop, those that go through gay “cure” therapy usually recant there claims of being cured and others just end up suicidal and depressed as they believe that it is somehow their fault that they cannot change there orientation.

      These “gay cure” places are one of the worst evils that religion has brought us.

      1. agreed

    5. Ian Townson 26 Aug 2011, 7:22pm

      Keith: Why would homosexuals want to change other than under social pressure to do so? Thankfully there is a more liberal attitude towards homosexuality in the west than when I was a teenager. As a guilt-ridden, ashamed, pale shadow of a person I sought psychiatric help and was given electric shock treatment (aversion therapy) to stop me from having a ‘maladaptive response’ and to change me into a heterosexual. I am glad it didn’t work. I gave it up in disgust at myself for falling into this trap in the first place. Had I met people with a more positive attitude to homosexuality none of this would have happened. I began to blossom later as a human being with the onset of the Gay Liberation Front who came out loud and proud about homosexuality. Keith, you are entitled to your views about homosexualtiy. Freedom of speech/assembly etc. is priceless and must be defended at all costs. However I will fight against your moral outlook because of two reasons.

      1. Ian Townson 26 Aug 2011, 7:38pm

        Continuation:

        Firslty, if your views gained ground and widespread acceptance there would be the danger of the state introducing repressive legislation leading to the recriminalisation of homosexuality. Secondly, homosexuals would have to go underground. No doubt there would be an increase in suicides, blackmail, gay bashing and an endless stream of people seeking ‘cures’.

        The word homophobia is a misnomer. This isn’t meant to be indicative of a mental state of irrational fear of homosexuality though no doubt that does exist. It is a somewhat misleading short form word indicating LGBT oppression that comes from religiously or politically inspired bigotry. Hence political opposition to it in the name of freedom, liberty and tolerance.

        1. @Ian Townson

          Hi Ian
          .
          Keith is part of the Ex-gay movement, that’s why he is posting these invidous remarks on this thread.
          .
          If you are not aware, the Ex-gay movement (Cult) is an insidous collection of fractious groups, who prey on vulnerable LGBT people struggling to integrate their sexuality with their social identity

  8. Amazing. PN constructs an entire story around our East End oppressors without once mentioning the word “Muslim”, making PN itself part of the problem. It is this insane brand of political correctness gone mad that’s killing gay men today. Muslims attack us and we are too scared to identify them by race because we are socially conditioned not to. HIV ads are wrapped up in cotton wool and naive youngsters contract the virus because they are not getting the hard-hitting messages of old. And so it goes on and on. What a crazy, upside down, inside out, back to front world we live in; one in which we are bringing about our own downfall. Unless we have the courage to start speaking the truth loudly and until the symptoms of our malaise are clearly identify and exposed, we will forever remain a weak, disempowered populace which only finds a voice to hurl childish abuse at its aggressors while hiding behind ridiculous monikers (Jock S Trap, anyone?) in these forums. Pathetic.

    1. ” Muslims attack us and we are too scared to identify them by race”
      .
      As has been pointed out regularly, Islam isn’t a race.

    2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:02am

      So one minute your saying we should stand up and be heard but then attack those that do.
      -
      Hypocrite much.
      -
      My name is irrelevent it’s the content that matters. It is a frickin comment page after all.

      1. JSTrap, the point I am making is that by hiding behind a ridiculous monicker on Pink News you are addressing the same small sector of the community that log into these pages regularly and are, in fact preaching to the converted. If you really wanted to make a difference and had the courage of your convictions and beliefs, you would be out there in public like Peter Tatchell doing something practical instead of moaning and whinging ad nauseum while hiding your identity on these pages. What difference can you make scanning these boards day and night moaning about the gross injustices you perceive are being inflicted against gay people? You talk and awful lot of talk but you never break off from here long enough to walk the walk. That makes you and a good few others who live on these boards hypocrites in my book, and therefore complicit bystanders in the continued oppression you perceive is being targeted at gays.

        1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:08am

          Doh…. and there was me thinking this was a ‘Comments’ page for people to debate and share opinions… Oh hang on.. It is!
          -
          Funny that you pinpoint and target me personally yet your not so bright as to do the maths on the times I am here. As for the rest, you don’t know what I do outside this, admittedly I haven’t done much recently but thats because of illness not that I should feel I have to explain to you as it’s none of your business but nevertheless you attack but you attack someone who is actually commenting on the story/stories not something totally irrelevent, purely to satisfy some flagging ego. Clearly that is ALL you can do.

    3. Hi Samuel, you might want to check out actual crime statistics. There are many homophobic attacks by both Muslims and non-Muslims in Tower Hamlets – and across the city, homophobic attacks are disproportionately by white perpetrators. Homophobia is a problem full stop, not just by people of any one race or religion, and it’s misleading to describe Muslims as “oppressors” when they are a minority within our country who are themselves often subjected to abuse and discrimination. We should show solidarity, not allow ourselves to be divided.

      1. Thanks for your contribution Andy, but if you check the statistics a little closer you will see that the part of East London that this article relates to is Tower Hamlets, and in particular the Bethnal Green/Shoredith area which houses one of the largest concentrations of Muslims outside the Middle East. Sure not another PC do-gooder trying to obfuscate from the fact that there is a link here? No doubt you were similarly defensive when the police were finally forced to admit that white girls have over many years been targeted by Muslim men, raped, drugged and forced into sexual servitude. See where political correctness gets us? Precisely. There is a boiling pot of viscous liquid simmering away in East London that is nearing the point – namely, when Muslims reach such numbers that they declare the area 100 per cent Islamic – when it will boil over and vapourise all “unnaturals” and “undesirables”; basically anyone who does not get down on their knees five times a day and pray to Allah.

        1. Ian Townson 25 Aug 2011, 9:32am

          I find it very odd that when vile crimes like rape and sexual servitude are committed or indeed any crimes of violence the religion or ethnic origin of the perpetrators is mentioned. But a crime is a crime and whoever commits it should be punished accordingly. There have been any number of murders and assaults on gay men by white, homophobic thugs but neither their whiteness or their religion or their ethnic origins is ever mentioned. They are just referred to as mindless homophobic thugs. Why do we single out ‘muslims’ for this treatment?

          There has been a large Asian (muslim) population in Tower Hamlets and the East End for decades with a very high degree of accepetance and integration over the years (which does not mean you give up your culture or religion). The only reason why we are screaming about all this is that we have allowed our debate to be captured by the vile activities of one ot two Islamist fanatics who are rejected by the vast majority of muslims.

        2. Just to put things into perspective there are four times as many racially and religiously motivated attacks in Tower Hamlets as there are homophobic ones according to Metropolitan Police statistics. This is not to minimise the seriousness of the anti-gay attacks but let’s get a proper handle on this.

  9. Tatchell makes me sick!

    We all know what the main, though certainly not sole, reason is behind the rise in homophobia. It’s Muslims. And, no, I’m not arguing that every single Muslim is homophobia, and I know some are gay. Overall, however, Muslims are viciously homophobia, and an incredibly conservative bunch more generally. Yet, people like Tatchell go on about how homophobia and et cetera are isolated to a minority of Muslims.

    Muslims are not our allies. Just because we are both minorities and not liked by a lot of people doesn’t make us friends. Why is it that in almost all Muslim-majority countries homosexuality is a crime? In 10 of them, it’s a crime punishable by death!

    Wake up, people, and smell the coffee!

    1. I would agree with much of what Sam as stated above. You only need look at some of the film footage shot in the Regent’s park Mosque where the killing of gay people as been put before its members. Nothing done about the many hate preachers that talk about gay people in a way that encourages a dislike and hate towards us. There many gay blokes on LBC presenting programme not one of them as the balls to stand up and agree there is a problem within certain communities towards gay men. Much like our spineless politicians.

      Its easy to kick Peter (I don’t agree with everything he does) but at least he get off his arse and does something why so many gay people look the other way. Stonewall is so far up it own behind it could clean its own teeth.

    2. I agree to a point Sam, however Muslim cannot fully pratice their religion purely due to the laws within this country. However, all the muslim community can do is post posters around the community and even that is a crime…..so we have a choice, we ignore them which creates a divided society or we try to educate and integrate these people into a unified society, if they choose not too then we cant say we haven’t tried…their loss not ours.

      Oh keith keith keith, what are we going to do with you…..you are beyond hope, shame really that you despise people so much purely based on sexual orientation which has nothing to do with you. Funny that you have so much fascination with what I get upto within the four wall’s of my house with my boyfriend. Do you want me to send you some photos so you can “get off on them”….run along dear and peddle hatred to someone who cares xx

      1. @Simon

        We can’t deal with this issue unless we understand what the issue is. Unless we accept that the vast majority of Muslims in this country are seriously homophobic we will not be able to tackle this issue. We need to understand the magnitude of what we are facing for us to be able to device a strategy that is robust enough to tackle this ignorance.

        We need to confront homophobia at every opportunity, irrespective of whether the person advocating it is Muslim, Christian or whatever. The problem is that at the moment we are largely turning a blind eye to Muslim homophobia. Then again, it’s not just Muslim homophobia that’s ignore. All the bad bits of Islam are ignored by mainstream society too scared to speak out on this issue.

      2. You are NEVER going to get it are you. I despise homosexuality, not homosexuals.
        As forwhat you get up to in private. do you think that it is nobody’s business what consemnting adults do in private? Why then the law against consensual incest, even between males? because some consensual practices are immoral. I see no moral difference between homosexuuality and incest except that homosexual acts have killed more person (including innocents infected by HIV) than incest ever has.

        1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:59am

          “I despise homosexuality, not homosexuals.”
          -
          Yet your the only one who doesn’t see people just what they do in bed.
          -
          Fvckin perv. It’s you that is totally immoral.

        2. “because some consensual practices are immoral”

          Who says.

          You.

          How dare you.

          Go toss yourself off you sad creep.

          1. So you don’t see ANY consensual sexual act as immoral?
            Anything goes, even incest?
            Filthy bugger!

          2. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 8:51am

            “Filthy bugger!”
            -
            Says the perv that can’t stop coming to a LGBT news site.

        3. Dr Robin Guthrie 23 Aug 2011, 10:49am

          “You are NEVER going to get it are you”

          It would seem that you are the one unable to let go.

          Why do you troll gay web sites?

          What is your obsession with homosexuals?

          Why are you obsessed with others sex lives.

          How sad you are.

        4. I wondered how long it’d take for Keith to start droning on about incest. His obsession with it is so intense (and intensely tedious) that one can only conclude that in some seriously twisted way he’s seeking permission.

          1. I’ve been thinking that for a long while now.

        5. Africa and Lesbians !!

        6. What is homosexuality without homosexuals I wonder? Sorry, nice try to excuse yours hatred but you can’t hate one without the other, you really are a perfect idiot Keith and a cowardly self-deluding and hateful one at that, one of many exactly like you.

          1. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 8:52am

            Exactly and point is why does Keith only view all human beings by the sex they have? Surely that kind of person should be locked up out of harns way.

      3. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:49am

        I agree Simon, esp with your last paragraph. It’s amazing that someone who claims to hate actually chooses to spend so much time here. It’s clearly an obsession.
        -
        It’s not healthy.

    3. Kerry Hollowell 23 Aug 2011, 8:41am

      @SamB, I understand your frustration, but please do not start your comments by saying “Tatchell makes me sick” have you any idea what this man has done for 1)gay rights and 2) equality and human rights?
      If there were more people like Peter Tatchell willing to speak up and take action these issues would be addressed and the world would be a better place.

      1. I just wish he would stop with the “Queer” crap.

        I am not queer.

        1. You might not be but I am. I quite like the word queer I am different for the normal Heterosexual and I love it.

    4. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:45am

      Whilst I may agree with you SamB the point Mr Tatchell is making is to bring all people together who wish to show a message of acceptence regardless and a better unity of which community they come from.
      -
      I certainly don’t need to be told about Muslim Homophobia since it was the reason I was forced out of my home and the area I was born in but I see the sense in bringing together for a cause rather than seperate for a cause, that way you include Muslims who wish to be a part of peace and acceptence.
      -
      There does need to be a reminder to those who hate that in This country who we are is perfectly legal and we have every right to live our lives accordingly within the law Just like everybody else.

  10. Peter Tatchell 23 Aug 2011, 12:21am

    Branding all Muslims as homophobic is factually wrong and bigoted. For a start Muslims are part of the LGBT community. Plus there are straight Muslims who have spoken out against homophobia. Demonisation and stereotyping is what was done to LGBT people. Let’s not do it to others.

    1. Has anyone actually stopped to consider the facts of the matter? I’ve lived in east London fo ten years, and there actually seem to be more LGBT venues and more LGBT people in the area than ever, certainly more than ten years ago. I’m acutely aware of the incidents, and as appalled as anyone at the attacks and the appearance of the anti-gay stickers, plus I’d love to see an East London march go ahead. But let’s not become hysterical or disregard what’s happening on the ground. This summer’s gone by without any trouble at the LGBT venues that I’ve heard of. The trouble spot at the moment seems to be Soho (Phillip Salom, the recent attack on the Strand…) I’m sure there are issues to be addressed, but let’s get some perspective…

      1. *Phillop Salon (typo!)

      2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:17am

        I lived in East London all my life until 4 years ago and can honestly say that since 2000 it has become intolerate, aggressively so and genuinely a nasty place to be. Most of the Gay venue have gone mostly due to their customers being abused or violently attacked meaning people stopped going through fear.
        -
        It has become an area ruled by fear for many for all those that don’t follow, what is a foreign way of thinking in our country of legal acceptance.
        -
        I was born in Bethnal Green, spent my life there but was forced out by Muslim homophobia, racism, abuse and threatening and violent behaviour. That is only recent.
        -
        I was fortunate enough to have many friends, some indeed Muslim themselves who tried to support, one leaving his faith through disgust. So I know first hand that a lot of Muslims are for the freedoms we all enjoy, or should enjoy and not for the sadly large numbered who wish to oppress.
        ….

      3. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:18am

        I know too many people Gay or otherwise that have been forced from the area or live in fear not having the means to escape it.
        -
        A pride event like this may go some way to helping them do something as well as knowing they are not alone.

      4. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:19am

        Phillip Salon was attacked in Piccadiliy not Soho. Soho is still a safe place, indeed most of central London is, regardless of what has happened and been reported.

    2. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that all Muslims are homophobic, Peter. You are attacking a straw man and failing to address the point that homophobia is a real issue within the Muslim community as a whole. Yes, a proportion of Muslims are tolerant of the LGBT community; however, figures posted in polls and surveys have told us time and time again that there is a worrying trend of homophobia within the Muslim community. This is, of course, unsurprising given the fact that homophobia is central to Islamic doctrine and Muslims, on a whole, are more conservative in their beliefs than their Christian counterparts in Britain. I believe it is naive to ignore the demographics in the East End and how they relate to the rise in homophobic crime.

      1. @Jayb “I don’t think anyone is suggesting that all Muslims are homophobic”

        Can you not read or are you blind? There are people above you insinuating exactly that.

        Where are these polls and surveys out of interest? Don’t use them to support your argument if you aren’t willing to share them with the rest of us.

        1. Robert J Brown 23 Aug 2011, 7:09am

          I personally know many Muslims who are not homophobic and there are many more who canvess and vote for LGBT candidates at elections!

      2. Actually, I think you’ll find there was a recent poll contradicting the one other poll to which you’re referring.

        Seriously, look at the crime statistics. There is no evidence of a wave of homophobic violence specifically by Muslims. On the contrast, there is evidence that far-right groups are trying to use this as a pretext for stirring up hatred against another minority.

        1. Paula Thomas 23 Aug 2011, 11:27am

          Links?

        2. Remember Andy that not all crime is reported to the police, therefore it wouldn’t show in the stats.

          1. Well then how do you know about this crime wave that is sweeping london if it never gets reported?

          2. Hamish, who are you asking?

    3. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:05am

      Indeed, which why we shouldn’t single out one group if we are to encourage all supporters to come and join in a message of acceptance.
      -
      We need to show those who hate in the community that those who want to get on in an equal, accepting society are made up of many from many other communities but together for one for one community and one positive message.

    4. Peter Wrote
      .
      “Plus there are straight Muslims who have spoken out against homophobia.”
      .
      Which “striaght Muslims” were you thinking of who have spoken out against homophobia?

    5. All Muslims may not be homophobic per se, but it is certainly true to say that Muslims generally are innately against the concept of two men being together as drummed/conditioned/programmed/brainwashed into them from the tender age they start learning how to read the Koran. Surely that is the same thing, in which case a cultural problem clearly exists? Our politicians are to blame for not identifying the potential for incendiary clashes between certain groups of immigrants and sectors of UKsociety, and not limiting the influx of migrants from parts of the world that are not compatible with Western culture. That also begs the obvious question, why do Muslims flock here in such large numbers when they hate the West so much? The answer can be found in the fact that Muslim ghettos like those which exist in Tower Hamlets and Bradford have some of the highest UK unemployment rates and which are most dependent on the welfare state. Yep, it’s an easy, cushy like in good ol’ UK. “Ooh, racist!!”

      1. Ian Townson 27 Aug 2011, 1:05pm

        Samuel B: We need to encourage a questioning attitude to all forms of so-called ‘received’ wisdom from whatever source whether its the Qu’ran, the Christian bible or the Torah. That way neither Imams nor priests nor Islamist fanatics of any description can pull the wool over our eyes.

        Muslims do not hate western culture. In fact many western cultural practices are increasingly adopted by muslim countries. This follows the admittedly slow pace of modernisation which hopefully will be accelerated by the recent revolutions in the Middle East. Asians have been here for decades, starting in the late 1940s, and have largely integrated. Note the number of doctors, nurses, teachers, factory workers, restaurant owners, business people, administrators and technicians of Asian origin. Islamist extremists are of very recent origin. Unfortunately this colours many people’s attitudes toward muslims. It’s just plain wrong.

        1. Jock S. Trap 27 Aug 2011, 1:26pm

          Agreed. There does seem to be a thing of hide from the problems instead of dealing with them.
          -
          And yet if we dealt with issues when they came up we probably would have been more respected for it

  11. When was the last time you read the Koran, or at least glanced through the Bukhari a’hadith, or studied, lightly or in depth, any one of the main four schools of Islamic so-called jurisprudemnce, Peter?

    Had you actually done any of those things then you would know that mainstream Islam is vehemently against homosexuality and that there are five negative references in the Koran and and four well known negative hadith (sayings of Mohammed on which much law – sharia – is based) one of which explicitly calls for the killing of homosexuals: “kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to.”

    One cannot get clearer than that, nor can one take any other meanings from the hadith and the suras of the Koran – they are not capable of misinterpretation. Surveys clearly indicate, beyond any doubt, that the vast majority of Muslims currently believe that the verses and the hadith are commands from God and must be obeyed.

    To state otherwise is willful ignorance.

    1. Thanks for your scholarly input, JohnMJ.

      If only moderate Muslims were more verbal, but then they would risk being alienated or killed themselves, wouldn’t they?

      Parvez Sharma’s “A Jihad for Love” (2007) documents a compelling insight into the plight of gays in the Muslim world.

      On the other hand, Gert Wilders’ own informed insight can certainly be a cause for alarm, or at the very least, a deterrent from religious institutions altogether.

      It’s a corker.

  12. Robert J Brown 23 Aug 2011, 7:07am

    Peter is obviously out of touch with east London living in Southwark as there is an event taking place on Saturday 24 September:

    http://www.eastlondonpride.com

    1. Staircase2 23 Aug 2011, 5:08pm

      Dead link – I smell a rat…
      (…Just how far away from the East End do you think Southwark is then!?)

      1. That’s probably because the link is
        http://www.eastlondonpride.org.uk/

  13. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 8:16am

    And the protest that was called… was stopped by a group supposedly there to help the LGBT community! For fears of upsetting people and causing tensions.
    -
    What about LGBT people that live/lived in the area?
    What about the rise n homophobic crime and abuse?
    What about the drop in Gay venues mainly because of homophobic abuse?
    -
    It does seem LGBT people in East London are being forgotted or pasted over and left on their own without proper support from either the local Gay group or local or central government.
    -
    The population in these areas need to work together to remind that this is the UK and being LGBT is an important part of our country and that includes LGBT people from within their own communities too.

    1. Hi Jock

      Don’t take this the wrong way as it’s not an attack, I am genuinely interested to know which gay venues have closed in east London in recent times. I can’t think of any and I’ve lived here ten years. Some might have come and gone, but most seem to be going from strength to strength, and some of the new bars that have opened on Mare St seem to be gay friendly at the very least. There are troubles and tensions to be sure, but I’ve not seen any evidence of an exodus of gay people from the area. I’m happy to be corrected if I’ve overlooked some major occurrences…

      1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:26am

        There have been quite a few one in particular was The Black Horse, sadly because of customer violence and intimidation. I myself was forced from the area after suffering 4 years of extreme hatred, racism and homophobia and I know many friends who have also left the area.
        -
        This is the area of my birth, Lee. I didn’t leave it willingly but it had notiably changed over the last 10 years so if you say thats when you arrived you really don’t know what a lovely place it used to be.

      2. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:30am

        PS “Don’t take this the wrong way as it’s not an attack”
        -
        Why would I, we’re debating. Varied view is what this is about.

      3. Gay venues in the east end which have closed in the last 20 years? London Apprentice, The Brit, The Pride of Stepney, Benjy’s, The Black Horse, and several other small pubs whose names I don’t remember (but if I travelled round the east end, I could find their names). One was on Globe Road, another was on the corner of Shoreditch High Street, one was round the corner from the Pride of Stepney. There was a TV/TS club on Commercial Road, and another one down at The Minories. The east end was the gayest part of London 20 years ago — it made Earl’s Court look like a desert. There was even a once-weekly gay club a block or two away from East London Mosque. It’s only a couple of years before some of the few remaining bars close.

        1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:15am

          Not forgetting The Block opp Tescos in Bromley by Bow.

      4. And a number of venues have also opened. Basically the scene has shifted from the south of Tower Hamlets borough up to Shoreditch / Dalston in Hackney. It’s not a conspiracy or anything more than market forces and changing tastes

        1. @James – I take your point that some places have closed down, but I think Kevin also makes a good point. These venues may have shut down for a variety of reasons, and bars/clubs do come and go over the course of two decades. I’m not saying everything is rosy in East London, and I do have some concerns, but when I’m out on the street I see a very diverse and vibrant bunch of people, and lots of very openly LGBT people, often heading to venues like Dalston Superstore, Bistroteq, George & Dragon, etc. I also know people who’ve had as much trouble from white kids on local estates as they have from Asian kids, which makes me think that the problems might be more to do with deprivation and education in Hackney, than to do with religion or race. All I want to do is guard against reactionary scaremongering (and I’m not accusing anyone here) – this just makes people (sometimes unnecessarily) afraid.

          1. @Jock – didn’t assume you’d take it the wrong way, my good man, just know that some on discussion boards can be a bit touchy :)

          2. Jock S. Trap 27 Aug 2011, 1:22pm

            Can be true, Lee. Luckily not in most though.
            -
            A lot of decent peeps here, some not so though.. :)

        2. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:26am

          Actually Kevin, quite a few closed because customers feared for their safety in the end, like the Black Horse which forced ‘changing tastes.’ I know several people that were attacked coming out.
          -
          I used to spend a lot of time in Earls Court when there used to be a scene there and that all changed because of ‘market forces and changing tastes’ and believe me it was very different to what happened in the East End.
          -
          You only have to see what happened to Oliver Hemsley to see that Gay East End pubs aren’t the safest esp as when the person responsible was found guilty the thugs returned again to the George and Dragon.

          1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:31am

            From my own experience and what I’ve seen, it seems to be that the more Muslims move into an area tolerance decreases and violence towards the LGBT increases. This of course doesn’t help the majority of law abiding Muslims and sadly they all get tainted but I do believe that as they increase further so will intolerance. We’re already seeing it with the posters and an increase in homophobic attacks. It is gradually moving into new areas with a noticable changing in Hackney and Shoreditch and unless the government actively puts their foot down and remind these people that in this country we are entitled to be ourselves this problem will get worse until we have a very sdangerous situation in our hands.
            -
            This is why we do need a seperate rally for ALL communities who wish to send a message of acceptence of each other within the communities. Many of whom I have no doubt will be Muslim themselves.

          2. From what I know of Oliver Helmsley’s attack, he wasn’t in or near a gay pub, but was walking down the street near Hoxton Sq. I’m pretty sure those were the facts of that very disturbing and tragic incident. As vile as that was, it happened two years ago, and there’s been nothing of similar gravity since.

          3. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 9:29am

            Actually Lee, Oliver was walking to the George and Dragon and as Mr Tatchell has said there have been a number of horrific attacks outside the pub ie the smokers and inside when Oliver’s attacker was found guilty.
            -
            We should never underestimate homophobia esp as they are happening, particularly in East London and we do no favours ignoring it or pretending it doesn’t exist.

          4. I’m not ignoring it nor pretending it doesn’t exist. I’m just asking for a bit of perspective and proportion. I’ve spent time trying to find out exactly what is going on in E London, talking to residents, police and people who run venues. Having spoken to them, it seems that the problem is a complex one, and also not one that’s suddenly better or worse. In fact, it seems part of the reason that this has received more attention is not because of incidents like Oliver’s attack, but because there are more LGBT living in E London, therefore more complaints and more vocal debate on the topic.

          5. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 9:04am

            Personally I think your being very laid back to a ‘complex’ and serious problem. I guess so long as we try to rationalise and make excuses for the homophobes we can expect no change in peoples action because their are No excuses. I was born and bred in Bethnal Green and ended up being forced from my home after 4 years of homophobia, racism both violent and abusive in and around my home. It was/is at a time when many of my friends who also lived in the area were suffering the same homophobia, many had lived there for many years.
            -
            I had suffered Christian homophobia before but not at my home nor on the same level as what I suffered from Muslims. I had Never suffered that level of homophobia before but had felt a change over the last few years of living there.
            -
            Yes there may be a rise in reporting incident but there are still too many trapped and too scared to do anything and we must never ignore them.
            ….

          6. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 9:09am


            I expected to die where I was born but too much of the East has become a place of complete intolerance that needs to be challenged because it’s not just the LGBT community these people attack but also many innocent Muslims themselves if they just happen to belong to the wrong Muslim sect.
            -
            Unless the community stands together to send a message the intolerance is not acceptable this problem will get worse.
            -
            I was lucky, I passed the feeling of suicide and went on to get help from other the police and THT who after 37 years of Bethnal Green being my home, helped and encourage me to be able to move from what I can only call now a cesspit from hell.
            -
            They talk religiously about heaven and hell yet it’s the intolerant in society that create the Hell.

  14. A “us vs. them” approach is hardly going to help minimise community tensions.

    If you think there are problems in the community, you should go out and talk to people, not parade in front of them.

    If you are serious about doing something, then do a weekly stall (not a one off parade) where you actually talk to people.

    Unless, of course, you are just a racist bunch who won’t talk with people to begin with.

    1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 9:29am

      This isn’t a them vs us. This is a community coming out together to support the better of the community against the hatred.
      -
      Doing this in numbers sends a message that intolerance isn’t and won’t be acceptable.
      -
      A weekly stall, talking to people sadly creates violence in some hateful people so while it is a good idea in principle an much larger demo is better and more productive.

  15. Kerry Hollowell 23 Aug 2011, 8:42am

    @SamB, I understand your frustration, but please do not start your comments by saying “Tatchell makes me sick” have you any idea what this man has done for 1)gay rights and 2) equality and human rights?
    If there were more people like Peter Tatchell willing to speak up and take action these issues would be addressed and the world would be a better place.

    1. Homosexuality is no more a human right than consensual incest amongst males.
      The concept of human rights is founded in the bible. the bible is clear in both the Hebrew and greek scritures that men should not lie with men and that improper , immoral thoughts should be fought against, not excused as genetic, otherwise, paedophilia (a mental state of attraction toward prepubescents) which is also legal, would also have to be considered moral.

      1. Paula Thomas 23 Aug 2011, 9:45am

        Some points Keith firstly acting of paedophillia is most certainly illegal, secondly the difference with homosexuality is that it is consensual, thirdly homosexuality is recognised as a human right by many organisations including the UN and the EU.

        1. Acting on paedophilia is child abuse or molestation . I said paedophilia is lawful, not the latter.
          Since you deem ‘consent’ to be the crux on which to base the question of whether an action is moral or immoral. it follows that you must deem any sexual act between consenting adults moral, such as incest.
          Do you think that consensual incest between male (which carries no risk) should be a human right. If not, why not?

          1. Jock S. Trap 23 Aug 2011, 11:29am

            Nothing to do with the Calls for East London to react to homophobic incidents story Keith.
            -
            Why are you hijacking all stories to your homophobic agenda?
            -
            Why does PinkNews fail to act?
            -
            Do I want to keep coming here to see Keith feels our lives are up for constant debate?
            -
            Keith I am Gay, it’s not up for debate. End of.

          2. Jock I’ve reported him a million times but for some reason he is still not getting taken off not quite sure why.

          3. Staircase2 23 Aug 2011, 5:10pm

            @Keith – you really are an arse….

          4. Staircase2 23 Aug 2011, 5:11pm

            Oops! Sorry: I left out the word ‘Ignorant’…

            I meant to say: “@keith – you really are an IGNORANT arse”…

            Apologies….

      2. This is valid ONLY if you believe all that religious drivel, so stop spouting YOUR beliefs at others.

      3. “The concept of human rights is founded in the bible.”
        .
        Rot. There was, for instance, opposition to slavery in the Bible, then? The concept of universal human rights was founded in Renaissance Humanism and developed during the enlightenment by people who were largely opposed to the sheep-like acceptance of biblical scriptures.

        1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

          http://www.humanrights.com/#/home

          1. And the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been REJECTED by all 56 muslim states in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_on_Human_Rights_in_Islam The Cairo Declaration (signed by all of them) says that ALL HUMAN RIGHTS ARE SUBORDINATE TO SHARIA LAW.

          2. Yes…sad, but true… still democracy is making progress as we speak… I hope.

        2. We hold these truths to be self-evident… (John 8:32)
          ^ Ishay, Micheline (2008). The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era. Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: University of California Press. pp. 64.

          fast forward to the declaration of independance…
          …that all men are created equal… (Romans 1:20-21; Galatians 3:28)

          …Human rights were defined as a result of European scholars attempting to form a “secularized version of Judeo-Christian ethics”

          that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights… (Romans 8:35-39)

          …that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. (Luke 4:16-21; John 10:10)

          1. Ian Townson 28 Aug 2011, 10:10am

            Keith: You cannot separate homosexuality from homosexuals. The relationship is symbiotic and inextricably linked. The idea that you can separate the sinner from the sin is a non starter. So…having said that, going back to your comments on and quotations about human rights, would you object to LGBT people being in line for ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?’ Or should all this be suppressed for your biblical inspired moral stance.

          2. Jock S. Trap 28 Aug 2011, 11:05am

            Indeed Ian.
            -
            I always find it funny how some say love the sinner, hate the sin but all they every focus on is what they think it the ‘sin’ and not the ‘sinner’.
            -
            Sin, Sinner – It’s just another excuse to justify their own bigotry.

        3. For fear o branching off into ANOTHER discussion, I have to say your comments aboput biblical slavery betrays your ignorance of the subject. In short, what we now call legitimate prisoners of war were then called slaves, a man could sell himself as a slave (or willling daughter). We now call them employees. Above all, slaves were to be treated humanely,and the opunishment for inhumane treatment could be death. I have no desire to elaborate further but a short perusal of your favourite search engine should qualify my comments.

          1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:35am

            Still wondering why the Bible quoting is relevent to Calls for East London to react to homophobic incidents? Other than of course it’s books like the one your quoting from that are the causes of such hate. Therefore I assume you fully back such homophobic crimes.

        4. Some historians suggest that the Achaemenid Persian Empire of ancient Iran established unprecedented principles of human rights in the 6th century BC under Cyrus the Great.

          After his conquest of Babylon in 539 BC, the king issued the Cyrus cylinder, discovered in 1879 and seen as some today as the first human rights document.

          The cylinder has been linked by some commentators to the decrees of Cyrus recorded in the Books of Chronicles, Nehemiah, and Ezra which state that Cyrus allowed (at least some of) the Jews to return to their homeland from their “Babylonian Captivity”.

          The cylinder now lies in the British Museum, and a replica is kept at the United Nations Headquarters.

          Magna Carta is an English charter originally issued in 1215. Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today.

          cont’d

          1. Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, such as the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

            The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a non-binding declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, partly in response to the barbarism of World War II.

            The UDHR urges member nations to promote a number of human, civil, economic and social rights, asserting these rights are part of the “foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”.

            Canadian law professor John Humphrey and French lawyer René Cassin were responsible for much of the cross-national research and the structure of the document respectively.

        5. The anti-gay hate industry is notorious for distorting the results of scholarly works to suit their own purpose.

          For example, the compelling history of human rights published by Micheline Ishay is concerned with the human rights of indigenous people in the age of globalization, condemning the rights of the LGBT community

          1. …correction..

            For example, the compelling history of human rights published by Micheline Ishay is concerned with protecting the human rights of indigenous people in the age of globalization, NOT condemning the rights of the LGBT community.

      4. Homophobia, trolling

      5. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 2:22pm

        Presumably it follows from your argument that heterosexuality isn’t a human right either. No more so than consensual incest between male and female or paedophilia between man and child or woman and child. By the way, I do find it disturbing that immoral thoughts are prescibed by the holy scriptures. Thought crime is usually associated with totalitatian regimes as in historical reality and George Orwell’s excellent book ’1984′. Perhaps the scriptural prohibition of tought crimes gives us a clue as to their historical provenance i.e. in ancient totalitarian systems governed by violent, intolerant, party line police states.

        1. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 2:44pm

          My comment 16 mins ago was meant for Keith or anyone else who wants to comment.

  16. George Broadhead 23 Aug 2011, 9:11am

    Jayb hits the nail on the head when he writes:
    “Yes, a proportion of Muslims are tolerant of the LGBT community; however, figures posted in polls and surveys have told us time and time again that there is a worrying trend of homophobia within the Muslim community. This is, of course, unsurprising given the fact that homophobia is central to Islamic doctrine and Muslims, on a whole, are more conservative in their beliefs than their Christian counterparts in Britain. ”

    People are afraid of drawing attention to the intolerant aspects of Islam in the Koran and Sharia Law for fear of being branded racist.

    Valid criticism of a religion is not racist.

    1. Don’t be silly, Mr Proud-to-be-Islamophobic, to quote your drivel from the other thread. People are *always* drawing attention to the intolerant aspects of Islam – indeed, the only time the Daily Mail ever cares about homophobia is when it gives it a pretext to complain about Muslims.

      Islamophobia is not criticism of a religion any more than anti-Semitism or the persecution of Christians in certain countries. It is hatred of a group of people.

      1. George Broadhead 23 Aug 2011, 12:39pm

        To quote Peter Tatchell from a previous Pink News report:

        “When OutRage! stood alone in challenging Muhid and the East London Mosque/London Muslim Centre we were denounced by some people as racists and Islamophobes. This is nonsense. We never attacked anyone because of their race or religion. We condemned their homophobia, in the same way that we condemn the homophobic bigotry of fundamentalists of all faiths.

        Many LGBT campaigners are now terrified of similar false, malicious allegations of racism or Islamophobia. To avoid such smears, they shy away from robust responses to homophobia when it comes from religious and racial minorities. This inaction is de facto collusion with homophobia.”

      2. Its a bloody religion.

        Made up by ignorant uneducated desert dwellers hundreds of years ago

        It is not a state of physical being.

        Perhaps I coul be described as religion-o-phobic as I certainly am.

        Everything bad on this bl@@dy planet is caused by the religious and there fairy stories.

        Personally I could not care less if the person was English, Scots, Indian, Arabian, Chinese, Black, White, Green, Yellow, polkadot, Muslim, Christian, Sikh etc.

        Its their bl@@dy insane religious ranting and desire to impose them on me that scare me.

        So back off with the Islamophobic cr@p.

      3. “People are *always* drawing attention to the intolerant aspects of Islam” – in the context of this discussion, of course people are going to highlight homophobia contained in Islamic doctrine. Do you expect people to simply ignore these versus and focus on the sugar-coated ones in an effort turn a blind eye to the root of homophobia within the Muslim community?

        I don’t agree with any hatred directed at any group of people. However, ‘Islamophobia’ is an abused term, often deployed in an effort to shout down any criticism of Islam, as an ideology, or the actions of its followers. Religion, at its core, is simply a man-made belief system. In my eyes, a Christian or a Muslim is no different to a Communist (in terms of the privileges they should receive in society) – all are voluntary followers of man-made ideologies, and hatred of anyone is unacceptable, but – we should not be afraid to offer legitimate criticism.

  17. The easiest way to end tolerance is tolerating the intolerants. That’s the oldest trap of them all. And hey, way to go. We gays are disposable. The intolerants have learnt all the tricks and dialectics of the speech of absolute tolerance to twist it in a way that their intolerance is disguised in tradition, culture, religion and even ethnicity –whether it is ours or from abroad- so enjoy your freedom while it last. They know that by crying out loud that they are victims of prejudice –even if they are not so- they know they can paralyze any exposure of truth due to the fear of being pointed at by the interlocutor.
    Two or three generations from now LGTB will be swept under the rug again or even persecuted again. We will only see the beginning of intolerance being feared, later tolerated, later respected and justified, later consolidated into politically applicable norms and well, you can guest what goes after that. We will never be more than the 5% of the population. Guess whose numb

    1. (continued) Guess whose numbers go up.
      Whether you like it or not, when bad understood and glamorized multiculturalism could mean your extinction or persecution you should define carefully what traits you want to incorporate from the world and what is absolutely detrimental to your local values or your own security or even life. I repeat: the easiest –and fastest- way to end tolerance is tolerating the intolerants, no matter how many layers have the complex disguise they want to hide it in.

  18. Another Hannah 23 Aug 2011, 11:40am

    I don’t think people should make a stand in this way. I think a very public and high profile as possible ceremony should be held to relinquish east london as a free, that is danger free part of the UK, and it should be admitted that it is no longer safe for LGBT people. Better to look after LGBT people and ensure their safety. Fight from where you are safe, and leave the government to deal with civil disorder and the destruction of British values and freedoms as they should. Go to where you can be free, live a good life, and not have to live in fear and danger. Build the power and resources of the LGBT people as much as possible in order to ensure freedom and a fight back when expedient.

  19. My take on this perhaps is slightly biased to be honest as I am a born and bred cockney.

    I came out in school when I was about fourteen, I’m now thirty-two so it was a while ago. My school was predominately Bangladeshi with 93% of the pupils from Bangladesh.

    I never experienced homophobia at the hands of my students. Perhaps I was lucky.

    However, I had noticed (until I left for the glamourous climbes of Vauxhall) that there was a distinct change in attitude. Pubs and bars were starting to shut down in general, not just gay venues.

    I understand fully that there is a problem with homophobia which is perhaps more prevalent dute to religion i.e. Islam but I do also understand that it depends on the person – not the faith they follow.

    I think we need to stop blaming and scapegoating the majority of people because of what a minority have done. After all, is this not both reactionary and almost fascist in it’s appearance?

    1. I understand the anger that is there, I’ve seen it time and time again aimed at the muslim community before. “They’re taking our homes”, “they’re having too many kids”, “they’re dirty” etc etc…

      Many of you bleat on other threads how if someone makes a homophobic comment and we change the word “gay” for “black” then it would be unnacceptable. I agree. But then, one one hand how can some of you scream homophobia while on the other come very close to being racist?

      We need pride, but perhaps more what we need to do is get some self-respect and aim our anger and fury at those who would do us harm…not those who might.

      1. Dr Robin Guthrie 23 Aug 2011, 12:59pm

        ISLAM / MUSLIM is NOT a race.

        It is a religion.

        So comments cannot be racist.

        1. I didn’t think I confused Islam with race in my above statement. Please feel free to point out where I did.

          With respect the majority of muslims in boroughs such as Newham and Tower Hamlets are from Bangladeshi or Pakistani backgrounds – hence my comment about racism because to me it is perfectly clear who the anger is directed at although I agree that for those who do not live in East London, nor ever have may seem somewhat unable to grasp my point.

          Also, please don’t use caps – it’s rude. You’re addressing me as part of a debate, not shouting at me.

          1. Dr Robin Guthrie 23 Aug 2011, 3:20pm

            I was not shouting. I was emphasising.

        2. And people aren’t homophobic because they’re not scared of us?

          Its all technicalities instead of racism we will just call it discrimination then. Either way its out of order.

      2. Staircase2 23 Aug 2011, 5:13pm

        @Mendirin Agreed! Well said…

    2. Maybe your lucky experience is due to the fact that islam has become more radicalised very quickly, that can even be seen visibly on the street from the numbers of muslim women who cover up to 15/20 years ago.

      1. I agree that perhaps Islam has become more radicalised – I can’t help but feel that something is happening, almost like a call to arms. I feel very uneasy with it.

        However, I’m unsure as to numbers of women that cover up. To be honest, I don’t know the numbers and would argue this is down to perception.

        1. I disagree ,it is just based on personal perception, even in secular states like turkey, the mass increase in women covering up has become a political issue.

  20. Secularism is the only way to solve hate crimes:

    Secularism combats the influence of religion on governments, ensuring that Human Rights always come before religious rights, fighting the massive exemptions religious bodies demand – and are sometimes granted – from discrimination laws that everyone else is subject to. Every privilege has its victimS (plural)….

    ALL Schools should be fully integrated. Religious school should NEVER be funded by government. In an equal society, we are all taught together

    Private religious schools should be funded by the churches… while the content is regulated by the governement..

    We are all born innocent…. At the age of 5, we separate our children (via schooling) and tell them that they’re different… We’ll only solve this hatred by community cohesion via integration from the age of 5…

    Faith Schools
    http://www.secularism.org.uk/faith

    Discussion on Faith School Funding:
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1169896

    1. Are hate crimes really always motivated by religion though? I thought there would be other issues involved..class, gender, race…

      I think it’s too simplistic.

      1. Religion is the single largest divisive organisation, leading to “perceived” differences….

        Yes: class, race and ESPECIALLY gender are divisive… but not to the extend that religion divides.

        Faith is personal and NEVER seeks to influence or divide people; Whereas, religions are THE largest divisive organisations around…. I have great respect for faith; but NO time whatsoever for religion. …

        1. As someone who is an atheist I would have to argue your point. For me, religion has been a very uniting force at times – but that may well be in the negative.

          What I mean is that millions of people around the word refer to themselves as Catholics or Muslims or anything else. The majority of those percieve a bond with their religious peers and would be much likely to unite against a common enemy.

          Religion, race, nationalism…it’s different but it’s ideals are the same – it’s about uniting.

    2. @John C -

      You said:

      “Secularism combats the influence of religion on governments…”

      That is not to say that secularism is opposed to religion, right?

      The fact is, our political system is democratic; our society is pluralist.

      No one belief can be imposed by loyalty.

      We have to engage in the market of ideas, putting forward our best arguments.

      The best arguments are the ones that most people can respond to.

      Religious arguments just aren’t effective.

  21. Peter Tatchell 23 Aug 2011, 2:15pm

    It is great that there is an East End Pride planned for 24 September. I will support it and publicise it. There is room for two events (perhaps spaced a bit more apart). But there are some problems. The 24 September Pride starts in Hackney. We need an event in E1, where most of the Gay Free Zone stickers were plastered and when some of the worst homophobic attacks took place.
    Moreover, the 24 September event is not planning to invite (according to their website) Black, Asian, Muslim and Jewish organisations to participate and speak. At this time we need to engage with and involve these other communities to build a broad alliance against hate and prejudice. A purely LGBT event is understandable but not enough. Let our community show leadership in uniting people.

    1. There was next to no media coverage of the main Pride London this summer. I doubt these events will be any better reported.

    2. Peter, the homophobic attacks you referenced in your open letter, outside the George & Dragon, happened in E2 not E1. The event on the 24th September starts in Hackney and finishes in Bethnal Green, E2, just round the corner from the G&D
      http://www.eastlondonpride.org.uk/
      The website shows Imman, the Muslim LGBT group, is one of the supporters of the event

  22. Peter Tatchell 23 Aug 2011, 2:20pm

    Ooops! Sorry. The first lines of my last post should have read:

    It is great that there is an East London Pride planned for 24 September. But it has not been well publicised. Most people don’t know anything about it. Nevertheless, I will support and publicise their plans for 24/9.

    1. Peter, you are my hero!

      1. And mine.

        1. Mine too.

          1. And me. Total inspiration.

  23. Terry Stewart 23 Aug 2011, 4:09pm

    https://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=209155182472416
    There already is an East London Pride event organised.24th september 2011

    This is the Official East London Pride Festival.

    We the LGBTQ community in East London are bringing you an LGBTQ Parade and Festival you will not forget. We are about our community and making sure that we are 100% included and accepted for who we are.

    We are diverse and come from every corner of the World. We are you and we hope you will join us in having a day which speaks about the aspirations dreams and future which we all desire.

    No Racism, No Homophobia No Transphobia No Islamaphobia and above all No Hate!

    Dance – Drama – Music – East Ends Greatest DJ – LGBTQ Arts installations – BBQ – Picnic – Debate – Discussion – Politics – Fashion – and most of all You.

    1. Will there be any Christianophobia, like on this site?

      1. Depends whether the Christians involved keep harping on about Leviticus 18 like a broken record, doesn’t it Keith?

        1. A bit difficult not to on a homosexual site where the majority are defined by their sexuality.
          case in point. A rtecent article about the alleged ‘singer’ Will Young ran the headline ‘Gay Singer’ Will Young ??????
          I don’t recall reading about ‘Straight Singer Gareth Gates’ or any other hetero.
          See…defined by sexuality!

          1. @Keith
            .
            Since Heteroseuxals are predominatly the ones defining LGBT by their sexuality
            .
            Keith, I will leave you to answer your own questions

          2. It really isn’t difficult not to Keith, you’re just not even trying.
            If you come blazing in spoiling for a confrontation like the Spanish Inquisition with hemorroids you’re simply not going to make many friends.
            Other christians manage not to get their knickers in a twist about what gay people get up to between the sheets, so I’m guessing it’s not an essential tenet of the faith.

          3. @Keith – Will Young wasn’t describing himself as a “gay singer” I suspect, it would the press doing that for him. I’m sure when asked what he does and given the opportunity to answer for himself, Will tells people he’s a “singer”, not a “gay singer.” So he’s not defining himself by his sexuality, the media are, to sell a few more paper thru titillation. It’s a very easy distinction to spot. Surprised you didn’t.

          4. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:38am

            Funny how Keith says that but can’t stop coming to a News Site designed for the LGBTQ community.
            -
            I guess a Gay News site suits when it needs to.
            -
            Hypocrite.

  24. @JohnK
    Since Heteroseuxals are predominatly the ones defining LGBT by their sexuality
    .
    Keith, I will leave you to answer your own questions

    I am a pretty smart heterosexual, not to mention enlightened educator, albeit a bit of a pedagogue, however, may I be struck blind if I know what the hell that post meant?

    1. Perhaps you could enlighten us more!. . .

      1. Keith
        .
        One other thing!
        .
        There is no need to tell us that you are really not that bright, we already know that!!!

    2. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:40am

      Someone ‘pretty smart’ wouldn’t be overly obsessed with a LGBT News site to spread his homophobia.

  25. Flapjack said…
    “Other christians manage not to get their knickers in a twist about what gay people get up to between the sheets, so I’m guessing it’s not an essential tenet of the faith.”

    My reply…
    First, I have never claimed to be a Christian and the word is not mentioned in the bible , but it is incumbent on all persons of morality to hate what is bad (Psalm 97:10) Men who lie with men have been defined as committing gross acts of badness as I have comprehensively pointed out with scriptures such as Le 18:22, 23; Ro 1:24-27; 1Co 6:9, 10) Therefore it IS essential to hate homosexuality.
    Ps. You are correct, it really ISN’T difficult!

    1. Why bother to read the New Testament using a literalist exergesis if you are not a Fundamentalist Christian!!!

      1. I apply literal interpretation where it ought to be applied. If you believe otherwise, which passage have I applied literally that I should have been applied metaphorically or otherwise?

        1. Now that is an interesting dilemma!!!
          I was wondering which areas of the old and new testament you think should be interpreted literally, rather than metaphorically

    2. Only if you cherrypick the bits you already agree with. Aparently the bit about not passing judgement on others or you may be judged yourself went straight over your head.

      1. I have not judged a single individual. Judging is determining which individuals will be punished. that is up to God not men
        I have defended my views against lies, misrepresentation and intolerance. The views I have expressed are all supported by scripture and it is easy to call it cherry picking. Much harder to prove it!
        Jesus did the same in Matthew 3:7 where he exposed the hypocrisy of the Pharisees….”But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?”
        Certainly , lies ,deceit and misrepresentation are to be exposed.
        I am happy to provide more accelerated moral classes tomorrow but for now I must retire.

        1. Keith
          .
          You appear to be suffering from selective amnesia. You have spent most of last week arguing on Pinknews that all homosexuals are paedophiles, and that there was research evidence to prove this.
          .
          I think this more than qualifies as a judgement.
          .
          When I pointed out how Paul Cameron’s research claiming to prove a link between homosexuality and paedophilia, has been universally discredited and ridiculed by the academic community. Your response was to recant on this, only to then reassert that it has not yet been proven that all homosexuals are paedophiles.

          1. You appear to be suggesting Cameron alone has researched this issue and that all who subscribe to it are aware of Cameron! Quite an assumption.

          2. Keith wrote
            .
            “You appear to be suggesting Cameron alone has researched this issue and that all who subscribe to it are aware of Cameron! Quite an assumption”
            .
            Keith, provide links to empirical studies, in reputable journals, which point to a link between homosexuality and Paedophila.
            .
            I will give you 24 hours to come up with evidence!!!

          3. selective amnesia – amnesia about particular events that is very convenient for the person who cannot remember…

          4. “Doctor” Paul Cameron, anti-gay hate industry charlatan, on the Phil Donahue Show –

          5. MEMO: from the “Gay Zebra finches thread”:

            **********************

            JohnK 2 days ago

            Keith
            .
            Drop the platitudes and respond like a Gentleman to my Paul Cameron links, unless you have no dignity and no honour?

            Keith 2 days ago

            To be honest I have no interest in defending that view since it will be an exercise in futility with articles posted back and forward all day with no absolute proof either way.

            For that reason, I am happy to concede that my statement that most homosexuals are paedophiles is unproven.

            **************************

        2. Accelerated moral classes?!? A Tad vainglorious aren’t we? Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.

          1. Accelerated moral classes?
            .
            Keith I think you will find that you are the one receiving a lesson in morals from us.
            .
            Your behaviour on this site is not only testimony to how you have no morals, but also how you display a limited understanding of the basics of moral action.
            .
            When you continue to spread your lies, misinformation and misunderstanding about LGBT people, you reveal that your moral code is little more than a crude expression of homophobic hatred.

    3. PS, by your definition there’s no such thing as a christian, only people who happen to believe chapter and verse of the bible and site it as the primary source of their moral code.
      It’s semantic hairsplitting and not very convincing.

      1. Flapjack
        .
        Thanks for that insightful analysis. This sort of highlights the issue of why Keith is so embarrassed or ashamed of identifying as a Christian, despite adopting the literary posturing of a Fundamentalist Christian

        1. JohnK – I have to admit this is a first for me too… A christian fundamentalist who uses the “No true Scotsman” fallacy on themselves.

          1. Anybody that calls themself a Christian is attaching themselves to a vast army of ciontradictory teachings and falsehood no contained in the bible. I uas the bible alone as my authority. You may contend with my words but please do not ascribe a belief system to me which I have said I am no part of and is not mentioned in the bible. It is desperation!

          2. Flapjack – ironic I agree.
            Although revealing himself as a lone wolf is hardly surprising, how could such an extremist individual function in any social group.

    4. That is NOT the way to read the Bible. Mohammedans believe that the Koran is the absolute word of God dictated to Mohammed and absolutely and correctly retailed by him to those who wrote it down. Christians believe that the Bible is the word of God filtered through the fallible (and prejudiced or ignorant of modern science) minds of men and therefore the Bible has to give way to new knowledge such as that about sexuality, genetics, witchcraft, psychology, engineering, physics, astronomy, and so on.

      The idea that because the Bible condemns or lauds something then that something is “a gross act of badness” or even a very good thing is just risible to most Christians. God gave us brains and the means to apply our brains and it is through the discoveries, and philosophies, that our brains have found, and thought about, down the ages that we Christians base our interpretation of Christ’s message – of universal love and brotherhood – not on some pharisaical, reading of some verse or other.

      1. The tremendous psychological discoveries of the 20th century – say, the Kinsey Report – can be attached, as extended revelation, to the word of God as it is found in Scriptures, and can certainly enhance the spiritual experience of the faithful.

        Am I reading you correctly, JohnMJ?

        1. One could put it that way, Jonpol, but many don’t like the idea of extended revelation but prefer the concept of modified, or rational, belief. That is to say that provable discoveries or sound philosophies will change the exact nature of belief – the detailed minutiae – but will leave untouched Christ’s great message of love and forgiveness and likewise leave untouched the idea of His death as the final sacrifice.

          Keith appears to be a Biblical literalist and that position is usually accompanied by some other very strange and superstitious beliefs. Biblical literalists are not Christians, of course, because they don’t worship the triune God but instead they worship the book, the Bible, and elevate it above all else. The Bible has become their Baal, their Mammon, their golden calf which they have erected in place of God and in order to keep Christ’s message out of their lives. Real Christians have no truck with the Biblical literalists’ nonsense and embrace new knowledge willingly.

          1. “Modified or rational belief”… mmmm

            Has a distinctive neo-Thomistic ring to it, although the creative genius of Augustine of Hippo did arrive at the conclusion that when science and religious dogma collide, a healthy religious institution should weigh things carefully before condemning and persecuting in the name of God.

            The case of Galileo comes to mind.

            More contemporary and relevant issues would include evolution, birth control, women’s rights, abortion, infallibility, divorce, silencing dissent, euthanasia, gay liberation, stem cell research, and the separation of church and state in a pluralistic society.

          2. “Biblical literalists are not Christians…”

            It follows that a biblical literalist is not targeted by so-called “christianophobia”, whatever that is.

    5. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 7:42am

      Guess thats the difference, you spend you life hating because we spend ours loving.

  26. What’s with all this ranting about God? U do know that he’s just as mythical and palpabale as Santa Claus or the tooth fairy.

    FACT:
    There is no god…
    There is no Santa…
    There is no Toothfairy…

    I too was upset when I initially discovered that all of the above are fictional… especially when everyone around me was forcing me to believe a lie..

    1. Unfortunately our new best friend Keith, who informs us he is an enlightened educator (just as well, we’d never have guessed otherwise), has mistaken this site for one where his proselytising would be either welcome or useful.

  27. George Broadhead 24 Aug 2011, 9:13am

    John C wrote:

    “Secularism is the only way to solve hate crimes:

    Secularism combats the influence of religion on governments, ensuring that human rights always come before religious rights, fighting the massive exemptions religious bodies demand – and are sometimes granted – from discrimination laws that everyone else is subject to.”

    Spot on! This is why it is so important to support the
    Campaign for a Secular Europe march and rally in London on Saturday 17 September 2011.

    1. Freedom to practice and follow a religion IS a human right (see ECHR and HRD) so how can human rights come BEFORE religious rights????

    2. Hate is not a crime. Many people hate murder, incest , stealing , bestiality, , and immorality. People should hate those things

      1. Keith
        .
        Hate is a crime if you use it to incite hatred.
        Your presence on Pinknews in which you are attempting to spread lies and misinformation (All homosexuals are paedophiles), is an act of incitment to hatred!!!

        1. Incitement to hatred is a crime (the haterd needs to manifest itself in violence or disorder) but as I CORRECTLY said, hatred is NOT a crime neither are my comments on here evn approaching what you imply. You have the freedom to promote immorality and I have the freedom to condemn it. Human rights are a bitch ain’t they?

          1. If you are serious in your belief that you are not inciting hatred on pinknews.
            .
            Provide the following information about yourself
            .
            1. Your UK county of residence
            .
            2. Your occupation.
            .
            3. Your age and gender
            .
            4. Your real name
            .
            If you cannot provide the following information, it is clear that you are not prepared to have your real identiy associated with what you are posting on pinknews, and this is a testimony to your guilt about your incitment to hatred.

          2. Ian Townson 29 Aug 2011, 3:19pm

            Keith: Goodness me. What a pedantic person you are. However you are correct. Hate in and of itself is not a crime but the consequences of hate can be. For example. The hatred of homosexuality has led to the murder, beatings, a torture and imprisonment of homosexuals. Not to mention insulting behaviour.

  28. John K said@
    I have not defined myself as a lone wolf. there are plenty of people that accept the bible but not religion.
    Jesus said in Matt 7:14..”.But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”
    I hope that resolves your misunderstanding.

    1. And this is relevant to this discussion because …?

    2. Keith, how is this relevant to a debate about, “Calls for East London to react to homophobic incidents”
      .
      Do you live in London?
      .
      Do you live in the East London?

      1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 1:27pm

        Agreed. I’m getting pissed off with it. I accept we will have homophobes but what I can’t accept it’s PinkNews reluctance to deal with them and allowing them to disrupt and try and stop us debating in a rational, sometimes irrational, manner.
        -
        This is clearly the intention.
        -
        Had this been a Christian site or ‘Bible’ site and we had made such abusive comments there is no way those sites would continuously allow such abuse.

        1. Jock S. Trap 24 Aug 2011, 1:33pm

          I don’t need to come to a LGBTQ News Site for LGBT and it’s supporters (and no so supporters) and constantly be told I’m immoral, on a par with incest, paedos, bestiality etc, we get enough of that in life.
          -
          Knowing when to draw the line PinkNews when it comes to homophobes and not allowing them to bully your readers. Showing your loyal readers a bit of respect in knowing when someone like Keith is going to far. Yes we’ve all heard it before but is it right that someone can completely hijacked most stories with ‘bible talk’, how ‘immoral’ we are and how it is right to hate us? I don’t think so.
          -
          Enough is enough.
          -
          My loyalty is wanning which is a shame since I coming here was helping me.

          1. I know what you mean.

            I used to read this rag, but no more.

            And I will advise as many of my friends as possible not to read it any more.

            It is no longer an LBGT site for LBGT people.

            Its is now just an excuse for bigots to rant, and the editors allow it.

      2. It seems to me that the narrow door that leads to life was one of the many concepts picked up by the Hebrews while they were captives in Egypt and forced to build pyramids in which narrow hidden slits in the stones would lead to the burial chamber, i.e. eternal life.

        But I can’t imagine how that ties in with East London unless the Gay Pride Parade is thought to be a narrow entrance into a more fulfilled gay life.

        Concepts and symbols are so much fun, innit.

        1. Even by the standards on here that was a pretty poor attempt at watering down Jesus’ illustrations.
          Jesus said that because the Jews as a nation rejected him, God would reject their corrupted form of worship. (Matthew 23:33–24:2) However, he indicated that those who want to worship God acceptably would have to belong to an organized group. He told his followers: “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” (John 13:35) A disciple of Christ who did not associate with his fellow believers could hardly show them love. In fact, Jesus plainly stated that there are only two religious paths. One he described as a “broad and spacious” road that leads “off into destruction.” By contrast, he said: “Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading to life, and few are the ones that will find it.”—Matthew 7:13, 14.

          1. @Keith
            .
            “Calls for East London to react to homophobic incidents”
            .
            What are you views on this thread?

        2. From an architectural point of view, it is true that a wide path into the center of a pyramid would lead to destruction. Makes perfect sense when the weight of the stones above the corridor are taken into account.

          One does wonder how so many of the sayings attributed to him are contradictory, as if Jesus were a fictional superstar used by gifted storytellers to bring forgiveness, hope, love and inner peace in troubled times, as if people were being told what they needed to hear in different sets of circumstances, much as the gods and heroes of the Greek pantheon were used to make sense of the world.

          How people like David Koresh, the Phelps family and others like them could interpret the gospel message as isolation and hatred, an us-versus-them attitude, indicates the failure of so-called enlightened teachers to reconcile the negative and positive aspects of their own personalities.

          A drop of honey will attract more bees than a cupful of vinegar.

          Good luck to East London Prid€e.

  29. :@ John K
    I have stated my views on the topic about 18 posts from the beginning. It is heartening hat you consider my views relevant!

    1. Discussing the bible in your 18 posts, is not telling us about your views on the topic of this thread!

      1. You read the wrong post (nosurprises there!). My first post on this thread outlines my view of the topic and does not mention the bible. It reads…
        “futile on this rissue since the only homosexuals that change do so because they want to, not because of protest.
        The same applies to protesting about homophobia. It is a futile endeavour. Homophobia is lawful.. It is a mental inclination. Furthermore, the majority of those accused of homophobia are falsely accused since they do not have an “irrational fear of homosexuals”. Their views can be rationalized using scripture, they are not in ‘fear of the ‘homosexual’ but rather they abhor homosexuality and homosexual practices.
        Marching to change these views is futile and unwarranted since people have a legal right to determine theThose that wish to demonstrate against homosexuality should do so peacefully and within the law. It undermines their position and jeopardizes future protest. Perosnally, I feel protest is ir own moral code , just a

  30. @John K
    What are your views on this thread?

    1. @Keith
      .
      My question was what are your views on the topic of this thread?

    2. My views are on post 18 though I see you have not stated your own views. Hoisted by your own petard?

      1. @Keith
        .
        My question again, was what are your views on the topic of this thread?

  31. John K reveals his scant yet amusing understanding of law….
    If you are serious in your belief that you are not inciting hatred on pinknews.
    .
    “Provide the following information about yourself
    .
    1. Your UK county of residence
    .
    2. Your occupation.
    .
    3. Your age and gender
    .
    4. Your real name
    .
    If you cannot provide the following information, it is clear that you are not prepared to have your real identiy associated with what you are posting on pinknews, and this is a testimony to your guilt about your incitment to hatred.”

    My reply….
    Failure to provide the following personal information will reveal that you were a participant in the recent riots…
    1. Your UK county of residence
    .
    2. Your occupation.
    .
    3. Your age and gender
    .
    4. Your real name

    .

    1. @Keith
      .
      I am not the one inciting homophobic hatred
      .
      Keith we are trying to establish, whether or not you really believe that you are inciting homophobic hatred on pinknews.
      .
      Keith since you will not provide the above information, I take this response as testimony to your guilt!!
      .

  32. Keith wrote
    .
    “John K reveals his scant yet amusing understanding of law….”
    .
    Keith, tell us more about your understanding of English Law
    .
    Also, tell us why are you are afraid of revealing information about yourself, if you are so sure that your posts could not be used against you legally?

    1. I know there is no such offence of “incitement to homophobic hatred”. The closest offence would be “incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.”
      What you have done is reveal your ignorance by ‘creating’ an offence that does not exist and fabricating a lie in that I am guilty of incitement to hatred.
      Here is a FACT. People have the right of religious expression, which is what my comments fall under.
      Any uillegal content posted here is prosecutable under cyber law, by which my details can be obtained from my ISP.
      I feel you are clutching at straws as nobody is really that dense!

      1. So provide the above information about yourself, if you have nothing to fear!

        1. I have reported you for this post . Also, nofurther comments of yours will receive a response from me. The report reads as follows..

          “This poster is poster harrassing. making false accusations of criminality and seeking personal information about a fellow poster”

          1. So, you are now throwing a tantrum becasue I have exposed your guilt? . . .

      2. Incitement to hatred of a person based on one of the protected characteristics, including religion and sexual orientation, is an offence.
        ______

        So yes, a lot of what you say on these threads appears to be expressing your own hatred for the purposes of influencing other people to adopt your views, so that they change their sinful ways. And that, Keith, is the same as inciting people to adopt your views. And your views are that you “despise homosexuality”. Explain to me how ‘despising’ is different to ‘hating’ and I might agree with you; right now though I’d say you are a text book definition of an offender because you are 1. inciting people to 2. hate themselves and others due to 3. their sexuality. JohnK’s accusation appears to be quite well founded, in my opinion.

        1. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 12:13pm

          Correct, sven.
          -
          I’m getting so pissed off now that I’m on the last straw of patience. If PinkNews continues to fail to act against homophobia within these threads I will cease to come here. I’m sick of having to trail through comments to find the ones debating the subject and I don’t need to be continuously told I am wrong while I’m trying to debate.
          -
          It’s time to show your readers some respect, the respect they deserve.
          -
          We have every right to stand up against homophobes and bigots but at some point PinkNews must take responsibility and provide a service we, the community you provide, can use and use safely without ongoing discrimination.
          -
          Stories that are relevent and up for being debated are being lost because Bigots wish to roam freely dishing their hatred and why they have the right to be it. What about Our right to debate?

        2. Another person wih zero grasp of the law. Hardly worth a lengthy rebuttal.
          Despise is used to show my severe contempt for homosexuality, or hatred if you like. this view is not unlawful despite you amusing protestation.

          1. @Keith
            .
            Still behaving like a scolded and petulent child then?
            .

          2. Keith,

            There IS no God.. you’re rants are very funny thou… Are you happy in life? Doesn’t seem so.. i hope you find peace and happiness.

            I don’t think he is “inciting hatred”.. Is there an ignore button? that would be really useful. He’s like a broken record.. reminds me of the church (same fictional stories, every year)…

          3. @john Coll
            .
            Keith is part of the Exgay movement, this is why he hates himself, and is very disturbed and unhappy.

          4. RumpleStiltSkin 29 Aug 2011, 5:14pm

            I’m sorry to hear that you have no penis.

            Boo Hoo……

  33. Sophie Hawthorne 25 Aug 2011, 1:15pm

    Firstly, I refuse to judge someone on their race. This is my story. I am a woman with a transsexual history. I own a house near the University in Stoke on Trent, it used to be my home of 25 years. The area has a majority population of Muslims mainly of Pakistani origin. I lived in a state of mutual friendship and respect with my neighbours regardless of race, culture or religion, or so I thought.
    Immediately I began my transition, possibly one of the most vulnerable times in my life, men whom I had considered my friends turned on my in the most horrible, offensive and brutal manner. The only common denominator I could distinguish was the fact that they were all Pakistani Muslim men. In the end the threats of violence and physical abuse became so unbearable that I felt staying in my home was untenable. I left causing my great hardship both emotionally and financially.

  34. Sophie Hawthorne 25 Aug 2011, 1:26pm

    I still own the house but am too afraid to return to it. Stoke on Trent City Council are trying to take the only real monitory asset I own by compulsory purchase under the guise of their empty homes policy.
    I am so traumatised by my experience that I now too afraid to deal with anyone who is a Muslim as I feel that Islam prevent followers from dealing with me in an unbiased manner.

    1. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 2:36pm

      The way you have been treated is appalling. It’s ironic some of the people harassing you are Pakistani in origin given that the Pakistan Supreme Court has recently passed a law protecting the rights of trans people. Is there any way you can appeal to the local council to have these people removed from the area? Neighbours from hell can be evicted. I presume the police offered you no protection at all.

  35. The Ex-gay movement is an insidous
    fragmented but small connection of interest groups in the UK

    Below is a link an organisation (Exgay watch) committed to challenging and monitoring Ex-gay activism and recruitment
    .
    http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/media-inquiries/

    1. Excellent link, JohnK…

      This is the link to the Home page, I think:

      http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/

      1. Thanks Jonpol
        .
        I think this organisationis is very good at trying to challenge the damage caused by Ex-Gay militant extremists such as Keith

  36. @Ian Townson who said…”You cannot separate homosexuality from homosexuals. The relationship is symbiotic and inextricably linked”

    My reply…
    Yes you can and furthermore the bible does. If we apply your logic though you are condoning acts of pedophilia since “The relationship is symbiotic and inextricably linked” as you say!
    My point throughout is that immoral urges must be controlled , even where they are not unlawful urges. Incest and bestiality are lawfully practiced in many places . Does this mean they are moral? Of course not! A greater guide (conscience) tells us otherwise. A well trained conscience also tells us that homosexuality is uunnatural and immoral.

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 28 Aug 2011, 6:52pm

      No Keith.

      Only your bible tells you so.

      Fortunately humanity has moved on since that hate filled tome you continually vomit at everyone was produced and re-produced over the 2000 years since your alleged messiah was sprouted out of his ( alleged ) virgin mother.

      Pedophilia is a disgusting act whereby a mature adult in tune with their morals actively seeks to abuse and rape a non consenting child.

      Homosexuality is by consent of two adults.

      How dare you compare homosexuality which is a state whereby a mature adult fully aware of their sexuality engages with another adult fully aware of their sexuality.

      Your so called moral book is awash with your hateful abrahamic god calling on death to children, women and countries.

      You know! Your Jesus never encountered a Cross until people like you nailed him onto one.

      You make me sick,

      And I work as a healer for a living. ( Heart Surgeon )

      1. You are another one that is confusing child abuse with pedophilia. Pedophilia is legal. It is a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. The attraction is in the mind and is perfectly lawful., a bit like wanting to murder or assault but not actually carrying it out.
        Moreover, I have not compared homosexuality to pedophilia except to say that they are both immoral and both sexual inclinations.
        Would you care to answer whether you believe that any sexual act between consenting adults must be moral? If yes, I will ask if this applies to father and son incest.
        Regarding making you ‘sick’, the bible says…2 Peter 2:22King James Bible
        “But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”
        Finally, as a physicuian, you should be familiar with the mdeath and misery caused by unclean sexual acts and promiscuity.

      2. By the way you sanctimonious fake, since when has a surgeon used the title Dr?
        Also, what is it with the medical community whereby they must insert their title before their name every tiime.
        Since I am a qualified pilot, I will now insist that you address me as Captain keith!

        1. Dr Robin Guthrie 28 Aug 2011, 9:04pm

          I see.

          You are a pilot now in your delusional mind.

          You must then be aware that your license can be withdrawn, given your as internet
          recorded delusional babbling s.

          My PhD is in Information Technology. Hence Dr. Title.

          My current job is none of your business.

          I, like every other gay person on this forum find it fun to tease ill educated
          bible bashing bigots like you.

          My mother bore me. I exist. Born onto this plane just like you.

          However. I do not spend my life hating others as you do.

          At this moment, I am nursing a white dove in my living room that
          crashed into my window and awaiting a vet to help it out.

          Meanwhile you and your viscous bible is spilling poison.

          So fukc off.

          1. A pilots license is for life and cannot be withdrawn. It can only be restricted. At any rate. I put in the hours, money and effort, not to mention the groundschool and medical checks.
            I will hence forth be addressed as Captain Keith!
            I reserve the right to hate but I confess I sometimes struggle to muster up the enthusiasm to hate that which i do not personally witness (rectal sex , etc)
            Respect for the dove thing though. I would do the same..
            My visccous (sic) bible beats any moral code or holy book out there. Ignorance and misunderstanding cause people to believe it is contradictory. To that end, I am happy to answer your questions.
            Happy Landings!
            Captain keith

      3. Obviously, the danger in using the bible as the one and only moral guide is that it lets people think that they have infallible backing for their fallible prejudices.

        In reality , the gay-rights battle isn’t freestanding.

        It’s tied into other debates about freedom, religion, rationality, the role of government, the justification of moral norms, and so on.

        It’s not only our conclusions that matter, but also how we arrive at them.

        1. Moral codes are like highway codes.One is all you need. More than one and you have chaos.

          1. Dr Robin Guthrie 28 Aug 2011, 10:15pm

            I could not imagine for one second, living a life so full of misguided hatred as you do.

            I feel so sorry for you, wasting the one and only life you have creating angst and hatred
            for others.

            You have never known love have you?

            But of course. No doubt your sh!tty book promises you an afterlife.

            That is why you are dangerous. Screwing up everything in this one in order that
            you get to your next.

            Not much different from 911 is it.

            You sir, are poison.

            A poison that needs to be removed from humanity.

            A boil that needs to be lanced.

            You and everything you you stand for is why this planet is screwed

            “A pilots license is for life and cannot be withdrawn”

            I’m pretty sure the NAA and the FAA would disagree.

            However we all know that you are not a pilot. Your history is all over these forums.

            You are just a sad man full of hate with a bible.

          2. Humanists believe that we should review moral codes in the light of developments in society and human knowledge.

            …and the same applies to highway codes…

          3. Jock S. Trap 29 Aug 2011, 8:39am

            Excellent comment Dr Robin. Thank you for putting it so well.

    2. Ian Townson 29 Aug 2011, 3:55pm

      Keith: All sacred texts are works written by human beings and are open to the usual historians’ questions: when were they written, by whom were they written, for what purpose were they written, what ideologies influenced their writers, are they factual accounts or fictional narratives, how reliable are they as historical sources informing us about the times in which they were written and so on. Simply asserting, in an uncritical way, that this received wisdom is the word of God or Gods for me is highly questionable and leads people into dogmatic insistence that within these holy texts lies the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I get my moral precepts and ethical standards from elsewhere and they seem to push me in the direction of treating other human beings with respect and dignity. Try that great engine of progress – Humanism. It doesn’t hurt.

      1. Humanists…

        …are atheists and agnostics who make sense of the world using reason, experience and shared human values.

        We take responsibility for our actions…

        and base our ethics on the goals of human welfare, happiness and fulfillment.

        We seek to make the best of the one life we have…

        by creating meaning and purpose for ourselves, individually and together.

    3. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 3:04pm

      Your pedantic logic is faulty. To say that the relationship between homosexuality and homosexuals is symbiotic and inextricaly linked is a statement about the integration of someones sexual orientation with the rest of their personality. If you hate one you hate the other. Why did you think I was condoning acts of paedophilia?

  37. Pinknews. Owned by:

    LGBT Interbank Forum

    PinkUnlimited Head Office:
    PinkUnlimited, Wisteria, Cavendish House, 369 Burnt Oak Broadway Edgware Middlesex HA8 5AW.

    Organised by the LGBT Interbank Forum, Inside & Out is specifically designed to help lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender undergraduates learn more about careers in the investment banking industry. On this site, you’ll learn more about the huge range of opportunities on offer in our rapidly-changing industry. You can also find out what the banks are doing to attract more LGBT applicants and hear from some LGBT professionals already working in the field.

    They do not give 1 blind arse about the LGBT community.

    Only the buck.

  38. @Nurse Robin Guthrie.
    Are you sure you want to be a surgeon. The hippocratic oath demands that you exercise objectivity and impartiality. I am not sure that the scalpel would not ‘accidentally’ slip should you find yourself operating on a ‘religious freak’.

    1. Dave North 29 Aug 2011, 7:16am

      Go Fvck yourself nutter.

    2. Jock S. Trap 29 Aug 2011, 9:30am

      Funny how religious people project and treat everyone by their own immoral behaviour.

    3. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 11:03pm

      Keith: A surgeon would not ask about a person’s religion before operating. Why would that be relevant to the success or otherwise of the operation?

      1. religious beliefs re part of the consent form and sometimes impact the manner in which surgery is conducted. Nurse Robin Guthrie will confirm this

        1. Ian Townson 2 Sep 2011, 12:24pm

          How does this impact on the way surgery is conducted. What did Robin Guthrie say about this?

          1. Some religious people require bloodless surgery for instance.
            Nurse Robin Guthrie (alleged heart surgeon) should know all about it!

  39. We can give full recognition to the importance of moral values, of kindness and compassion, fairness and justice, honesty and integrity, not as external obligations to which we must conform but as qualities which enrich our lives and our relationships with others.

    Humanists like to refer to ‘shared human values’.

    We need nothing more, and we can act to promote these values for the benefit of everyone.

    1. Are ‘humanists’ of the belief that any sexual act between consenting partners must be moral or is morality more ‘fluid’ than ‘constant’ amongst humanists, in that each may decide himself what is moral?

      1. You are getting boring. Go away hateful little man..

      2. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 11:41pm

        Keith: I imagine sexual acts between consenting partners (you forgot the word ‘adult’ before partners?) is really their business and not ours. Sexual acts are neither moral nor immoral. They either work or they don’t depending on the quality of the sexual encounter and the satisfactlion the people concerned get out of it. If it doesn’t qujite work out then there is always room for improvement. May our joys be many and our sorrows be few.

        1. So in the case odf say a father and son having incestuous sodomy, you do not believe this to be immoral or anyones business?

          1. Ian Townson 1 Sep 2011, 1:46pm

            Keith: Why would it be immoral or any of our business so long as it is between consenting adults? The operative word is consenting which preludes the use of force or coercion in which case we would be straying into the territory of rape.

        2. You Can be Good Without God. :)

          The myth that only people who believe in the power of a supernatural being are morally superior has persisted for far too long.

          Humanism holds that the development of morality, of a sense of right and wrong, is fundamental to the development of the human species.

          Without developing a rule of reciprocal altruism (otherwise known as ‘the golden rule), chances are we wouldn’t have made it this far.

          Instead of tormenting ourselves with abstract scenarios, we would do well to concentrate on more relevant and concrete issues.

          For example, any thinking person would agree that our one and only planet is presently overloaded.

          If we believe in the inherent dignity of humanity, is it not our moral duty to do everything in our power to assure the survival of the human species?

  40. Humanists believe that we should review moral codes in the light of developments in society and human knowledge. :)

    1. So do you all share the same morals in that case and if there is a difference of opinion, how is it decided who is right Say (abortion for instance)…do you all convene and have a resolution/vote??

      1. Ian Townson 30 Aug 2011, 11:47pm

        Keith: No need to convene anything. Humanists trust individuals to make up their own minds and there is plenty of literature, advice, people around for them to consult to help them reach their own conclusions rather than simply be a slave to one-size-fits-all dogma.

        1. In that case, ‘humanism’ has no value since no framework exists to establish absolute right or wrong of a matter. What is the point of it? A humanist could argue from a humanist point of view that consensual incest between a father and son is not immoral. Who is to say otherwise, another humanist? According to you they are both correct since they “make up their own minds”. A hfallacious ethic to follow if ever there was one! I am sure that plenty of humanists are opposesd to gay marriage, homosexuality stem cell research, abortion etc etc. and humanism cannot unite such ones or
          provide a moral code whereby all agree.

        2. But one size does and should fit all. If something is bad or immoral(say recreational drug use), it is not good. You cannot have half the people saying yes and the other half no. that merely fragments society and provides no mora guideance for the next generation, as we have witnessed.

          1. Ian Townson 1 Sep 2011, 2:13pm

            Keith: There any number of moral precepts and ethical standards to be found in humanist publications, groups and practices. All of them are designed to treat human beings with dignity and respect in which case they do not need to be ‘absolutist’. These are just as capable of providing moral guidance for future generations as any other. Google a few websites and find out for yourself.

        3. I agree, Ian, that Humanism does trust individuals to make up their own minds.

          In fact, Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives.

          It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities.

          It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality.

          1. Some humanists have made their own minds up that recreational hard drug use is moral and good, not to mention abortion,sexual promiscuity, polygamy, consensual incest, .alcholism
            Good system you have eh? Since all the aforementioned are legal in many lands and widely practiced amongst those that determine their own morality (as you endorse), on what account can you condemn these practices?
            do you see that humanism and detachment from bible standards is the reason society is self destructing?

        4. Right on, Ian.

          Also, there are moral dilemmas today that did not exist in previous centuries.

          As firm believers in democracy, we are called on to make the world a better place by bringing abstract scenarios down to earth with rational evidence and positive action:

          http://www.avaaz.org/en/australian_carbon_price/?cl=1243516847&v=10108

          Again, and to return to the topic, I think the evidence weighs in favor of Peter’s anti-hate slogans in the East End.

  41. In an attempt to bring this thread on track, I’d like to quote Peter Tatchell’s comment posted above:

    Peter Tatchell 22 Aug 2011, 6:47pm

    I suggest that the East London LGBT Pride theme is: “Unite against all hate” or “East London United” or “Gays & Muslims united against hate”.

    We want to the event to be inclusive and unifying. Black, Asian, Muslim and Jewish organisations should be invited to participate and to provide speakers for the post-march rally.

    This rally should explicitly oppose all prejudice and hate, including racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, misogyny, transphobia and the victimisation of Muslim people.

    We should specifically advise that the EDL and BNP are not welcome and should not attend. If they turn up, we should liaise with the police to remove them. We want nothing to do with their politics of bigotry and division.”

    Carry on, Peter :)

    1. You forgot to add Christianophobia, but I guess that is because you are bigotted against the religious views. What do you think should be done to counter the rising sheer hatred, bigotry and Christianophobia directed towards godly persons of religious morality?

      1. Please enumerate the ways ‘Godly [ie Christian?] persons of religious morality’ in the UK are subject to unlawful or criminal behaviour. I haven’t as yet heard of Christians in the UK being beaten up for being Christian, or their meeting-houses being defaced or attacked, or their cemeteries desecrated.
        .
        As you have pointed out elsewhere, ‘phobia’ means an irrational fear or aversion; many people’s hostility towards organised religion is wholly rational.

        1. ..ofc…entirely rational…

          1. As are religious views of homosexuality!

          2. Jock S. Trap 30 Aug 2011, 8:46am

            “As are religious views of homosexuality”
            -
            Actually no it’s not because it’s a case of a chosen religious lifestyle being discriminating towards how others are born.
            -
            LGBTQI people and our lifes should never be up for debate. All should have the right to be treated decently and respectfully.
            -
            End of, creep!

        2. i did not say they are subject to criminal behaviour. I charge the same against the homosexual community that the homosexual community charge against those with religious views. That is to say…
          incitement to hatred, bigotry amnd Christianophobia (the moral equivalent of homophobia). There is no justification for such irrational hatred of people.

          1. Jock S. Trap 30 Aug 2011, 8:47am

            And yet your full of it… hate and sh!t!

          2. Ian Townson 2 Sep 2011, 12:51pm

            Keith: or Islam, Judaism, tribal animism, buddhism, hinduism, shintoism etc. Don’t forget these.

  42. Also on the same date, PN published the following article written by Peter:

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/08/22/comment-east-london-needs-a-show-of-pride/

    :)

  43. We can give full recognition to the importance of moral values, of kindness and compassion, fairness and justice, honesty and integrity, not as external obligations to which we must conform but as qualities which enrich our lives and our relationships with others.

    Humanists like to refer to ‘shared human values’.

    We need nothing more, and we can act to promote these values for the benefit of everyone.

    1. Sounds like a recipe for confusion and ambiguity. Inevitably, there will be differences of opinion as to who has the right moral values and who does not in the ‘humanist community’. When these differemnces occur (as they will), who is to say which opinion is the correct one on issues such as abortion, recreational drugs, smoking , promisuity to name but a few?
      PS . I have not witbnessed any homesty and integrity here. i have been sworn at, death wishes,etc. There has been incitement to criminal behaviour such as computer hacking of legitimate businesses. Also, incitement to break criminal laws regarding homosexualiity acts in countries where they are not permitted and as for your moral values, there are no morals, anything goes as long as there is adult consent! How will that benefit society. It has and will continue to perpetuate AIDs HPV Hepatitis and other loathsome preventable diseases that kill even innocent babies.
      http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/936.aspx?CategoryID=54&SubCategoryID=

      1. Jock S. Trap 30 Aug 2011, 8:49am

        Get lost loser, we’re not up for debate. The story is, Not our lifes so fvck off.

  44. :)

    Humanists believe that we should review moral codes in the light of developments in society and human knowledge.

    1. So which consensual sex act/s amongst adults do humanists believe to be immoral and are you all in agreement on these?

    2. And when two humanists disagree on the issue (ie.father and son consensual adult incest), which is right and why?

      1. Ian Townson 2 Sep 2011, 12:57pm

        Keith: the yardstick is the concept of harm. If the actions of any human being cause others to be treated without dignity and respect then it is harmful and wrong. I am not sure when the incest taboo came into operation. It hasn’t always been there. I will have to look into this further. No doubt this will necessitate delving into anthropology. I do know than incest was acepted in the past by certain tribal communities but my knowledge of this is limited.

        1. So is it wron for a father and son to have consensual incest as there is no harm or no victim?

          1. Ian Townson 3 Sep 2011, 8:16pm

            Why not?

    3. Intentions, motives, character traits and people involved in a moral dilemma are to be considered In order for a moral judgement to ring true; otherwise it is a phantasy.

      For example, suppose that three hijackers, mid-flight, take control of a passenger plane, 200 holidaymakers aboard.

      The hijackers’ intentions are unclear; radio communication is not at its best.

      As the plane circles, the hijackers demand political asylum; yet evidence suggests they could be terrorists, about to crash the plane in rush-hour London, with thousands of lives lost or maimed.

      Should the military shoot down the plane, while it flies over a heath?

      True, there would be the death of innocent holidaymakers, the hijackers (who may indeed be escaping a repressive regime); but the risk of greater tragedy would certainly be avoided.

      Using *only the Bible* as a moral guide, what would you do, Captain K.?

      1. Not quite the answer I was hoping for. Obviously a diversion.
        I will play along in anticipation of an eventual answer.
        A person that truly follows bible standards would never be in such a position as they would refuse military service as did the early Christians in the first century…
        Isaiah 2:4; Matthew 23:8-10; Romans 12:17, 18)

        1. Thank you for proving my point.

          1. What was your point/

  45. We can give full recognition to the importance of moral values, of kindness and compassion, fairness and justice, honesty and integrity, not as external obligations to which we must conform but as qualities which enrich our lives and our relationships with others.

    1. More ambiguity and meaningless drivel? I asked you a specific question and you cannot answer Never mind, back to the mire for you.

      1. On the contrary, you know as well as I do that there is nothing specific about your question; it is purely abstract, surely you see that.

        Perhaps if you were to set the scene with meat and bones (no pun intended), then you could use your brains to resolve your moral dilemma, take the responsibility for your decision, and become a better person for it, hopefully dropping your need for a dangerous belief in the supernatural.

        Also, there are a number of interesting questions which you have neglected to answer.

        1. …or cannot answer..

        2. My question could not be more specific and you could not be more evasive.
          Please highlight which areas you would like me to clarify in order for you to answer. The question was…
          Is it wrong (immoral) for a father and son to have consensual incest as there is no harm or no victim?

          1. The question is formulated differently each time it is asked.

            Still, the terms are abstract because the father and son are beyond space and time, in a vacuum. This is a phantasy, and as such it does not appeal to everyone.

            These characters need meat and bones, a time and place in which they exist(ed), intentions and motives to bring them down to earth.

        3. I have answered everything and have not knowingly avoided a reasonable question. Which question/s do you feel I have not answered? I will take the opportunity here. I ask also that you answer my previous ‘specific’ question.

          1. I distinctively remember asking how old is the earth.

            As for your question, in my opinion, it is getting the answer it deserves.

  46. Ian Townson said…
    “There any number of moral precepts and ethical standards to be found in humanist publications, groups and practices. All of them are designed to treat human beings with dignity and respect in which case they do not need to be ‘absolutist’. These are just as capable of providing moral guidance for future generations as any other. Google a few websites and find out for yourself.”
    This is an example of ambiguity and a flawed ethical policy.
    Morals must be absolute and constant otherwise they will vary from person to person.with no definitive answers.. Ie humanist A concludes incestuous sodomy between consenting adult father and son is moral. Humanist B deems this immoral. Who is correct? Also, if a humanist deems that homosexuality is immoral, is he correct or incorrect since according to your criteria he is the arbiter?

  47. I have tried for many days to ascertain which mauthority the homosexuals on here apply when deciding whether a sexual act is moral or immoral. Despite no small amount of evasion and abuse, I have determioned that the homosexuals on here generally believe that human beings are self determining on moral issues and each indivisdual may decide for himself what is right and wrong, moral and immoral.
    Hence, the homosexuals on here have no cause to take offence at those that deem homosexuality immorall since they themselves have made it clear that moral codes are set by each individual. that being the case, why should the homosexual brigade (who appear to sheare the contrary view that homosexuality is not immoral) seek to impose their own morals on others that hold opposing values, based on hygiene, cleanliness , health and godliness.

  48. @Ian Townson
    Regarding consensual incest you said…”Why would it be immoral or any of our business so long as it is between consenting adults?”
    Obviously from the point of divine law it is immoral but since you deem that it is not immoral, is there any consensual sexual act you deem to be immoral or do you not accept the concept? Do you think that the aforementioned should be allowed to occur in society?

    1. Ian Townson 3 Sep 2011, 8:34pm

      Who invented divine law and for what purpose? I oppose incest but not on moral grounds. I oppose it because of the likelihood of the abuse of power between younger and older members of a family. Also between male and female members in a society where females are unequal in status therefore more vulnerable to abuse. In either case coercion into unwanted sexual relationships may occur. How you could possibly know whether or not incestuous relationships are occuring in families without massively intruding into private lives I do not know.

      1. then your reasoning is inconsistent since if the act is consensual, how can it be an abuse of power. Also, you assume that no abuse of power can take place between non related persons say an older homosexual male with a younger impressionable (rent) boy!
        You are attempting to micro manage consensual sex to your own personal taste.
        Finally, are you opposed to consensual father and son sex where there is no risk of ‘power abuse’ and do you accept that this ‘power abuse ‘ can occur between non related homosexuals and indeed in any relationship, requiring an outright ban on sex, for fear of power abuse?

      2. There has been much abuse of power in the homosexual community that has been perpetrated amongst other homosexuls This means that yu are opposed to homosexuality on the grounds that it can create an abuse of power, right?
        http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22171

        1. Ian Townson 4 Sep 2011, 1:16am

          I notice you didn’t answer my question as you expect me to answer yours. In fact there are several points I raised and questions asked that you have avoided answering. I assume that either you haven’t got an answer or it is a deliberate evasion on your part. Your inquisition seems to stick to a narrow band of probing questions whilst avoiding wider issues that I have raised. I am quite prepared to answer the current points on the condition that you answer all the ones I raised with you in the past that you have failed to answer. You can find them easily enough by trawling back. By the way when you say “you are attempting to micro manage consensual sex to your own personal taste” do you mean to suggest that I have had or want incestuous sexual relations and that I approve of rule by the powerful over the powerless? Yes or no?

          Here’s the deal. If you don’t deal with past, unanswered observations and questions I will consider this correspondence with you to be closed.

          1. I don’t avoid questions. Since it is me versus everyone else, I often miss them. I will check and reply shortly

      3. “Who invented divine law and for what purpose?”
        Divine laws would obviously originate with God for the purpose of making transgression (from Gods perfect standards) manifest and introducing protection, justice and punishment.

        “How you could possibly know whether or not incestuous relationships are occuring in families without massively intruding into private lives I do not know.”
        I did not claim this information could be known and I don’t see the relevance. In my hypothetical scenario, the sex would be consensual and there would be no coercion (not that coercion itself is immoral as it occurs across the spectrum of relationships), Since you do not deem consensual incest immoral, would you support an exception in the law which allowed safe incest such as homosexual incest. If not why not? (potential for coercion is not sufficient reason to bar loving consenting adults since relationships universally carry this risk and it is not a factor considered in law)

  49. @Jonpol
    Scientists reckon the earth is 3-4 billion years old. Nobody knows for sure. Is that relevant?
    I perceive that you are unable to answer as to whether father and son consensual incest is immoral. Not a difficult question for one with a moral compass but since you have been evading it and agonizing over how to reply in the most ambiguous manner possible, my conclusion is that you actually condobne the practice, since you are reluctant to condemn it!

    1. You would conclude such a thing without a shred of evidence.

      1. The evidence is your lack of respone to the question/s on this issue.
        Please state here and now whether you condone consensual homosexual incest and if no, on which grounds?

  50. @Ian Townson

    “Why not?”

    I am asking you if it is wrong in your opinion for a father and son to have consensual incest. You answered “why not?” Are you saying that you don’t see any wrong?

    1. Ian Townson 4 Sep 2011, 12:46pm

      I have answered this question in another comment. Also the question was directed at you. What are your objections to incest?

      1. You said you don’t see it as immoral or moral. I asked whether you see it as wrong?
        My own objections to incest would be on biblical grounds.

        1. Please disregard my last post as I am confusing you with another poster. I recall that you suggested potential coercion as a factor. I pointed out the flaw with this argument, in that coercion can take place in any relationship across the spectrum, but coercion is neither illegal nor immoral. Also, my hypothetical scenario involved a ‘consenting’ adult incestuous liason between a father and son, therefore no coercion. In this scenarion, is it wron, sinful, immoral or acceptable in your opinion and do you believe an exception for such ones ought to be made in law?

          1. Ian Townson 5 Sep 2011, 9:54am

            Keith: As stated previously I am not confident that you are going to deal with all the points I raised in other communications with you especially the one questioning the provenance of the bible. Given that is the case I am now terminating this correspondence. It has been an interesting educational challenge jousting with you on various controversial topics but I don’t see any progress in this. No doubt, Mr. Domestos, you will carry on destroying germs and cleansing the world of what you perceive as moral pollution in your usual role of interrogator in the office of the holy inquisition. I will continue to fight for progress and the practice of thinking for ourselves rather than running for cover to the ‘received wisdom’ of fictitious biblical texts whether they be found in the New Testament, the Qu’ran or the Torah etc. I am now closing this communication and there will be no further comments.

  51. Just to put things in perspective these are crime statistics from the Metropolitcan police (not Andrew Gilligan) for Tower Hamlets.

    http://www.met.police.uk/crimefigures/boroughs/ht_month%20-%20mps.htm

    1. I meant to add that there are quadruple the number of racially and religiously motivated hate crimes in tower Hamlets compared to homophobic ones.

  52. Just to put things into perspective there are four times as many racially and religiously motivated attacks in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets as there are homophobic ones. See the reference below from the Metropolitcan police.

    http://www.met.police.uk/crimefigures/boroughs/ht_month%20-%20mps.htm

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
Tag Code: