I don’t care if he is a bloody Martian. His brand of christo-babble is dangerous and hurtful and should be dismissed as the anachronistic nonsense of a defunct age when people could not explain why the sun rose.
…an age when people had never heard of electricity, DNA, neuroscience, airplanes…and human rights..
Human rights being one they particularly do not seem to understand …
Equality legislation is always forcing them to like us, apparently. It’s hard to avoid the suspicion that they are projecting – they have an exclusively revealed truth that they would like to force on the rest of us if they could.
Apart from which, I hope he really isn’t ‘Brtain’s most inspirational black figure’. Just who was asked?
am sure is all hateful christains vote for him …… who know him why dont go back to Nigeria to do is witch hunt and yes am black man
The article fails to say for what he was voted for but only the why he should’nt have been…..
Religion and Homophobia item 1 of the week.
Ah so you are not watching me in particular …
Thats how it came across on your posts over the weekend …
Hope you are also counting the non-religious posts …
Wondering what the point is you are trying to prove, because like it or not – religion is something that affects gay people in one of three ways – either they themselves are religious, they find it interesting in a discursive sense or they find it aggravating or threatening …
Just because you do not share the religion or the interest does not mean a gay news site should not try and portray stories that affect relligious gay people or where religious people may impact on gay communities. In fact, to not have such articles would be to censor and prohibit a free press – and a responsible exercise in freedom of speech, is something I am sure we can all agree with …
I,m simply pointing out the number of problems caused by religions never ending prevalence in gay peoples lives, whether they are religous or not.
Lets call it a self study in god botherer watching.
May I steal that for a future tract on Church history?
I actually support you in most of your comments.
I actually think that there are many times that people such as Keith, etc etc bring risible and irrelevant religious commentary into stories on PN
Other people can bring some balanced debate, and thats interesting and I don’t believe we should dissuade that, in the interests of openness, honesty and transparency (which is after all what we seek from others).
Some stories are predisposed to religious comments in any event (for example this one).
I am neither religious nor a theist. My ideology is secular based, but that secularism in me strives for fairness – which means freedom of religion for those who want it.
It also means that god bothering and harassment by relgiious people is unwelcome.
um, Barack Obama opposes marriage equality as well.
Barack Obama congratulated New York state on the progression of equality when they introduced equal marriage – does not sound to me like someone who opposes same sex marriage …
His official position is that he has not yet made his mind up …. which I take to mean he is sitting on the fence for political expediency but personally errs on the side of supporting equal marriage ….
“Q: Define marriage. A: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman… Q: Would you support a constitutional amendment with that definition? A: No I would not. Because historically we have defined marriage in our constitution, it’s been a matter of state law” Fresh Copypasta from Obama :P
Here is some commentary from USA Today on 2 October 2011 that suggests Obama’s views on equal marriage are not as definitive as you suggest:
“But, as expected, Obama stopped short of endorsing gay marriage, saying only that “every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law.”
Obama has said his views on gay marriage are “evolving”, but for now he only supports civil union. Obama has acknowledged that public support for gay marriage is building. During a meeting with liberal bloggers last October, he said “it’s pretty clear where the trend lines are going.” Obama aides have given no indication of where the president’s evolution on gay marriage stands. And some gay rights advocates believe political considerations could keep Obama from publicly backing gay marriage until after the November 2012 election.”
I suspect we will see Obama publically supporting gay marriage after the next Presidential election (whether or not he wins).
How was this poll conducted? We are not told. Who got to vote? Just black people in London perhaps? I was certainly never made aware of this poll or given a chance to vote in it. How were they selected? By going round black-run churches and community centres possibly? No chance of skewing the results there! How was voting effected? An online poll maybe? Those are next to worthless. How well informed on the candidates were the people who got to vote? I’ve certainly never heard of this Irukwu man – I can’t imagine many other people have either.
And if there was a shortlist of 61 candidates to choose from and a very small sample size it really wouldn’t take much at all to get one person who nobody has ever heard of coming out on top – especially if he has a small coterie of followers dedicated to the task.
It really annoys me that people conduct these kinds of polls and don’t reveal anything of the methods used so we can’t check how worthwhile they really are.
It certainly would be helpful to know more about the poll.
I managed to find this info online:
Given the list of laudable candidates it is risible that Agu Irukwu was elected – particularly by such a landslide.
The poll appears, at face value, to have been manipulated by a religious element, which I would contend makes it unrepresentative of Londoners as a whole.
Who the hell cares anyway? Their beliefs are DYING… Get used to it folks.. The days of having everything your way are fading fast.. Pray to your gods and false idols… You’re gonna need ‘em… because you have nothing else going for you!
Wow! What a scary result, this surely must be a shot across the bows for all three major political parties as a warning to them how out of touch they are with the general population. If democracy is at it purports to be about the majority holding sway over the minorities then perhaps this drive for gay marriage should be halted immediately otherwise the likes of Irukwu will be getting more and more results like this.
After all if our 1971 London Gay Liberation Front Manifesto objective of ridding society of the model of the Nuclear family is to be realised, (because as it says in the manifesto it works against the interests of homosexuality see http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/glf-london.asp ), perhaps it’s time to be less overt and strident in how we go about changing society into the way we want it and not the way that straight people think it should be. After all last year’s National Statistics Office Survey which showed that only 1.3% of the population are gay was a real blow.
I smell a Troll….
I hardly think a poll of this nature in a newspaper is representative of UK feelings or even UK black feelings …
If anyone thinks this poll is relevant to political views, they clearly have no understanding of democracy, politics or opinion polls …
Nice try, to make it seem important – but this poll is obviously biased and irrelevant
Human rights and equality before the law are irrelevant to numbers and percentages, and letting majorities decide the fate of minorities is mob rule, not democracy.
And appeals to 40 year old apocalyptic pamphlets is scraping the barrel. 0/10.
Homophobes should avoid trying to use irony.
They still think it means ‘ironmogery’…
It has to be said that Churches with predominately black congregations – notably the Pentecostal – are ultra homophobic.
This is generally true but a gay-friendly church I used to be involved in organised a march against homophobic ordinances in Florida 30 years ago and they were welcomed and supported by a black pentecostal church who knew that uncritical acceptance of apparent Biblical endorsement of homophobia was as oppressive as accepting its precepts on slavery. It was a startlingly memorable event for those times (I’m now a sceptical agnostic, BTW).
There have been many charismatic people who turned out to be rather unpleasant.
Why are so many people of African heritage so blinded by religion? Well, in order to be free of enslavement to religion and embrace rationality or personal spirituality or both, one must first be empowered. Empowerment comes through several things but the most important three among them are (1) A strong sense of self-hood and self-esteem (2) Education that truly enlightens and enables self-expression and successful enterprise (3) Experience drawn from a diverse set of life encounters through travel, reading, cultural exchange, human exchange. When you take all of this into consideration you can understand why religion still holds so many people of African heritage captive and its charlatans are still seen as heroes instead of prison wardens. I speak from experience as a black lesbian from a staunch evangelical background.
Meanwhile in Uganda 4 anti-gay evangelical pastors (including 2 Americans) died in an accident/Act of God.
Also note the story on Cameron withholding aid, and the spin they put on the “kill the gays and their friends” bill. Maybe we should add some comments of our own…
The Ugandan paper’s whitewash of the kill the gays bill is here:
It’s always a shame when you allow people free choice in who they admire. Someone should have prevented him being on the list of candidates eh. People! Will they never learn that they need to be told who to vote for.
The shame is not that people are free to choose, the shame is that they choose such awful people. If indeed they did, which I sincerely doubt since the whole tone of this poll sounds decidedly fishy to me.
It simply will not do to pretend that this is about freedom of speech. It isn’t and never was. Nobody is saying that and it is beneath you to bring it up.
What this is about (on the big proviso that the poll does represent the views of a section of the population accurately) is persistent and worrying homophobic attitudes in society. Or, at the very least, a dangerous willingness to overlook homophobia on the part of a great many people.
Absolutely VP its an indictment on the people of London that either they see such a man as inspirational or that the poll was manipulated in such a way.
I am sure the vast majority of Londoners either have not heard of this pastor, nor would want to, or if they have either are indifferent towards him or resent his bigoted and inhumane approach to many parts of our society
But they have heard of the others and they didn’t vote for them. Clearly those who chose to vote were more active in their participation and had a willingness to take part. We end up in a very dangerous situation if we decry popular choice. It’s their decision, if you are a Londoner and didn’t vote then you have no right to complain
Currently not a Londoner …
Have a right to complain about the interpretation of the results …
How many people voted multiple times …????
champion of black macho culture that rapes and hits women well done, they say also gay is not black sorry gay is everywhere 15% of the population . so live with that .and religious freaks fed on lies should not be taken as models
To be honest, the whole thing is just laughable. Who picked the shortlist? Who decided only readers of Metro in London should pick from that shortlist? It was a loaded question put to a very small section of the UK public. It was very easy for members of his church to flood the ballot. It means absolutely nothing!
A bit like Boris, really!!
How can Tutu not win this out right. He is a champion of every ones rights and answers to know one.
“We struggled against apartheid because we were being blamed and made to suffer for something we could do nothing about. It is the same with homosexuality. The orientation is a given, not a matter of choice. It would be crazy for someone to choose to be gay, given the homophobia that is present.
Tutu would certainly have been well up there as a winner for me, alongside potentials such as Mandela, Martin Luther King or Doreen Lawrence who could have been justifiable winners
To be frank I would even have been pleased to have seen Moira Stewart or Sir Trevor winning instead of this pastor …
There is no gay gene. You are using the same excuse as paedophiles who say they are born that way. People who are inclined towards wrong and immoral actions are fullly accountable since YOU can control your impulses just as most paedophiles manage to control theirs. Many have cme to the realization that homosexual acts are immoral and have managed not to act on their urges despite temptation. |Fornication and homosexuality spread death and disease. Abstinence until mutually monogamous marriage provides full moral and physical protection. Look at the amount of mutually monogamous couples that have STDs (none) then compare how many fornicators, buggerers and homosexuals have STDs(which incude high numbers of oral cancer in women). That is how I know I am right.
The above comment was for Andrew whio said…
“The orientation is a given, not a matter of choice.”
The ranking system on this comment board is random unworkable and disordered.
Homosexuality is not a choice – it is how you are born …
Otherwise, please explain to me how you chose to be attracted to the opposite sex … what thought processes went into your decision making, whether you considered that you may prefer the same sex (or both sexes) …
The proposition that homosexuality is a choice has long since been ridiculed and its only bigots that hold onto a baseless argument like that
Keith, you really should see a psychiatrist for some help. Your compulsive hateful obsession with this website is worrying. You talk about paedophiles a lot, and the fact that you seem to know that paedophiles manage to control their impulses suggests that you share those impulses – how else would you know? I certainly have no idea about that. And also, how do you know there is not a gene that dictates our sexuality? I guess the same way that the church used to know that the Earth was the centre of the universe, and the Sun orbited our planet. I feel sorry for you. You certainly have a lot of personal issues that you need help for.
Irrelevant rubbish. Outcomes are what matter, not choice (and no, I don’t happen to think that attraction of any kind is a choice). Your endless slanderous gibberish about gay sex always being dangerous or disease-ridden is only a twisted rational for hatred.
SIXTH time of asking, Keith – is it OK to do in Babylonian babies (as per psalm 137 of your magic book)?
I think there are possibly millions of black people in the UK who have no idea who this person is.
I m sure even less people have heard of Axe Axgil, the filthy promiscuity promoter and disgusting sodomite who’s death got him a few lines here.
Is it alright to kill Babylonian babies, Keith (Psalm 137)?
- FOURTH time of asking. Everyone else ask him this, please. Sadism in his holy book he never seems willing to comment on.
I am sure that is a certainty. And I am not black.
The real religious dictators, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILBapfzxo8c
The more I learn about this guy, the more of a joke this poll appears:
So this poll is a representative of londoners views. Londoners are getting more ignorant and homophobic , no surprises there then.
Its not representative
You are wrong,the purpose of a poll is to provide representation unless you can prove fraud or otherwise or more than suspicion , your personal agenda is fruitless.
Statistically this result is highly unlikely …
I have emailled the Metro to ask whether any effort was made to prevent duplicate votes from the same people, I await a response …
I shall let you know …
Otherwise, you speculation that there was full integrity and representation in this poll remains that – speculation
As for opinion polls, they are about as much use as the used toilet paper from Keiths house
I imagine his notebooks are of even less utility, Stu.
When I contacted the Metro, I was told that they could not guarantee that there was not duplicate voting in the poll
In other words they could not rule out the poll was not rigged …
which inevitably means there is no substance in the claim that this poll is representative
@stu inevitably there is no substance in your speculation that the poll was rigged only a lack of guarantee from the metro.
If the organisation can not guarantee the reliability of the poll, then is carries no legitimate credit as being representative …
@stu nor can it be legitimised as rigged. You have only based that scenario on your own wishful thinking . Your opinion on this is just that , an opinion without evidence.
I would regard the fact the people running the poll being unable to state the veracity of the figures to made the result more than doubtful – certainly wouldnt pass an academic test of probity
@stu, i disagree, there is just as much probablity that the poll is accurate as not, you have only provided your opinion on the matter .
Disgusting evil man!
Guys deal with it. D truth is bitter anyway. I’ve not seen any bliv or religion dats says gay nd lesbianism is a good thing. It is only d laws of some Evil Men. Left 4 me dey’ll such thing shud neva b heard. Thnk God i,m African. Do i know pastor Agu Irukwu? YES