Reader comments · Writer and editor defend “pertinent” Nazi comparison column · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Writer and editor defend “pertinent” Nazi comparison column

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. What an idiot. He means he’ll tolerate gays that live celibate lives, never mention their sexuality and who are prepared to tolerate the abuse that they receive from religious fundamentalists.

    Keep talking buddy, it’s people like you that will ultimately destroy religion.

    1. I wonder how he would cope with celibacy, not mentioning his relationships or attractions and receiving abuse from extremists …

  2. Wait a second… Who are these gay “leaders”? when did we vote for them? Why wasn’t I informed of this?

    1. Some of his best friends are the so-called Christian Institute, so-called Christian Concern and The so-called Christian Legal Centre. All believe in the inerrancy of (their version) of the Bible, all display scant regard for reality or evidenced facts, all work to insert Christian religious law into our civil legislation, the ultimate aim is to create a Christian theocracy.

  3. Mumbo Jumbo 9 Nov 2011, 11:10am

    Next thing you know, he’ll be telling us some of his best friends are gay.

  4. He says that gay issues have been rectified in law – that may well be almost true – so why is he complaining when that law is implemented to stop christians discriminating.

    Did he hope that passing laws but being allowed to ignore them was equality in action.

  5. Gaystapo? sounds sort of kinky, if you like that sort of stuff.

    1. Melanoma Phillips 9 Nov 2011, 12:49pm

      Who’s he? The Kristapo?

  6. David Skinner 9 Nov 2011, 11:48am

    Strudwick said: “Alan Craig’s comments are the low, libellous point in a very worrying recent backlash against gay equality in which commentators and public figures routinely describe those lobbying for the rights of gay people as ‘militant’, ‘McCarthyite’ ‘bullies’. He goes onto says,“ My side of this case is the very antithesis of fundamentalism, extremism or fascism. Instead I am trying to prevent others imposing their extremist views on vulnerable people.
    Presumably Strudwick would describe the following as civilised, and reasonable behaviour.
    Shades of Nuremberg Rally:
    Hatred of Christians in Castro district San Francisco:
    Death threats:
    Cruelty against Mr and Mrs Bull :
    Children swearing :

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 9 Nov 2011, 11:56am

      Your point being?

    2. Oh please. What the worst of the gay militants are doing is nothing compared to the virtual holocaust the church is trying to inflict on the LGBT community. They want us dead, its that simple. Is it not fair that we hate Christians for wanting us dead, converted or striped of human rights?

      Im quite happy to leave them alone, its they who are the aggressors here, not us. If their views are counter to basic human rights and equal treatment for all then they deserve vilification. They are just bigots hiding behind a religion.

    3. Can somebody please stick a fat cock up skinner to chill him out?

    4. Mumbo Jumbo 9 Nov 2011, 12:56pm


    5. Ok David…
      1. – you spend too much time looking at Gay related you tube videos’
      2. – what would you have us do? Be quiet, say nothing, stay hidden.
      3. – I can’t ever remember a time in history where ANY minority was given rights without fighting for them.
      4. – Maybe according to YOUR God Gay people are immoral, wrong, evil and to be kept in their place or even put to death. If that is the case then YOUR God is not MY God and last time I looked NO-ONE had ownership of God.
      5. Try a little love, it works a lot better than hate.

      1. He’s unemployed, that’s why. He was kicked out of his job for anger issues or crying, or something. Can’t remember the exact circumstances, but it was becuase of this “gay boss”, and David’s inability to stand up to him….. Go figure

    6. Medication time.

    7. Jock S. Trap 11 Nov 2011, 1:23pm

      You don’t ‘alf talk a load of crap David Skinner!!

  7. Ironic really given that i call the church the Christapo.

    I really dont see any of the militancy in the gay ‘leadership’ (who ever they are supposed to be). Some are a bit aggressive, but all they want is for us to be equal, not superior.

  8. David Skinner 9 Nov 2011, 11:53am

    Strudwick said: “Alan Craig’s comments are the low, libellous point …. in which commentators and public figures routinely describe those lobbying for the rights of gay people as ‘militant’, ‘McCarthyite’ ‘bullies’. He goes onto says,“ My side of this case is the very antithesis of fundamentalism, extremism or fascism. Instead I am trying to prevent others imposing their extremist views on vulnerable people.

    Presumably Strudwick would describe the following as the very antithesis of intemperate and uncivilised behaviour:

    Shades of Nuremberg Rally:
    Hatred of Christians in Castro district San Francisco:
    Death threats:
    Cruelty against Mr and Mrs Bull :
    Children swearing :

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 9 Nov 2011, 12:00pm

      There seems to be a pattern here in these “christians” bleating victimisation.

      Perhaps if they stopped discriminating against people they would not be treated as they are in your “examples”.

    2. The church is directly responsible for encouraging homophobia, this leads to teen suicide, and reduction in all our basic rights. The church is causing deaths, its that simple.
      We are not causing any religious people to die, we arent campaigning to reduce religious rights to a lower level than ours. The equality laws apply to all of us. Its the church that wants people to suffer.

      If ANYONE cant abide by equality laws in their business, they shouldn’t have a business. Mr and Mrs Bull would only provide a service to certain types of people, this is illegal. It doesn’t matter who those people are.

    3. Mumbo Jumbo 9 Nov 2011, 12:57pm


      1. Dr. R Guthrie 9 Nov 2011, 1:16pm


    4. “Presumably Strudwick would describe the following as the very antithesis of intemperate and uncivilised behaviour:”

      Yeah, add posting obscenities and obsessional thoughts about gay sex on a gay site by someone who “identifies” with being straight, to that list. And then put your name beside it.

    5. Jock S. Trap 11 Nov 2011, 1:24pm


  9. Alan Craig should probably be restrained in a straitjacket and held in a secure unit, his grip on reality is less than tenuous, in fact he’s lost the plot entirely.
    But let’s not forget there are many equally crazy who will agree with him, Christian dominionist’s do not really concern themselves with real evidenced facts nor reality at all, they just want to make their version of Christian law the law of the land by any means they can use.

  10. Alan Craig also appears to be rallying his troops from mainstream Christianity as well

    1. Melanoma Phillips 9 Nov 2011, 12:56pm

      Anglican Mainstream is a deliberate misnomer to make themselves feel more important than they really are.

    2. Speaking as an Anglican I would hardly call these chaps mainstream. These closet bound Anglo-Catholics and their rather harrowing alliance with the traditional Evangelicals are a fringe group, and despite claiming to be upholding traditional Anglicanism they are more often than not a reactionary group, that are quite accustomed to playing victim. I think it is a little pathetic, as uncharitable as that sounds, however they let these issues cloud what should be the greater concern of the Church – the poor and persecuted everywhere. What angers me is the lack of responsibility of their tradition of faith for the hateful things done towards people who they are meant to love.

      1. @Clappity

        I agree to some extent with your analysis, but what concerns me is how over the last 20 years the Evangelical fundamentalists in UK Anglicanism have grown in numbers and have begun to mobilise themselves politcally.

        Moreover, pressure groups such as Anglican Mainstream allthough not speaking for the majority of Anglicans, I agree. I think it is fair the say they do represent what is mainstream in Evangelical fundamentalist Christianity, as typified by Anglican theological colleges such as Wycliffe College Oxford.

        1. I share you concern about the growth of this modern Evangelicalism, and it is not purely because of my liberal catholic churchmanship. I fear the right wing politicisation of Christianity, which I believe to be the greatest evil of the past century. The seeming abhorrence they seem to have for their fellow man is horrifying and not only juxtaposed to the teaching of Gospels, but it endeavours to undo all the good man has done in try to establish tolerance, love and peace in the world for the sake of Christ or otherwise.

          Ps: Don’t get me started on Wycliffe Hall.

          1. Wycliffe Hall


            Don’t get me started either

  11. An irrational fear that gays are out to get you…
    Sounds like homophobia to me.

  12. Keep digging bitch

  13. Craig needs a labotomy!

  14. Cambodia Guesthouse 9 Nov 2011, 12:45pm

    The dying words of a dying breed…

    One day, people will look back on the notions and beliefs of the churches and find it amusing that people could have believed such rubbish…

    Rather like believing that the world is flat and if you go to far, you will fall off the edge..

    …and churches/cathedrals will be nice places to visit to read about these crazy notions… and see old buildings..

    Everything else will be consigned to the dustbin of history…

    Seeing this approaching, these nutters are getting increasingly desperate to cling on to their ‘more equal than you’ lifestyles and ‘rights’ to discriminate against everyone else…

    Get used to it guy… you and your ilk are on the way out!

    1. Righteous

  15. I have today made a formal complaint about Mr Craigs article, and the publication of it by The Church Newspaper as being an incitement to hatred and/or violence to the police.

    I have contacted the newspaper to explain how offensive the article is, and that the editors tepid defense of being on holiday and that he would have managed the publication differently just doesnt wash.

    I am also contacting the toothless wonder, the Press Complaints Commission and I would urge all PN readers who are offended and outraged by this to contact their local police, the PCC and the newspaper. The newspapers email is:

    The PCC is:

    I hope there will be a considerable volume of emails to both. Don’t just assume others will do it. Join in!

    1. I have emailed the church paper and let them know this kind of journalism is disgraceful.

    2. Robyn Griffiths 9 Nov 2011, 5:05pm

      I have also reported the article to he Police under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008

      1. @Robyn

        Out of interest which force did you report it to … Just so we can try and marry up the two investigations at some point.

        Let us know any developments, and I shall do likewise …

    3. I have sent an email to –, lets hope they pay attention as this could be a major issue if this gets out of hand!

      1. The PCC have written back to me stating as The Church Newspaper does not fund the PCC, they are not obliged to accept the findings of or co-operate with a PCC investigation. I suggested they might like to try first, but that Lord Leverson’s inquiry may be interested in the views of the PCC – I shall keep you updated.

        1. The Leverson inquiry have accepted an email regarding the conduct of The Church newspaper and if they require a statement will contact me again …They state it will be considered re ethical standards in the media

    4. Here is some of the reply I have today had from the editor of the newspaper concerned:

      “I appreciate the hurt and offence the article has caused and wish to apologise for that. As you have noted, I was on holiday at the time of publication and unfortunately the offensive nature of the article was not spotted by other members of staff. However, I would like to reaffirm that the article was a personal viewpoint and is in no way endorsed by the newspaper. Indeed, in recent weeks we have run articles in support of gay marriage by leading evangelicals.

      I understand your concerns and you must do what you believe is the right reaction, but we have removed the article from our website and do not believe that incites hatred or violence against gay people, which is something the newspaper has long opposed. I would like to affirm to you that no articles will be published in future along the same lines.”

  16. If he opens his mouth wide enough perhaps he can still stuff the other foot in it.

  17. Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2011, 1:20pm

    Has Skinner been released from mental Hospital….again.

    1. Care in the Community unfortunately!

  18. Even more sinister than the clearly insane Alan Craig is the reaction by the newspaper’s editor Colin Blakely.

    His remark that homophobic hatespeech is ‘pertinent’ simply shows what everyone knows – the Cult of England is a monstrous, undemocratic hate-filled group.

    The Cult of England shows its true, ugly, bigotted face.

    I want that hateful cult removed as the official churcn in our country. We do not want or need a state church.

    1. Paula Thomas 9 Nov 2011, 1:37pm

      Maybe he also thinks that Hitler had pertinent views on Judaism?

    2. I’ve not heard one word of condemnation by archbigot Rowan Williams or any other anglican cleric. Silence gives consent so we can deduce the state cult supports Craig’s screed to warrant publication in it’s paper. I’ve been advocating for the abolition of state religion for decades, along with the equally undemocratic, anachronistic House of Lords. Both irrelevant and unnecessary in a democracy.

      1. I have emailed the Archbishop and other senior CofE clergy … disappointingly not even a holding reply as yet .,..

        Fortunately, when I reported Craigs to my local police they felt there was probably sufficient evidence to justify an investigation into inciting hatred, although they did not feel an incitement to violence offence was obviously complete (although they may interview with this offence in mind!)

      2. I have just received a response from the Bishop of Durham, who has agreed to take up the matter with the editor of the Church newspaper.

        1. Good work!

        2. Great work


          Well done!!!

  19. Just a sad case of “wah help the mean horrible gays are ‘bullying’ me because I don’t respect them and say untrue and hurtful things about them what about the poor bigots obviously we’re the REAL victims here it’s not FAIR ON MEEEEEEE WAAAAH!”
    Cry moar, bigot. No one who is remotely a decent human being is even listening anymore.

  20. I didn’t realise we have a leader?

  21. Johnny33308 9 Nov 2011, 1:45pm

    He has “nothing” against ‘ordinary’ gays…indeed! Only those of us who will no longer tolerate being second class citizens because of those who like himself are bigoted, are ‘gaystapo’. KKKristians wish to impose their views upon the rest of secular society-EQUALITY is not intolerant, but disallowing abuse and violence against ourselves could be considered intolerant, from a certain perverse point of view. KKKristians are never the victims of anything, they leave victims in their wake.

  22. Hating hatred is not bullying.
    Hating hatred is not intolerance.
    Hating hatred is not bigotry.

    Alan Craig just does not get it!

  23. You are either for equality or you are a hypocrite. There are “gay leaders” who want to make sure “gay hotels” remain gay, whilst glorying in the prosecution of straight hotels that refuse gay customers. IMO the gay hotels should not be able to stipulate that they are gay-only. And neither should religious institutions be allowed to refuse to employ gay people. In fact, I’d like to see all state support (and charitable status) removed from all religious institutions. The Left are just as capable of being fascist as the Right. Remember, the Gestapo was an organ of a German national SOCIALIST party. There were many similarities between the British Union of Fascists and socialism –

    1. I quite like who you managed to start with a comment on equality, and then end up calling socialists and fascists. Its truly remarkable, and the irrelevancy almost goes unnoticed….

      1. I noticed that as well . . . extraordinary!!!!

    2. Whats this got to do with socialism, I happen to be a socialist but I know most gay men aren’t alot even vote Tory (though I find this an odd one)

      Gay hotels are just as wrong as straight ones and we have had to change our hotels to fit the law now it is time for christians to do the same!

    3. Jock S. Trap 11 Nov 2011, 1:25pm


  24. I note the rush of bishops queueing to distance their leaderships from this lunatic – not.

    1. Sadly not even responding to emails of concern at this alarming development

      1. wonder if he is a size 10, I have big feet lol

      2. I spoke too early, the Bishop of Durham has promised to highlight concerns with the editor of the church newspaper

  25. Anyone who’s platform of speech is the Church of England Newspaper must be pretty desperate. Dreadful rag. Home of bitter and miserable evangelicals.

  26. “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you win.” – Mahatma Gandhi

  27. Can I get some of these pink boots he mentioned they sound lush :)

    He sounds gay just from the descriptions he uses lol

    1. I bet he has several pairs in his closet …

  28. What makes me laugh with this is that they spend all their energy telling us that we are wrong, sinful (mmm sounds good to me), unnatural, diseased, should be cured, will burn in hell and all other such remarks both ridiculous and hate filled and basically bully us because of who we are but then cry “thats not fair” when we defend ourselves and call them bigoted.

    It is so much like kid siblings saying “he started it” but as is always the case their is usual one that is right and as we have to defend ourselves it is definitely us. Bloody christian bullies lol

  29. Father Ted 9 Nov 2011, 4:49pm

    I believe Britain should be much more worried about the damage to British culture and tolerance potentially done by the very unBritish mega churches this man supports, such as the KICC, which was investigated by the Charities Commission.

  30. This man’s fevered bleatings are symptomatic of a very positive trend in British culture over the last ten years or so. The automatic and uncritical respect that religious views were once afforded – just for being religiois – is beginning to crumble. People are no longer willing to treat religion with kid gloves, and are subjecting its nastiness to the same kind of criticism, censure and legal strictures any other kind of horrible backward social attitude would receive.

    But these elderly bigots (and they are almost all elderly, and will thankfully soon all be dead) still expect the uncritical respect they have been used to all their lives. The new secular world of tolerance and rationality frightens and appals them, because they’re no longer getting it all their own way and are having their undeserved privilege stripped away. So they lash out with faux-offended guff like this. It’s like a death rattle – unpleasant to listen to but signalling the inevitable end of the one making it.

  31. We should be grateful to this Muppet. Digging his own

  32. @Stu et al

    A lot of comments have been made since I last posted, including indications of unrequited anger, and it is difficult to respond to all of them. I note this new thread around Alan Craig’s views and an interesting addition to his blog today:

    I have written a paper on many of the issues touched on but, given the nature of these forums, I can’t reproduce it here. I am hoping to set up my own website to include my writings and post a link – so bear with me, I would welcome feedback. I do acknowledge the contribution of PN readers (like you Stu) who have helped me to come to a more balanced view and to see other perspectives.

    I also recognise all too often PN readers feel insulted and threatened by the likes of Mr Craig, myself and the other so-called “fundies” (including, Stu, your own “righteous indignation”). Might I add, I could rightly take umbrage at the personal attacks I have suffered in these forums, only recently, but as my dad taught me: “two wrongs don’t make a right”.

    I don’t speak for Mr Craig and my previous comments apply. I feel his language may be intemperate and his analogies inappropriate. I don’t believe, however, they are hate motivated and I do share a number of his concerns. The recent Stonewall demonization of Melanie Phillips and the fear now being engendered in ordinary folk, who just want is a quiet life, by gay rights activists, at least leads me to think that some comparison with 1930’s Germany could be valid…

    1. What utter utter tripe. Melanie Phillips was rightly criticised for her intemperate comments. Your mind must be made of some kind of mushed up toilet paper.

    2. “including indications of unrequited anger”

      Probably more disgust mixed in with disdain, than anger.

    3. @JohnB
      I shall look at Mr Craigs blog again and see what the interesting new developments are.
      I appreciate that in some areas you have developed a different perspective from a variety of contributors to PN including Iris and myself. I also have regarding some issues been given cause to consider a slightly different view point on some issues from a couple of your contributions.
      I would be more than happy to comment on your writings if you were to develop a blog etc. I suspect there would be many areas we would agree, but some significant areas of disagreement – although by then examining the disagreements one or other or both viewpoints can sometimes be altered from a sense of understanding.
      I appreciate you and others have been subject to attack on PN. As have i (variously from trolls and some who are uncomfortable with my entering into discussion with those who are not presumed to be pro gay). I have tried to be balanced with my comments on your writings.
      I realise you do not…

    4. … speak for Mr Craig.
      I personally perceive his language as beyond intemperate and actually inciting hatred. He has been reported to the police for inciting hatred. The police are actively investigating and liaising with legal advisors to ensure their investigation is complete.
      There is a huge difference between the Stonewall exposure with satire of Melanie Phillips as a bigot. The language by Stonewall was temperate and did nothing other than expose the lack of integrity in her very public writings and contributions to TV eg Question Time. Whereas Mr Craigs issues a clear rallying cry to fight aggressively and with determination the LGBT community. He calls on people to “rise up” and demonizes the LGBT communities as worse than N@zis. Stonewall did nothing like this with Phillips.
      I am very concerned that you feel comparison with the 1930s could be valid. I note you are having difficulty posting your next piece.
      As for righteous indignation, maybe. I have never been so…

    5. … angered by a person I have not met. I am totally offended and disgusted that not only is Craigs being totally homophobic in his comments but he is sounding a rallying cry to fight the LGBT communities. That is clear incitement to hatred. Its outrageous and I am ecstatic that the police are treating it as a serious hate crime.

    6. Hi Stu
      I’m still having difficulty posting “part 2”. I note your response and will seek to reply.

      I am sorry that you feel Mr Craig should be reported. Although he might, like you, feel incensed, there is a case for moderating one’s use of words in a public arena.

      I did note in his latest blog he differentiates the gay community per se and certain gay activists, who presumably are a tiny part of that community.

      1. @JohnB

        I will keep checking for the second part of your posting.

        My decision to report Craigs to the police for inciting hatred is because of his actions, I appreciate you are not responsible for them. There is a difference to my being incensed at someone deliberately and publically sounding a rallying cry to engage in a war against LGBT people, and someone who is offended because a group in society seek to achieve equal value and fairness.

        He may say he differentiates between the LGBT community per se and some gay activists. Firstly, that differentiation is far from clear in his initial blog or his article in the newspaper. Secondly, his diatribe at times is clearly focussed on the entire LGBT community – and I personally (and many others were offended and outraged). Finally, even if it were only some of the LGBT community that he seeks to demonise in the manner he operates – that in itself is not acceptable conduct in a democracy.

        I note in his latest blog he did nothing…

      2. … to deny that Craigs was seeking to incite hatred by seeking people to rise up against gay people. Such a rising up, and comments about “there is a time for war” and provocative references to militaristic forms of vocabulary, and comparisons to the holocaust can only be reasonably seen as a heinous attack on all gay people.

    7. @JohnB

      It is interesting how you Fundamentalist Evangelical Christians always play the victim card, rather than taking responsibility for your actions.

      No one is forcing you to comment on Pinknews threads.

      If you are having a rough time on PN, can can always go else where, but instead you choose to stay?

      Why do you choose to be a myrtar

    8. @JohnB — why are posting here ? What on earth is it you’re after ? What do you want us to do ? Accept you views ? Why not articulate them rather than complaining that we’re not jumping up and down when you treat us with contempt ?

  33. Dear Mr. Craig,

    Go sit on your cross.

  34. Derek Lennard 9 Nov 2011, 5:49pm

    Patrick Strudwick is guest of honour at the GALHA Lunch on Saturday, He will be talking about the issues covered in this story. I can’t wait!

  35. I’m having difficulties posting the second half of my earlier post???

    1. I hope you can post it soon, as the way your first post was left ended was a tad concerning

  36. Mumbo Jumbo 9 Nov 2011, 7:33pm

    A response to Craig in the Guardian earlier today:

    The first paragraph is priceless.

    1. Thanks Mumbo Jumbo

      I agree, a very good response by Alan Wilson in the Guardian.

    2. @Mumbo Jumbo

      Thanks – a great response.

      I love the first paragraph, but I love these later ones even more:

      “The Church of England Newspaper has no official status. I don’t read it and hadn’t seen the original article on 28 October. Neither, apparently, had the paper’s editor who says he is too busy always to read the stuff he publishes, but assures us that if he had, he would have asked Craig to tone down his language a bit.

      I would defend, even on the beaches, the right of eccentrics to hold and publish their views, though I’d prefer them to read them first. May I modestly propose, however, that real debate would be served far better by ditching inflammatory second world war references, certainly those whose relevance cannot be established.”

  37. Peter & Michael 9 Nov 2011, 10:03pm

    We thinks that he has probably been lean’t on by the big man, was it Williams himself, by any chance! We shall never know.

  38. … to recap, comparing the “gaystapo” with 1930’s Germany is at least unwise.

    Where some comparison could be drawn is in the 1930’s people were sucked into accepting a wrong ideology, which to question would have untoward repercussions.

    Some argue something akin is occurring today. The new ideology (religion) is to place equality above everything else such that to argue against marriage equality for gay people, for example, could also have consequences (although admittedly not loss of life)…

    1. I feel today’s war is a cultural one – still important as it affects the heart of the nation.

      Like you, I care about human rights, which is why I advocate for the homeless, poor etc.

    2. Stu: I still can’t complete what I wanted to say – it will have to wait for another time I’m afraid – can’t quite work out what is happening. Hope you get the gist. I wanted to elaborate on the example of Pastor Deitrich Bonhoeffer and draw parallels but that will have to wait now.

      1. I get what you are saying, but I don’t agree with it.

        1. Stu, while I regret the police case, I am not surprised given what has gone on in the past.

          I appreciate you feel offended and affronted (just as I do when people direct vitriol at me – but one tries to get over it).

          Reading what this guy says and I know (I think) where he comes from, I feel almost sure that his hate is not directed toward individuals or a community but rather against ideas he feels to be harmful and detrimental. I appreciate that may be what some PN folk do sometimes when they read what I write.

          My admiration for Bonhoeffer is he could have easily gone with the flow (indeed he could have stayed in the USA during WW2) but he chose to oppose what he saw to be evil and pastor the flock, firstly by words and example; secondly he was part of a plot to kill Hitler, for which he was executed.

        2. Stu: I have just come back from our local community cafe, having spoken with a theologian friend of mine and asked for words of advice. He admiited that like me, he knows folk who are gay, including among the clergy, and while maintaining his orthodox views have no problem relating to them including as friends.

          Like me, he feels the right approach is to emphasise what we have in common and act practically rather than proclaim what we are against. So we agreed, for example, the next time we are approached to take part in the next anti-gay demo at the next gay pride march, that instead we should think about having a tea and cake stall to give out to the marchers.

          Yes, like you, I am passionate about what is good for the culture and feel compelled to say so. As you say we see things differently yet still have a lot in common. Let it be. I know we (Christians) are on the right lines when what we do makes a positive difference in other peoples lives rather than, sadly, being seen in a negative light.

          1. Why would any gay person want to relate to you as a friend or your orthodox theologian friend?

          2. @JohnB

            Two of the principal differences between us is that I believe passionately that LGBT people should have rights of identical value to those of heterosexual people and that this includes marriage. I also passionately believe that the law of the land should be completely blind to difference (other than in enforcing equality legislation to ensure fairness).

            I appreciate that you feel the law of the land should be rooted in Judeo-Christian tradition. To an extent, I think that many aspects of any sensible legal system have some elements of Judeo-Christian tradition eg outlawing of murder, theft etc. That is perfectly workable in a modern, accountable society. What (in my opinion is not acceptable is to dictate laws based on spiritual beliefs to a population who largely do not share those beliefs).

            I appreciate you have been offended on these threads before (including this one). I regret many of those incidents.

            I have also been subject to abuse (from Christians and …

          3. … others. Some of that I accept is banter, and some which is aimed as a personal attack. Nonetheless, in a discussion forum where I take strong views – I anticipate that some people will be unable to be measured in their comments from time to time. As I say I regret the offense that has been caused to you on here.

            I do find Craigs article, published on the net, published in a national newspaper (which some gay people may read) is a ratcheting of offense to a different level in an internet discussion group. Not saying PN discussions are not helpful or important (they can be) but the preaching of Craigs with distorted reality about the holocaust and linking it to LGBT people appears to use deliberately provocative language meant to offend and meant to rouse up hatred against the LGBT communities. Even Keith’s vile and obnoxious rhetoric is surpassed by the vindictiveness of Craigs words.

            I appreciate you are passionate about your cause, as am I. It is for that …

          4. … reason that I feel compelled to report Craigs to the police and seek support from the PCC, hierarchy of the Church of England and others to remedy the outrageously bigoted tirade that Craigs has unfurled.

            You may be correct (although this is not how I perceive it) that Craigs is not targetting an individual or the entire community but to ideas. Given that Craigs response to PN is to say that he is targetting particular individuals – then we have to accept a certain amount of truth in that. I do not think it is the whole truth, and I perceive he is targetting LGBT people as a whole. Indeed, it is LGBT having equality he particularly demonises – thus the impact is to the whole community – whether that is his intention or not. You reap what you sow, and he has offended MANY people through the significant reporting of this event in the gay, religious and general media.

            I value the positive work that some Christians do (including some that you have mentioned that you do). …

          5. As I have said before, the good that some (many?) Christians do is undermined by the significantly negative impact of vitriol such as that Craigs has authored, picketing of events such as pride (that is perceived as offensive and scorns ridicule), and dogmatic approaches to try and dictate morality.

            I maintain a passion for universal human rights (as you well know that is LGBT rights AND rights for others including those who have faith).

            I do not enter into discourse on here with any attack intended on you as an individual, and usually very much enjoy the debates that occur. My intention is to pursue with vigour an aim to ensure human rights are respected and valued and confront anything I perceive as being an obstacle to that.

            I hope we can continue to debate – but I am not going to change my view on Mr Craigs horrific, obnoxious and demonising words.

      2. It is interesting that you want to elaborate from Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

        In his 1932 sermon he famously said

        “the blood of the martyrs might once again be demanded, but this blood, but this blood if we really
        have the courage to shed it, will not ne innocent, shining like that of the first witnesses of the faith”

        Clearly the man is a dangerous extremist!!!.

        JohnB . . . were you planning to blow yourself up in Gay Pub?

    3. Do you have * any * idea what the Gestapo did ?

    4. “… to recap, comparing the “gaystapo” with 1930′s Germany is at least unwise.”

      Unwise? You think?

      I compare religious types trapped in their insular stupidity a surge on humanity and its progress. That must be unwise too.

    5. @JohnB

      I understand that you are a member of an equalities board for your local strategic partnership in Southend.

      Are they aware of your views on homosexuality?

  39. Interesting to note that the server used by the Church of England newspaper (whose editor believes Alan Craigs has some pertinent issues to raise) uses the same server and computer facilities that also provided services for those mentioned in this article (which outraged many):

    1. Would this be the same Christchurch earthquake where a church got flattened. Funny how whatever circumstantial tectonic/ meterological ‘evidence’ for god hating gays fundamentalist christians come up with invariably winds up destroying a good few churches and leaves the gays mostly unscathed. If god’s aim is really that lousy I’d stop worshipping him… I mean does he smite things with a blindfold on?

  40. Ah, I love the smell of desperation in the morning…

  41. Dont matter what he says in my book he is still a Wanker

  42. David Myers 10 Nov 2011, 9:10am

    This is the typical projection techniques of the big lie. Accuse your opponent of what you are, in fact doing, and then it will be useless for them to point out what you’re doing as it will look like they are just saying “you too”. Defussing the opponent’s reaction before he makes it. If any group is practicing facism and fascist tactics it is the hate mongers of the christian fundamentalist movements (I am not including “true Christians” – those who follow the teachings of Jesus).

    1. burningworm 10 Nov 2011, 12:53pm

      What are the teachings of Jesus?

      Gather your boys get some blades and wait for them to cum get you?

  43. David Myers 10 Nov 2011, 9:43am

    Why you would publish this hate-mongering fascist crap is hard to understand. A pot calling the kettle black. If anyone knows the true tactics of fascists (including employing the “big lie” technique professed by Hitler’s propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels – “tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth” and “the bigger the lie the more they’ll belive it”), they’ll see them being employed by Craig. What could be bigger lie than accusing the people you are employin fascist tactics against of being fascists? What a hypocrite.

  44. burningworm 10 Nov 2011, 12:15pm

    I like the editor would say tone down the language though I wouldn’t address it to Alan Craig.

    He has a valid point. The use of ultra masculine language to convey obiedence is and has always been in use. Now that LGBTQi… groups take that stance the burgeoning of a counter argument is shut down but only when pure articulated reason is forth coming. I wish they did it with more flare with less teeth on show.

    Don’t raise your voice. Improve your argument. Tutu.

  45. Apologies for disjointedness.

    Stu: Thanks for these positive responses.

    Firstly, I should say that I am sad although not surprised you have received abuse from some Christians because of your sexuality, That is unacceptable and regrettable. It is not acting in the spirit of Christ. Besides, acting like this is always unacceptable, I try not to judge / treat anyone based on sexuality or anything else and accept that all should be treated as human beings, i.e. Christlike way (love your neighbour etc.).

    Re. your take on what Mr Craig has written, and your actions, there is little more I can add and we will have to agree to disagree in part…

    1. @JohnB

      Since you failed to answer my previous question, I thought I would ask it again.

      I understand that you are a member of an equalities board for your local strategic partnership in Southend, which works with local business to make sure they abibe by the equality act.

      Is this public board aware of your views on homosexuality?

      1. JohnB

        Since you will not answer this question, I take it that your local equalities board is not aware of your views on homosexuality?

      2. JohnK: I would normally be happy to respond to questions sincerely put. However, since you choose to deal in insults and mischief (and please don’t deny it), I will decline to do so on this occasion.

        1. JohnB

          In what way have I insulted you

          In what way am I being mischievous – this sounds rather paranoid?

          I think you are throwing a tantrum becasue you cannot answer my questions, so you are now resorting to the victim card.

          This is rather childish do you not think?

        2. @JohnB — this is a sincerely put question: do you have * any * idea what the Gestapo did ?

          This is also sincerely put: please provide examples of JohnK’s mischief and insults — I cannot find them.

          I would rather you answer the first one: it is really important.

    2. @JohnB

      We will have to agree to disagree on this one …

      I will keep everyone updated on any developments re my complaints about Craigs articles and apparent incitement to hatred.

      Interesting to note that incitement to hatred is regarded as such a serious offense that the Attorney General himself has to authorise prosecution. Understandably, the police are taking legal advice on what points need to be proved and whether there are more effective remedies that could be considered alongside or as alternatives. It could be a long process – but nonetheless it is being progressed.

      1. Thanks Stu, I was trying to post part 2 but …

        1. JohnB

          I noticed that you do not seem concerned by Alan Craigs incitement to hatred towards Gay people?

    3. @JohnB

      On a previous thread you said

      “Whether PN readers like it or not Alan Craig does articulate the concerns of a number of Christians who are not lunatic fundies, but who carefully think through their positions and give considerably to their communities”

      JohnB . . . In Alan Craigs blog, in what way is drawing an analogy to the holocaust the rhetoric of some one who thinks through complexity and nuance.

      1. JohnB

        You support of Alan Criags incitement to hatred of LGBT people I find disturbing.

  46. @JohnB

    1. What do you want gay people to do ?

    2. Do you know what the Gestapo actually did ?

    3. How many LGBT people would have to ask you to get you to stop posting on this site ?

    1. Harry I agree . . .

      JohnB is an habitual Troll, but a little more smarter than most.

      I think JohnB’s real reason for trolling PN is twofold.

      Firslty, there is JohnB’s friend who he encouraged to enter local politics, but who was then humilated for his homophobic views.

      Secondly, JohnB’s own postion as a member of a local strategic partnership equality board in essex is interesting, especailly inlight of his views on homosexuality, which if the board were aware, I am sure would make his position untenable.

      I think JohnB is using these boards to learn how to appear gay friendly, whilst holding, and not compromising is rather entrenched homophobic beliefs.

      1. @JohnK — his modus operandi reminds me of someone (also called ‘John’) who posted on this site some months ago. That John posted some really foul views and caused me to leave this forum for six months. I strongly suspect they are one and the same person, and — as you suggest — he has learned to dissemble.

        I imagine he considers himself to be a skilled debated, but there’s more to skilled debate than making claims without evidence and refusing to respond to questions.

        I think we should see if he provides clear answers to the three questions I posed. If he doesn’t, I think he demonstrates the type of man he is.

        1. Harry

          Yes, I remember the person called “John” who posted some very foul views, I also remember that the person then changed their name and started posting under the ID “anotherjohn”.

          I remember your departure. Iris, Will and I, as well as many others were sadden by this. I am glad to see that you have returned. We value and welcome your commitment to these threads.

          I would also like to see if JohnB does answer your three questions, although as you have noted he does tend to make claims without evidence, and when challenged on a pertinent issue then refuses to comment.

          1. In my view

            John – anotherjohn – JohnB

            are all the same person based on
            stylistic charateristics, turns of phrase, consistency in the range of personal detials disclosed etc

  47. apologies – I have been trying to add some comments including trimming and editing but not successful so will have give up for now :-)

    1. You keep repeating this. . . ?

      I understand PN can be a bit buggy from time to time. However, if you have something new to add to this debate, I would prefer that you present your argument succintly rather than through large chunks of preformualted text.

      There is some thing disingenous in chunking as a form of online communication, since it will be interpeted as lecturing and preaching.

      1. one of your better comments JohnK.

        I admit I do like to craft a reply, not to preach or lecture but rather to include all the pertinent points and avoid saying anything that can be misconstrued, which as you appreciate is more an issue for me than it is for you.

        fyi my views on homosexuality have not been an issue with our Equalities Board (I’m on it because of my wider community role). But I don’t hide my views when called for and we try to address the needs of all groups within our community. I’ve played my part in helping set up an LGBT network and arranging a football match with London Titans.

        I am sure if you want to do one of your Plymouth Brethren fundie exposes you could contact the Equalities Officer at our local council and please give him my regards :-)

        1. On the 25th October your wrote to Stu in a thread

          “You might be surprised to know that I am a board member of the Equalities Board of our Local Strategic Partnership, part of which role is is to help ensure employers do carry out their public duty regarding the Equality Act.”

          I understnad that telling lies is not an issue for you (although it is generally throught to be a sin in all branches of Christianity)

          I understand that integrity is an issue for you.

          1. (Clarification with regards the issue of your lies)

            I do not believe you are on any such board – I think this is a fantasy!!!

            The reason I say this is because no equality board would want to have as an active member, any one who publically asserts that homosexuality is a sin.

            If you continue to assert that you are a member of such a board

            Kindly provide the following information

            1. The name of the equality board

            2. The contact details of the equality board

        2. “I am sure if you want to do one of your Plymouth Brethren fundie exposes you could contact the Equalities Officer at our local council and please give him my regards”

          I do not need to do this, your threads do it for you

        3. “I’ve played my part in helping set up an LGBT network and arranging a football match with London Titans.”

          What is the nature of this LGBT network?

          Who funds this LGBT network

          What part did you play in setting up this LGBT network?

          1. In addtion

            What is the name of this LGBT network

            Where is this LGBT network based

            Provide some from of contact details or link to this LGBT network

        4. JohnK: Every time I think there is hope for productive dialogue you come out with stupidity – pity really :-(

          Discussion isn’t helped when one accuses the other of lying (yet another reason why I wonder why I do “cast my pearls before swine”)?

          Since you have shown your investigative prowess by discovering some of the facts about what I do, where I come from etc., there is enough clues there for you to find the answer your own questions.

          PN forums is not imo the place to name names and expose people I respect to dodgy characters like you come across as being :-)

          1. Since you refuse to provide evidence, you leave me know choice but to call you a fantasist and pathological liar

          2. “Discussion isn’t help when one accuses the other of lying”

            I have not accused you of lying, I have proved that you are a liar
            . . . . . .

            “I wonder why I cast my pearl before the swine”

            A holy man is fully of integrity and would provide evidence when asked, because he has nothing to fear.

        5. “I admit I do like to craft a reply, not to preach or lecture but rather to include all the pertinent points and avoid saying anything that can be misconstrued, which as you appreciate is more an issue for me than it is for you.”

          Interesting, insult

        6. Since you refuse to provide evidence,

          You highlight how you are a rather sad fantasist and pathological liar

  48. @JohnB — if you solve your technical problems, and if you feel that you should be posting here, perhaps you’d answer these:

    1. What do you want gay people to do ?

    2. Do you know what the Gestapo actually did ?

    3. How many LGBT people would have to ask you to get you to stop posting on this site ?

    4. Do you think your views would prevent or promote tragedies like this:

  49. @JohnB — if you solve your technical problems, and if you think your comments are welcome, perhaps you’d respond to my questions above, and perhaps you’d tell us if you think your views are likely to prevent or promote tragedies like this:

    1. @Harry: I’m not sure I’ve cracked all the technical querks – it was a bit frustrating as I wanted to tie up some loose ends still – but let it be.

      I’ve just come back from a community remembrance service which was a good experience – and yes, to answer a previous question, I believe the holocaust was a terrible tragedy and am sad that not only was it wicked but not enough good people spoke out long before it happened and thus prevent it happening.

      As for the link you posted, I had seen this and was aware of some of what happened. I mourn Jamie’s passing and sympathise with his family. Bullying in any form is totally unacceptable and whatever influence I do have e.g. with my family, church, community etc. my message is to stand up to the bullies and stand with the bullied. I teach my 13yo that some of his peers may be / turn out to be gay and that is ok.

      PS you can’t have it both ways: tell me to go away and yet ask my opinion :-)

      1. @JohnB — yes but what do you actually want gay people to do ? Do you think we should be able to be married ? Do you think we should be allowed to have sex ? Do you think they should be able to enjoy * all * the same rights as the heterosexual ? If not, what rights would you withhold from them ?

        PS I haven’t told you to go away – I can’t think why you think that. But I do note you haven’t answered the question: how many LGBT people on this forum would it take to stop you from posting on this site ?

        1. @Harry
          what do you actually want gay people to do ?
          [not sure I understand – in any case it is not for me to say]

          Do you think we should be able to be married ?
          [its an impossibility unless you redefine marriage]

          Do you think we should be allowed to have sex ?
          [by human law – yes … but God’s law is different]

          Do you think they should be able to enjoy * all * the same rights as the heterosexual ?

          how many LGBT people on this forum would it take to stop you from posting on this site ?
          [when I am unable to productively engage in respectful dialogue]

          PS again, welcome back to these forums Harry. I was also sorry you left. I have nothing against you or any gay folk. I just want to understand and when appropriate to challenge.

        2. @JohnB — I’m sorry you chose not to understand what I was asking. Maybe this is clearer:

          I’m a bit confused when you say gay people should be allowed to enjoy all the same rights as heterosexual, yet say they should not be allowed to be married or have sex. Perhaps you could clarify ?

          One person has already asked you to stop posting on this forum but you continued. How many people would have to ask you to take your views elsewhere for you to stop posting here ?

          I’m very confused when you say it’s not for you to say what gay people should do — clearly you have views on what gay people should do: why not be open and honest and state them here, clearly, and unambiguously ?

          1. Harry: with regret, I am not prepared to continue this line of questioning:
            1. phrases such as “chose not to understand” show a lack of respect on your part.
            2. I do answer many of your questions and it seems you choose not to respond or even show that you have taken in what I have said.
            3. I am a busy man and don’t have time to chase lost causes or upset/be upset unnecessarily.

            Perhaps you should take a leaf out of Stu’s or Iris’s book? At least here debate is intelligent, helpful and courteous, despite big differences frequently coming to light.

            Fyi, the main reason I vist PN forums is because I learn a lot. The issues raised particularly interest me. I believe understanding and seeking to find common ground to be a positive thing. I never criticise gay people over their sexuality. As a Christian and a human being I consider each issue on its merits and given that PN kindly allow people to make points, even if ones many readers disagree with, I try to do so – thoughtfully and with respect.

          2. @JohnB — but you always do this. When the line of questioning becomes uncomfortable for you, you run away, accusing the questioner of rudeness and lack of respect.

            Let me remind you that it was you drove me from these forums with your comments some six months ago. I believe these forums are more my home than yours. That you chose to continue to post says something about you.

            I am unsure as to what you think * I * have not responded — perhaps you could clarify ?

            I would still like to know just what you think it would be best for LGBT people to do ( or not do ), and why you think they are not deserving equality.

            Let us be blunt, you have on the shelf of your home a book that describes people like me as abominations. Quite how you have the audacity to complain about a lack of respect being shown to you is beyond comprehension. You do not believe that LGBT people should have equal rights with heterosexual people. The tragedy is that you have convinced yourself that you do, and when

          3. line of questions makes this manifest, you run away complaining of rudeness.

            And you don’t see the damage that you do to your own cause.

            Imagine for example a teacher printing out threads that you participate in and discussing them with her pupils. Do you think that they will hold a more positive view of christianity after reading the thread ?

  50. Jock S. Trap 11 Nov 2011, 1:20pm

    All this man has done is shown religion up for the evils of this world and why it should be only ever read about in the history books.

  51. @JohnB

    Since you refuse to provide evidence for the following:

    1. Your membership of an equality board

    2, The detials of the LGBT network you claim to have set up

    3. Your invlovement in a Gay football team

    Sadly, you leave me know choice but to assume that you are not only a troll, but a fantasist and pathological liar

  52. 2 champers sips to being a diva 30 Jan 2012, 1:10pm

    Stop Christians discriminating.
    Now that their abhorrence of secular rights is clear, what next? Violence?

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